STUMP » Articles » Friday Trumpery: Did You Miss the Women? » 10 March 2017, 01:10

Where Stu & MP spout off about everything.

Friday Trumpery: Did You Miss the Women?  

by

10 March 2017, 01:10

Yeah, I don’t know why this is supposedly about Trump, either, but I guess a bunch of people still have chapped asses over Hillary’s loss.

So, this seems to be the executive summary of what this “Day Without Women” is supposed to be like:

After the Women’s Marches across the country and the world last month, many wondered what the next step would be in the resistance. In early February, the organizers of the Women’s March announced they would stand with the grassroots organizers putting together a one-day strike on March 8, 2017, called “A Day Without A Woman.” Although we’ve known about the date for a little over a week now, few details were available about the strike itself. On Thursday, though, the Women’s March organizers announced the “Day Without A Woman” strike details. There are three fairly simple ways to get involved and make an impact, so read on for how you can participate in the strike.

…..
1. Women take the day off work — whether you are paid or unpaid.

2. Refrain from shopping for the day — or if you must shop, choose small, women- and minority-owned businesses.

3. Wear red in solidarity with those participating in and supporting the strike.

As they note, at the very least, most people could do #3, but it’s a stupid idea.

Do I go up to the people working at Target and say “Hey! I notice you’re supporting the Women’s Strike!”

As for me, I’m writing this post on Monday, so I don’t know what I’ll be wearing on Wednesday. I might be wearing red in some form – it’s one of my favorite colors, up there with black. I have so many pieces of red clothing, I have a red-only wash load. I like red pajamas, red tops, and I even have some red pants. I really like red.

But I don’t support this whatever-it-is (any more than I supported the Women’s March with their pussyhats, etc.)

When that march occurred, it was obviously a bunch of people pissed off that a woman who got rich via marriage and political pull didn’t win an election were compelled to have a public hissy fit. Fine, go make fools of yourselves.

But the supposed reasons for this “strike” doesn’t even begin to make sense.:

In the same spirit of love and liberation that inspired the Women’s March, we join together in making March 8th A Day Without a Woman, recognizing the enormous value that women of all backgrounds add to our socio-economic system—while receiving lower wages and experiencing greater inequities, vulnerability to discrimination, sexual harassment, and job insecurity. We recognize that trans and gender nonconforming people face heightened levels of discrimination, social oppression and political targeting. We believe in gender justice.

Okay, it’s not just supposed to be a day without women, but also a day without the genderqueer, etc. There is no coherence to any of this.

A Day Without a Woman reaffirms our commitment to the Principles of Unity, which were collaboratively outlined for the Women’s March. We are inspired by recent courageous actions like the “Bodega strike” lead by Yemeni immigrant store owners in New York City and the Day Without Immigrants across the U.S. We applaud the efforts of #GrabYourWallet and others to bring public accountability to unethical corporate practices. The Women’s March stands in solidarity with the International Women’s Strike organizers, feminists of color and grassroots groups in planning global actions for equity, justice and human rights.

….and nobody cared about that, either. Oh, you closed your shop? I guess I’ll go over to the CVS that’s open 24/7.

Here’s their Unity Principles and I’m not going to quote them because it’s just a repackaged bit of the Democratic Party platform.

But as, Debra Heine writes, there’s a really obvious red accessory I could wear that day, but nobody would confuse me for supporting this progressive bullshit.

GENDER BULLSHIT

No, I’ve just had it with this shit, and my protest is not to re-write what I’ve written before. Here are my prior posts in various places on “women’s issues”, with dates as to composition/publication:

October 1996: On the Sokal affair

For example, I have seen papers purporting physics, math, and/or science in general being anti-women — they’re not talking about the science community being anti-feminist or culture’s opinion of women in these fields. Some actually claim that any endeavor based on rigorous analytical, quantitative work goes against “the way women think.” I find this terribly insulting; it makes me think that the female authors of these papers generalize from their own state of being. They unreason that if they can’t think clearly, then no woman can. I never heard of a man making this kind of generalization about men. I’ve met plenty of men who had no analytical skills whatsoever and they didn’t blame it on their gender.

September 2000: A ‘debrief’ from “Connecting Women in Mathematical Sciences to Industry”

One thing I find very annoying is the way some people have of taking everything personally, or politically, or (most annoying of all) both.
….
The political can be annoying, for often such people seem to lack consistency between their words and their actions, especially when their own convenience is concerned…. One cannot claim to fight against oppression of females, claim to be a high-powered feminist and then 1) dismiss all statements by females that undermine your world view, 2) as a woman yourself act helpless and weak.

October 2006: College major distribution by gender

But one finds that certain fields are not gender neutral. Let’s see which these are favored by men compared to women: physics, chemistry, and electrical engineering. Also on a different graph: computer science and economics. (Question: where’s the math majors? There are far more majoring in math than physics or chemistry…so why isn’t it represented? Is the pattern not one that would go with their neat regression? Seriously, I’m not trusting the number-crunching when some huge majors are missing.) Favored by women: education, nursing, psychology, sociology. Does one see a pattern? Anyone?
…..
Perhaps “desegregation has stalled” because the populations are now in equilibrium, where each individual is going with their actual major preference, and where such preferences aren’t equally distributed amongst groups. Is there any outcry that there aren’t more men in women’s studies? Why the gender segregation?! We must kick out some of the faculty and students and forcibly draft men to take their place. Then justice shall be achieved!

May 2008: Women and sci/tech

January 2009: Science needs chicks: a rebuttal

November 2009: Math and Science: SEND CHICKS

Here’s my bottom line: is there injustice being perpetrated against individual, identifiable people? If so, let’s fix those injustices.

If you cannot point to some injustice, at this point I just don’t care. Does it really matter if women just prefer to do something else, or if women aren’t hanging out in that right tail? It’s not like there’s a peculiar “women’s math” that is going undiscovered [and the people who posit such a thing will have to ponder their own thoughts of gender essentialism]

May 2010: I lose my temper over some gender equity awareness stuff

July 2014: #WaronWomen: the Absurdity of Statistical Equality – that one involves a policy from the Obama Administration I would assume is going away if it weren’t for the new DOL secretary pick.

October 2014: Fight the Patriarchy! Work More! Study Engineering!

November 2014: How many people are in sex-biased occupations?

For men, over 40% work in occupations where more than 80% are men.

For women, almost 40% work in occupations where more than 80% are women.

….
So every time you hear bitchery about rocket scientists, TV producers, CEOs, and other very small occupations, remember these lists.

When we’re talking about sex-biased occupations, it’s mainly stuff like truck drivers and preschool teachers.

August 2015:Mamas, don’t let your babies grow up to be Womens Studies Majors

Anyway, I’m talking mostly about “lack” of women in STEM majors/careers, and not the pay. Someone else can take that.

At this point, it’s pretty clear it’s a matter of choice. Let women choose to be elementary school teachers if that’s what they want to do. Yes, even if they’re good at math. Heck, especially if they’re good at math. It would help to have some teachers who understood math better.

OTHER REACTIONS

Helen Smith:

Anyway, rather than let it bum you out that women have decided to avoid work and shopping, think of all the perks a man can get on this female-absent holiday. If women don’t come to work, the men in the office can relax a bit and not worry that this will be the day a sexual harassment suit will be filed against them. With no women in the office, it will be less likely that a man will be a target. And without women around, maybe the men can get some work done.

…..
Maybe workplaces should keep track of productivity for the day of March 8th and see if it goes up? Maybe a day without women will allow the men to work instead of spending their time at HR or learning how to address their female superiors properly. Maybe for once, men can spend a day in relative peace and quiet doing their jobs without hearing the constant chatter from women and their sycophants about what horrible, bad people men are. Maybe “A Day Without Women” will give men a much needed day off.

Debra Heine:

Pro-life feminists weren’t even allowed to join them for their “Women’s March” in Washington last month. Many of these so-called “feminists” oppose Melania and Ivanka Trump simply because of their association with Donald Trump. They likely support stores (whether they’re male or female owned) that dropped Ivanka’s products. Instead of holding a smart and successful businesswoman like Ivanka up, they prefer to tear her down. That’s “pro-woman”?

So let’s call it what it is — A Day Without Left-Wing Women Who Vote Democrat And Want Bigger Government Controlling Everyone’s Lives — which is fine, but I’m curious about a few things.

If these left-wing ladies are not going to be at work or shopping (except in woman- or minority-owned stores), where are they going to be able to show off those red outfits? Are they allowed to go out to eat? Should they avoid restaurants owned by men? Won’t their red outfits clash with their pink “pussy hats”? More direction may be needed here.

Also, before they decide to show their solidarity with other lefty women on March 8, they might want to heed what happened to some unfortunate participants in the “Day Without [progressive] Immigrants” demonstrations earlier this month.

More than a hundred workers were canned after taking part in those protests because employers felt that those employees were not so important to their businesses that they could get away with skipping work.

Hundreds of women could end up with pink slips to go with their pink “pussy hats” — which makes this “pro-woman” event seem kind of counterproductive.

Now, those are posts from libertarian/conservative women.

What about critique from a progressive?

I should probably take at least a minute to say that I do not come from a place of malice with my statements. I stood at the Women’s March on January 21, 2017 like most of today’s marchers also did. I held my signs and yelled my chants and, God, did it feel therapeutic. I felt a sense of solidarity with others who, like me, need our patriarchal system to be ripped out of our institutions. But when I got home from the march and watched closely to what our 45th POTUS continues to do with his power, I realized that simply marching in the streets and showing legislation our bodies was not enough. In fact, like our reactionary march, I believe Trump himself reacted to us marchers. We are currently in this vicious cycle of loudly proclaiming our injustices, but not taking the necessary steps to be the change we so badly want to see. I mean, it really makes me wonder: Do we even know what the change we want to see looks like?

Excellent question. And she’s got more:

I was in awe when I read how women were advised to stick it to “The Man”. For starters, women took to the streets on March 5 in Los Angeles and congregated around LAPD Headquarters… The website states that said march was to be held on March 8. I am not sure if those who marched on March 5th were aware of the march’s legitimate date, or were just a privileged group of women who knew they couldn’t make that much of a sacrifice to march on the 8th. Those who took to the streets on March 5, 2017 fail to realize the shallowness of their efforts… March 5th fell on a Sunday. Women were urged to “take the day off” on a day where many businesses are closed. This was not a major demand- This was a privileged and somewhat political stance.

I’ll move on to my second issue: Women are being asked on March 8th (or was it the 5th?) to avoid shopping for one day. One whole day of avoiding Target, or God forbid the grocery store. But, oh wait, you ARE still able to shop- So long as you are only buying from “small, women- and minority-owned businesses”. Am I allowed to buy PepsiCo product because the CEO is Indra Nooyi, a female entrepreneur? Or what about a pair of $69.95 shoes from Ivanka Trump, as she too happens to be a female business owner? I am not sure if I am supposed to be angry at the confusion of the Women’s March’s objective, or disappointed that yet again, the women’s movement fails to be inclusive of the lower class.

In all of my confusion of what I am supposed to be angry about, or even what I am supposed to be fighting for, I realize that the women’s march and day without women is not so much about intersectionality and more about privileged women doing their monthly charity work.

The progressive woman linked to above is making it entirely clear that her object is to have Trump removed from the presidency. Period. That’s a pretty concrete goal, and whether it is likely, at least it’s clear if/when that goal is achieved.

Cosmo profiles some conservative women re: the Day Without a Woman

The entire concept of the strike is “counterproductive,” says Karin Agness Lips, the founder and president of the Network of Enlightened Women, a conservative group for college women. Instead, she thinks that a day to advance women’s equality in the workplace could “encourage women to ask to meet with their boss to talk about their pay. Or polish their resume. Or be a mentor and mentor a younger woman in the office, and give her career advice.
….
Jill Bader, a conservative woman in Nashville, Tennessee, says she’s too busy to strike. She’ll be traveling to New Mexico and Colorado, meeting with potential clients for the Republican advertising firm where she works.
….
“That’s not inclusive,” Pavlich tells me. “There’s a lot of women who believe in pro-life values. And that should be respected. If we’re going to take the title and claim that we’re doing a women’s march — well, no. You’re doing a liberal women’s march. And that’s fine. But don’t claim the title of being representative of all women, because it’s dishonest.”

That doesn’t bother them one bit, because Pavlich knows as well as I do that we’re not really women to the pussyhat brigade.

“Show up and do a better job than everyone in the room, including the men, and earn your respect and recognition for your work that way,” Pavlich says. You “don’t earn respect and recognition by leaving for the day, essentially throwing a tantrum.”

Doing one’s job? Pffft. Come on.

WHAT ABOUT REGULAR PEOPLE?

So much of this bitchery comes across as women who are pissed off at the choices they’ve made.

Example: “unpaid labor”. I do not engage in the “unpaid labor” I’ve seen many women bitch about, like taking care of the house. My husband does that. The only time I cook is when I’m cooking for myself. Should I not do that unpaid labor for myself? WTF people. When you do that “unpaid labor”, I assume you’re doing it for your family because you chose to. MEN DO THIS STUFF TOO. “OH WOE, I’m mowing the lawn in an unpaid way!”

Then there is the bullshit of stuff like ‘Emotional labor’, which seems to encompass a lot of social behavior. Some of it is just being polite and keeping your unwelcome thoughts to yourself or smiling at people you hate (men have to do this too, dummies). Some of it is you being shitastic at not imposing boundaries with people who are not paying you for therapy and aren’t your friends/family.

Stop being a “work wife” if you find it taxing. JEEZ THIS IS NOT DIFFICULT.

I do not organize parties, listen to people’s too-much-info-sharing, etc. at work. That’s not my thing. Just don’t do it. It’s like the self-martyring mothers. Nobody likes it, and people see it as the immaturity it is. Grow the fuck up and mind your own business.

The only time I’ve had someone emotionally impose on me at work, it was a female executive who I think was punch-drunk/boozy and I just tried to pretend I didn’t hear a damn thing she said. I think she was going through a divorce, which yes, is rough, but I was not her buddy.

But to respond to this piece:

The strike is meant to show the world the value of women. Imagine what your day would be like if there were no women around to teach at schools or to run businesses across the country. Think about the chaos that would take over if women weren’t around for a single day to be waitresses in restaurants, do research in laboratories or treat sick patients in doctor’s offices.

Yes, and women are less than half the workforce. Did you know that? If men stopped working, much worse things would happen.

In any case, as noted by the progressive woman above who just wants to get rid of Trump, this is a really privileged “movement”. Let’s consider: these are women who can skip work, thinking there will be no repercussions. Women who can tell their families to go screw, because they’ve never gotten the kids to do useful work in the house. Women who don’t need to buy food everyday. Or, they can go the cheap route and wear red. It’s like buying indulgences!

The only reason I would not have been at work on Wednesday is the same reason I wasn’t at work last Thursday & Friday (and haven’t finished on Nevada pensions): I was taking care of my family due to a medical emergency.

Yeah, that “unpaid labor” of DOING WHAT I WANT DONE because my husband, who usually does this stuff, had a bad situation. If you want to get a hint of what happened, you can read this.

I’m at home now, writing this, just in case Stu needs help. I have the privilege of internet & working from home, which I’ve had to do many times for a variety of reasons. On Wednesday, I’ll be working in my two jobs and probably doing some shopping as well.

I bet I won’t have to edit this post, even though I’m writing it on Monday.

I bet nobody really noticed the privileged progressive women were gone, except that the workplace and shops were a much nicer place to be.

Actually, my real prediction is that there will be media coverage, and regular people will just do their thing and not even notice this supposed protest. Most women can’t afford to frivolously take a day off of work or find some artisinal boutique to buy their groceries from.

OH WAIT SOME WILL HAVE NOTICED

So after I finished writing the above, I came across these plans for a few schools to be closed on Wednesday:


Now, let’s not be tricky… all those mothers can just dump the kids on the dads!

What do you mean not all mothers have a dad of their children available to take care of them?

Uh….. send them to daycare!

What do you mean almost all daycare workers are women?

Uh…..

Yeah, I love how this whole thing is a great representation of feminist “thinking”. Let a bunch of privileged women (who not only are members of a government worker union, but also have DB pensions and can retire fairly young (for now)) throw a public hissy fit and screw over less privileged women.

I’m sure all the screwed-over women will be wearing red in solidarity, while they are home from the jobs they need to work to provide for their kids. They will be so happy to get burned yet again by “the movement”.

LATER REACTIONS

These have all been added since I first wrote the post.

Twitchy post on school closings for Day Without a Woman

Some other progressive women also notice:

Day Without a Woman protest sparks debate on white privilege

So maybe it wasn’t the best thought-out event, A Day Without a Woman general strike this Wednesday, on International Women’s Day.

“Stupid. That’s what I first thought,” says Angie Beem, the state director of the Women’s March that in Seattle drew tens of thousands of participants on Jan. 21.

“What’s the purpose of a strike when you can’t afford a day to not work? Women who could possibly do this are in an executive-type position. Life will go on for them. Their career is more stable. This screamed …”

Guess the next two words.

“White privilege,” concludes Beem.

Okay, that’s idiotic. Many/most white women also cannot ditch their jobs, and any non-white women in executive positions or government union jobs will probably be just fine.

Some comments about the strike on the Facebook page of the Women’s March of Washington included:

“I have to engage in paid work. It’s my job and I’m a single mom and can’t afford to lose my job.”

“As a health care professional, I can’t bring myself to “strike,” however I will wear a red ribbon proudly on my scrub.”

“I hope my boss is supportive and understanding when I don’t show up on March 8th. I could use a day away from my workplace, demonstrating and standing with many others to emphasize the importance of women in the workforce. Oh wait. I’m self employed. Never mind.”

Oh right. What about the women who work for themselves? Can a woman be The Man? How dare you ask such a sexist question!

Nicki at the Liberty Zone is a bit more harsh about the “emotional labor” bullshit…fwiw, I’m at work, didn’t really notice any woman missing (some men are out for other reasons), and I hadn’t noticed normally smiley women not smiling… except me, but that’s only for a few moments at a time. Jeez, what an idiotic “protest”.

Men tell the feminists how they will support Day Without a Woman.

One of the Day Without a Woman organizers is a convicted terrorist who bombed a grocery store in 1969. Two people were killed.


Related Posts
Friday Trumpery: Digging through STUMP's Basement...
Women and STEM academia fix: Be Professional
How Not to Be a Dumbass, Take N: It's Okay To Not Know Something (or Somebody)