March for women. A message from Conservatives

[TSwizzle]

I see a lot of virtue signaling and tilting at windmills.

 

[laughing dog]

To add: if you're seriously, actually unaware that women are on the forefront of gaining rights of autonomy for ALL women, then you're not paying attention and haven't been for all of your life.

There are many who are and who did so but I was not seeing this in this particular March. As a trade Union member some years ago we secured equal pay for all women in UK retail shops that were unionised. I was just a small cog attendee to campaigns.

I am not seeing that your union get worked to equal pay for all women in all shops across the world. Were you just sheeple tilting at windmills?

 

[whichphilosophy]

There are many who are and who did so but I was not seeing this in this particular March. As a trade Union member some years ago we secured equal pay for all women in UK retail shops that were unionised. I was just a small cog attendee to campaigns.

I am not seeing that your union get worked to equal pay for all women in all shops across the world. Were you just sheeple tilting at windmills?

It does not relate to the essence of achievement, the operative word being United Kingdom (UK). It was definitely not a Windmill if a shortfall on women's pay was identified and then resolved. There would have been tilting if I had campaigned for women's equal pay when they already had it.

 

[laughing dog]

I am not seeing that your union get worked to equal pay for all women in all shops across the world. Were you just sheeple tilting at windmills?

It does not relate to the essence of achievement, the operative word being United Kingdom (UK). It was definitely not a Windmill if a shortfall on women's pay was identified and then resolved. There would have been tilting if I had campaigned for women's equal pay when they already had it.

No. You and your union should have been working for equal pay for women everywhere. But you ignored all those women and their plight, just like you claim feminists and these marchers ignored Muslim women. Therefore, using your own standards and "reasoning", you were sheeple tilting at windmills.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It does not relate to the essence of achievement, the operative word being United Kingdom (UK). It was definitely not a Windmill if a shortfall on women's pay was identified and then resolved. There would have been tilting if I had campaigned for women's equal pay when they already had it.

No. You and your union should have been working for equal pay for women everywhere. But you ignored all those women and their plight, just like you claim feminists and these marchers ignored Muslim women. Therefore, using your own standards and "reasoning", you were sheeple tilting at windmills.

The Trade Union Movement is a Global organisation run at grass roots level. The British Unions are under the Trade Union Congress which in tern is affiliated through the European Trade Union Confederation. These are all part of the International Trade Union Confederation with 172 million members in 162 countries.

The Trade Union Movement campaigned for Womens equal right before most in the West thought about it

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

Current activities are here
https://www.ituc-csi.org/women

International Day against Violence against women is 25 November each year
https://www.ituc-csi.org/25th-november-2016-international-18129?lang=en

 

[Rhea]

Here are the facts from your links:

The Trade Union Movement campaigned for Womens equal right before most in the West thought about it

You're kidding, right?
Trade unions in UK:

http://www.unionhistory.info/timeline/1850_1880.php
Women were excluded from most of these 'craft' unions. The only trade in which they still remained organised in any numbers was that of weaving. Any attempts to organise women in this period came from outside the labour movement, often through the work of philanthropic women. The most notable example is the formation in 1874 of the Women's Protective and Provident League (later the Women's Trade Union League).

(emphasis mine, to help you out) (Also, I had to go find another site to provide info on their long history with women, because the one you linked says it started in 2009. I could have just thrown that back at you, but I'm willing to do my homework for myself. You should try it.)

by way of comparison,

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html
1848
The first women's rights convention is held in Seneca Falls, New York. After 2 days of discussion and debate, 68 women and 32 men sign a Declaration of Sentiments, which outlines grievances and sets the agenda for the women's rights movement. A set of 12 resolutions is adopted calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.

Boy, you must feel kind of stupid for putting down the significant efforts of others using terrible research.

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

Bastards. Don't they care about oppressed women in Saudi Arabia!?!

 

[laughing dog]

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

 

[whichphilosophy]

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

The Website will mention several causes but it is also timed with the election of the Republican Party and for 100 days afterwards. The emphasis is on pussycat hats and standing outside the US embassy where you will see Dump Trump signs and other signs. They didn't plan to stand outside other embassies which are very close by

https://www.womensmarchlondon.com/update-faq/

On Youtube the speeches for the USA show they are anti trump and not pro rights etc.
Trump didn't get the majority vote and the system needs change
In the UK they did talk more on women's rights but we're too packed to take in to many more migrants.
The Tories only got 36% and won the majority of seats. This system needs reforming but we don't have such demonstrations.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I have seen no evidence that Romans conquered Gaul. Therefore they never existed. Any evidence or argument you have will be discounted with prejudice.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Here are the facts from your links:





You're kidding, right?
Trade unions in UK:

http://www.unionhistory.info/timeline/1850_1880.php
Women were excluded from most of these 'craft' unions. The only trade in which they still remained organised in any numbers was that of weaving. Any attempts to organise women in this period came from outside the labour movement, often through the work of philanthropic women. The most notable example is the formation in 1874 of the Women's Protective and Provident League (later the Women's Trade Union League).

(emphasis mine, to help you out) (Also, I had to go find another site to provide info on their long history with women, because the one you linked says it started in 2009. I could have just thrown that back at you, but I'm willing to do my homework for myself. You should try it.)

by way of comparison,

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html
1848
The first women's rights convention is held in Seneca Falls, New York. After 2 days of discussion and debate, 68 women and 32 men sign a Declaration of Sentiments, which outlines grievances and sets the agenda for the women's rights movement. A set of 12 resolutions is adopted calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.

Boy, you must feel kind of stupid for putting down the significant efforts of others using terrible research.

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

Bastards. Don't they care about oppressed women in Saudi Arabia!?!

You're talking about the 1800's and that is correct. The link shows the progression of women's rights in the USA
Did you read the link? This is about the 1800s.
What you say about the attitudes to women did change during the 1900s - a little but the women eventually got the vote in the UK after years of campaigning.

During the 1900's with the emancipation of women and women's votes things changed.
WWII proved that women could do men's jobs in factories and the civil rights gained a little ground.


https://www.ituc-csi.org/women

Women have increasingly become part of the paid workforce and of trade unions, and there have been important achievements in organising, collective bargaining, and rights. Yet they remain overrepresented in precarious, low-skilled, low-paid jobs with little prospects for career advancement.

The ITUC and its affiliated organisations work together to advance women’s rights and gender equality. The ITUC actively promotes equality at the workplace and the full integration of women in trade unions including in their decision making bodies.

https://www.ituc-csi.org/five-years-of-progress-for

https://www.ituc-csi.org/saudi-arabia-bans-trade-unions-and

Domestic workers fear for lives in modern day slavery
Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the ITUC, said there is not a single trade union in Saudi Arabia, as the law does not allow them to exist.

The Secretary General of the ITUC is a lady
https://www.ituc-csi.org/sharan-burrow,6329

Sharan Burrow was elected General Secretary of the ITUC at its Second World Congress in Vancouver, June 2010. Prior to this, she held the position of ITUC President since its Founding Congress in Vienna (November 2006) and the position of ICFTU President since its 18th World Congress in Miyazaki (November 2004). She is the first woman to have held any of these positions.

Sharan was born in 1954 in Warren, a small town in western NSW, into a family with a long history of involvement in unions and the struggle to improve the lives of working people.

 

[laughing dog]

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

The Website will mention several causes but it is also timed with the election of the Republican Party and for 100 days afterwards. The emphasis is on pussycat hats and standing outside the US embassy where you will see Dump Trump signs and other signs. They didn't plan to stand outside other embassies which are very close by. ......blah blah blah

Wow. When confronted with your hypocrisy and compulsion to tell women who, what and how they should protest, you double down. And why do you feel the need to continually inject what happened in Britain into almost every thread about the US election?

 

[Rhea]

You said

The Trade Union Movement campaigned for Womens equal right before most in the West thought about it

followed by

... a whole bunch of stuff about the terrific work brits did 100 years after "the West" thought about it...

You're just a troll? You said something untrue, I proved you were wrong. You respond with a flurry of information not relevant to the untruth you posted.

So okay, we've determined that you're trying to say that women need to meet your criteria for appropriate protest based on a falsehood that you're trying to push to change the conversation of the march away from it's incredibly positive and useful message.

.
.
.

we see you.

 

[whichphilosophy]

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

The demonstrations are essentially party political and as I requested did you see any of the speakers talking beyond Trump or blowing up the white house.
The methodology is pure semantics. The women's marches are campaigning

The women's marches are not doing anything that different. In the USA its Trump or Trump. In the UK its about UK issues, Trump and some international.
WIth the Trade Unions it's local and international.
It's pure semantics to ship people abroad

 

[Rhea]

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

The demonstrations are essentially party political and as I requested did you see any of the speakers talking beyond Trump or blowing up the white house.
The methodology is pure semantics. The women's marches are campaigning

The women's marches are not doing anything that different. In the USA its Trump or Trump. In the UK its about UK issues, Trump and some international.
WIth the Trade Unions it's local and international.
It's pure semantics to ship people abroad

You're obfuscating. The speeches are probably online. You could watch them, instead of deciding that the last, unplanned, after-people-were-marching away was the meaning of the whole day.



It takes a lot of effort to deliberate misinterpret that badly.

...

I went to a friend's house today to watch the speeches that she had dvd'd. I've finally seen them. They were amazing. Most of them. A few were not as pertinent or well delivered to me. Some included calls for bipartisan outreach. You could watch it, you know. Interestingly, the act of marching was called to start 3 speakers before Madonna got on. So people were walking away for quite a while. For you to consider that as the focus of the show is.... well, eye-poppingly, achingly ignorant of the event.

We told you all through this thread what the focus of the march looked like to us. And it wasn't that. But keep on trying to change the story. It's hilarious.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The Website will mention several causes but it is also timed with the election of the Republican Party and for 100 days afterwards. The emphasis is on pussycat hats and standing outside the US embassy where you will see Dump Trump signs and other signs. They didn't plan to stand outside other embassies which are very close by. ......blah blah blah

Wow. When confronted with your hypocrisy and compulsion to tell women who, what and how they should protest, you double down. And why do you feel the need to continually inject what happened in Britain into almost every thread about the US election?

The Marches were also in the UK so it makes sense to comment. What are the marches about then?

 

[whichphilosophy]

At grass roots level the individuals in their own country would campaign local issues. Most can't afford to travel abroad but delegates will travel from time to time.

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

What are they protesting about then?

 

[whichphilosophy]

The demonstrations are essentially party political and as I requested did you see any of the speakers talking beyond Trump or blowing up the white house.
The methodology is pure semantics. The women's marches are campaigning

The women's marches are not doing anything that different. In the USA its Trump or Trump. In the UK its about UK issues, Trump and some international.
WIth the Trade Unions it's local and international.
It's pure semantics to ship people abroad

You're obfuscating. The speeches are probably online. You could watch them, instead of deciding that the last, unplanned, after-people-were-marching away was the meaning of the whole day.



It takes a lot of effort to deliberate misinterpret that badly.

...

I went to a friend's house today to watch the speeches that she had dvd'd. I've finally seen them. They were amazing. Most of them. A few were not as pertinent or well delivered to me. Some included calls for bipartisan outreach. You could watch it, you know. Interestingly, the act of marching was called to start 3 speakers before Madonna got on. So people were walking away for quite a while. For you to consider that as the focus of the show is.... well, eye-poppingly, achingly ignorant of the event.

We told you all through this thread what the focus of the march looked like to us. And it wasn't that. But keep on trying to change the story. It's hilarious.

Are the marches essentially against Donald Trump since these started after the election and my understanding they were protests against him. Democrats and Republicans always work together but there's no harm with Outreach. I take it you found Madonna's speech of thinking (not threatening) about blowing up the White House but that is still 'a bit over the top.'
If these speeches before Madonna are on I can check them on Youtube

 

[whichphilosophy]

You said



followed by

... a whole bunch of stuff about the terrific work brits did 100 years after "the West" thought about it...

You're just a troll? You said something untrue, I proved you were wrong. You respond with a flurry of information not relevant to the untruth you posted.

So okay, we've determined that you're trying to say that women need to meet your criteria for appropriate protest based on a falsehood that you're trying to push to change the conversation of the march away from it's incredibly positive and useful message.

.
.
.

we see you.

I'm mainly quoting from a Union site. The head of this Union is female (first one)
Did I actually say

... a whole bunch of stuff about the terrific work brits did 100 years after "the West" thought about it...

I mainly quoted from history.

 

[laughing dog]

And yet in this thread you are criticizing grass roots marchers for their failure to protest what you think they should be protesting (issues abroad). Wow.

What are they protesting about then?

Now you are doubling down on ignorance. And yet, that same admitted ignorance does not stop your persistent nonsense and insistence on what women ought to say and do in protests. Wow.

 

[Rhea]

Are the marches essentially against Donald Trump since these started after the election and my understanding they were protests against him.

There's a real-life story of a man who suffered a brain injury and could not remember anything longer than 10 minutes.

(I pause, take a sip of wine and contemplate the workings of a mind who has been reading 398 posts on a topic and still doesn't know what it is about. Fascinating.)

The March.
Was nuanced.
It was for many many different reasons.
As we've said.
Over the last 398 posts.
Many many reasons.

Any list I give you will yield either you telling me I'm wrong about the march I attended, or picking one reason and falsely assigning it to something it never was.

It was to protest policies, not a man. Some have been going on for a long time but are still urgent. Some are policies that the new government (President, House, Senate) have vowed to pursue.

If these speeches before Madonna are on I can check them on Youtube

You,
Should probably not spend any time watching the videos of the speeches at the event, nor reading online the lists of "Why I Marched."
Because you will not comprehend them.
Save precious minutes of your life and go play golf instead.

Democrats and Republicans always work together but there's no harm with Outreach. I take it you found Madonna's speech of thinking (not threatening) about blowing up the White House but that is still 'a bit over the top.'

I found it over-the-top, out of synch with the rest of the day and unnecessary.