The Women’s March on Washington (2017) was probably the single, most important event staged by feminists that evoked in the general public a rejection of feminism.
The highlights of the policy platform that were impressed upon the writers of the article covering the event were these (the impressions I took away from the media coverage are added in parentheses after each item in the list):
- Reproductive rights (government funding of abortions and other forms of birth control);
- Immigration reform (legalization of illegal immigration);
- Healthcare reform (government funding of health care for women);
- Religious discrimination (more government protection for Muslim U.S. women residents, the promotion of Sharia law for women, Burqas, Hijabs, polygamy, arranged marriages, etc.);
- LGBTQ rights (more government promotion of LGBQT rights);
- Gender and racial inequities (the elimination of those that are thought to favor men and Non-Hispanic whites);
- Workers’ rights, and other issues (to make women “more equal” wherever they feel they are being discriminated against, regardless of the fact that women live on average five more years than men do), and
- Environmental issues (apparently the oppressive EPA rules are not restrictive enough, although it is most definitely difficult to figure out why opposition to what made America great has become a women’s issue and how women’s objections to corporate profits will help women, unless women desire that the economy goes the route taken by Venezuela. After all, if corporate profits are to be eradicated, how will the government raise the tax revenues required to make women happy?).
The Women’s March on Washington (2017) was to become known for a visible symbol, pink Pussyhats, a play on vaginas, that was for many women not impressive enough, wherefore many of the marchers dressed up in costumes that were intended to resemble giant vaginas, apparently intended to instill fear in everyone who would think of resisting women power. There’s no accounting for taste.
The policy platform presented by feminism for the Women.s March on Washington (2017) was somewhat disorganized and unfocused, to say the least, even after a year of contemplating second thoughts, but it is a tough job finding gifts for women who have everything and are the envy of women in the world who line up to come to enjoy some of the plunder that is to be had in the land of plenty, the land of the most.
The policy platform for Women;s March (2018 edition)? Who knows?
The beginning of the end of an era?
The preceding graph by Google Trends reflects the decline of the public’s interest in feminism, women’s rights, and women’s march (with the trend line for men’s rights – at a steady zero throughout the whole interval from Dec. 4, 2017 to Jan. 25. 2018 – providing a solid base line for reference).
With the Women’s March on Washington (2017), feminism “jumped the shark.” It was a flash-in-the-pan. After it was over, the public’s interest in feminism and women’s issues continued its downhill slide that was barely interrupted by half-hearted attempts at bringing about a repeat performance this year through an even less-focused and less-well organized Women’s March (2018 edition).
So, where will women’s rights go now? At least no one needs to worry about the decline of the public’s interest in men’s rights. Rock-bottom is a very stable position.
Popular interest in feminism and women’s rights shows
seasonal changes triggered by media and public relations efforts.
(Notice that the annual low points in January and July are being followed by peaks in July and November, respectively, while that pattern changed lately on account of the flagging interest generated by the Women’s March events.)
For public interest in men’s rights, any change will be an improvement. Billions of dollars in annual funding for men’s rights would do wonders, but as of now there are no equal rights in those two sectors of public policy. Women have the power.
Are the media letting an opportunity slip through their fingers? Imagine what an ongoing, escalating media war promoting men’s rights against the overwhelming and now somewhat boring power of women rights could do for the ailing newspaper-publishing industry and for other major players in the main-stream media who wish that their ratings would improve.