Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on January 20, 2017, 09:12:25 AM

Title: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 20, 2017, 09:12:25 AM
This "Women's march on Washington" is cracking me up. So far they have banned any pro-life women from marching with them, and they are also complaining that not enough men have signed up for it. They are also now getting complaints that there are too many white women. They also left Hillary off their "honoree list". :)

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/01/19/whos-ready-for-more-womens-march-unity-addhername-campaign-wants-hillary-added-as-honoree/
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: makattak on January 20, 2017, 09:14:59 AM
This "Women's march on Washington" is cracking me up. So far they have banned any pro-life women from marching with them, and they are also complaining that not enough men have signed up for it. They are also now getting complaints that there are too many white women. They also left Hillary off their "honoree list". :)

http://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/01/19/whos-ready-for-more-womens-march-unity-addhername-campaign-wants-hillary-added-as-honoree/

Ladies and gentleman: the left, where every day is another contest over who is the most oppressed.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 20, 2017, 09:54:06 AM
Twitchy also had a page the other day about the Gals' March being all accepting and inclusive of Muslim chicks. Because feminism.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Pb on January 20, 2017, 11:41:16 AM
One of my wife's friends is going.  They are/were raising money to build a giant puppet:

https://www.gofundme.com/phoenixpuppet

 ???
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on January 20, 2017, 07:03:16 PM
I worked downtown at hotels through a bunch of women's marches. It's like a giant hen party. A chance to shop booze and get some strange .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 20, 2017, 07:15:54 PM
Several customers are going and one Anatolian person I know is as well, although she is doing so reluctantly.

The Anatolian person posted to FB not that long ago that while she is going, if it starts getting nasty she is leaving. She's all activisty and on the left side of the political spectrum and even she doesn't trust this thing to stay peaceful.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 20, 2017, 08:29:50 PM
Dana Loesch has sensibly asked, "Who will make the sammitches?"
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: castle key on January 21, 2017, 11:59:37 AM
I have enjoyed the braying from the left about how bold these women are. They are facing certain beatings by the state, tear gassing, and incarceration.

My liberal Facebook friends exchange recipes for magical cocktails to remedy the effects of tear gas, recommend Sharpie-ing the phone number of the National Lawyers Guild on an arm, and preparing for a long weekend in DC Central Cell Block because the police will simply round up hundreds without probable cause because of oppression.

So let's break this down a bit....

Tear gas. Really the only way to deal with this is to use a mask... not a paper dust thingy, a gas mask. But if you don't have one, you probably will not die. You will feel crappy with a runny nose and burny eyes, but you WILL NOT FACE THE END OF HUMANITY. And further, the last time tear gas was used in DC was November 1977 when a visit from the Shah of Iran got ugly.

Sharpie numbers on the arm. This certainly makes you look like a bad ^$$ professional protester, but when I see the hausfrau sporting this badge of honor, I always recommend that when they get home they visit a doctor because the Sharpie contains Xylene, and they will probably suffer awful illness.

Ah the DC Central Cell Block! So the aforementioned believe that this is the place to show solidarity and is a ticket to punch for demo credibility. The "protesters" are simply lumped in with the usual crack heads, robbers, disorderlies, shooters, and various ne'er do wells locked up on the average weekend. This will not result in a Nobel Prize for "Letters from the DC Central Cell Block."

And if you think you will get locked up today to prove your worth as a demonstrator, you may be disappointed. The average cop in DC worked about 16-20 hours yesterday and is pretty tired. You will need to pretty much commit Murder1 While Armed to get arrested.

I eagerly await my liberal friends' tales of heroism for standing so boldly against "the man" in the face of grave danger.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 21, 2017, 12:03:08 PM
Maybe you guys should set up a booth and charge a dollar per bop in the head with the billy club and ten bucks per tase. That way they can get an injury worthy of a "real protester" and you guys can make some cash.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: K Frame on January 21, 2017, 03:48:35 PM
Ladies and gentleman: the left, where every day is another contest over who is the most oppressed.

My God, that's absolutely fantastic.

Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on January 21, 2017, 03:52:55 PM
I have enjoyed the braying from the left about how bold these women are. They are facing certain beatings by the state, tear gassing, and incarceration.

My liberal Facebook friends exchange recipes for magical cocktails to remedy the effects of tear gas, recommend Sharpie-ing the phone number of the National Lawyers Guild on an arm, and preparing for a long weekend in DC Central Cell Block because the police will simply round up hundreds without probable cause because of oppression.

So let's break this down a bit....

Tear gas. Really the only way to deal with this is to use a mask... not a paper dust thingy, a gas mask. But if you don't have one, you probably will not die. You will feel crappy with a runny nose and burny eyes, but you WILL NOT FACE THE END OF HUMANITY. And further, the last time tear gas was used in DC was November 1977 when a visit from the Shah of Iran got ugly.

Sharpie numbers on the arm. This certainly makes you look like a bad ^$$ professional protester, but when I see the hausfrau sporting this badge of honor, I always recommend that when they get home they visit a doctor because the Sharpie contains Xylene, and they will probably suffer awful illness.

Ah the DC Central Cell Block! So the aforementioned believe that this is the place to show solidarity and is a ticket to punch for demo credibility. The "protesters" are simply lumped in with the usual crack heads, robbers, disorderlies, shooters, and various ne'er do wells locked up on the average weekend. This will not result in a Nobel Prize for "Letters from the DC Central Cell Block."

And if you think you will get locked up today to prove your worth as a demonstrator, you may be disappointed. The average cop in DC worked about 16-20 hours yesterday and is pretty tired. You will need to pretty much commit Murder1 While Armed to get arrested.

I eagerly await my liberal friends' tales of heroism for standing so boldly against "the man" in the face of grave danger.
I bet it's like an invasion of white people.
My favorite joke about northwest one was when I heard " hey white boy!" I knew they were talking to me


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: K Frame on January 21, 2017, 03:55:36 PM
I'd really love to know what the average annual income is for these downtrodden women who are marching in Washington today.

I bet it's not poverty level.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 21, 2017, 04:52:35 PM
I'd really love to know what the average annual income is for these downtrodden women who are marching in Washington today.

I bet it's not poverty level.

Agreed. And didn't they claim they'd have a million of them, yet again?
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 21, 2017, 07:47:50 PM
So Madonna is bragging that she "thought about" blowing up the White House? Is that still racist? Because I'm pretty sure it was racist about two days ago.  ???

Trump really lucked out there, of course. Madonna the covert demolitions expert...
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: never_retreat on January 21, 2017, 09:09:07 PM
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.memes.com%2Fmeme%2F496223&hash=bcff4bacf8586fe1f0cfff25b34d2b965ae0b7a1)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: castle key on January 21, 2017, 11:11:09 PM
Madonna used rather crude language. Many of the signs were really crude. A lot of the props and costumes were quite crude.

All to protest stuff that is crude.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: charby on January 21, 2017, 11:32:47 PM
See progress...
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 22, 2017, 09:45:03 AM
Okay ladies of APS, why are you holding out on the guys on this free razor thing? I want in!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 22, 2017, 11:40:06 AM
Madonna used rather crude language. Many of the signs were really crude. A lot of the props and costumes were quite crude.

All to protest stuff that is crude.

And wow, they really respect the environment. I guess it's still the man's job to take out the trash.

http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/01/22/nasty-women-vote-and-make-lots-of-mess-womens-march-trashes-cities-across-the-country/
Title: Re: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: makattak on January 22, 2017, 11:53:40 AM
And wow, they really respect the environment. I guess it's still the man's job to take out the trash.

http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/01/22/nasty-women-vote-and-make-lots-of-mess-womens-march-trashes-cities-across-the-country/
Nope.  They're liberals,  who expect government  (i.e. someone else) to take care of them. 

Compare to the much maligned Tea Party that always left their protest sites looking better than when they arrived. (And had a significant number of women.)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 22, 2017, 01:46:15 PM
Okay ladies of APS, why are you holding out on the guys on this free razor thing? I want in!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)

Hell, Ben, I don't know what to tell you. I want to know where one gets hooked up with free razors myself...
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 22, 2017, 01:49:34 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)

I have no idea what this sign is saying. I mean, I can read the individual words, but who is "them"? Men, I assume? Since when have men NOT paid for razors? I've always paid for mine, and I've never heard any males reporting a source of free razors.

Katie Hopkins doesn't seem to be entirely sympathetic to "the cause," but she does offer a fairly cogent perspective on the march: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4144242/KATIE-HOPKINS-Having-vagina-biology-not-argument.html
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Tuco on January 22, 2017, 02:04:09 PM

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)

Free tampons?  You have got to be kidding me.
Please tell me the current welfare system is somehow denying poverty stricken women access to sanitary products through an antiquated clause originally placed in the administrative language as a response to Toxic Shock Syndrome.
Please?

It's not like tampons are absolutely necessary.  I live with three women who get by with pads just fine.  I have a vivid memory of my paternal grandmother relating when menstrual flow control products were introduced, and the reaction of her father (a Spanish American War Vet)

I am NOT suggesting that tampons shouldn't be an eligible expense at any level, but if she gets free tampons, I'm going after free toilet paper.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 22, 2017, 02:17:44 PM
So far the only "threat" I can see coming from Trump in terms of an issue that is primarily affecting woman is that he flopped over to pro life and has stated that he will appoint pro life justices. Obviously, I don't care for it since I happen to be pro choice and, had this march been a pro choice march, I may have actually supported it.
Instead it's been billed as a march for "woman's rights" and I have yet to see any of those rights that woman are missing or threatened enumerated by this mob.



Tuco, just FYI, tampons are cheaper than pads. I assume she used the word "tampon" because "feminine sanitary products" didn't fit on her sign. Also, new materials have made TSS a thing of the past. You have to leave them in for like days to get that now.
Either way, none of it's that expensive, especially if you buy generic. If I can afford to buy name brand products without starving, I doubt any woman in that march has any struggle.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 22, 2017, 02:36:50 PM
I have no idea, but could it be that hospitals charge patients for tampons, but not for razors?
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 22, 2017, 02:44:37 PM
I have no idea, but could it be that hospitals charge patients for tampons, but not for razors?

I think hospitals charge for everything, right down to the stupid booty socks they make you wear, and I can't see how they would be even expected to provide razors for general grooming purposes.
Plus, I doubt they'd have tampons. They'd have pads, as most of the patients needing the items wouldn't be in a condition to use tampons.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Doggy Daddy on January 22, 2017, 03:42:46 PM
Is there a Facebook equivalent to "Harry's Razors"?  Perhaps "Patty's Plugs"?    ???
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: RoadKingLarry on January 22, 2017, 03:51:33 PM
Okay ladies of APS, why are you holding out on the guys on this free razor thing? I want in!

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)

Being as I haven't bought a razor since Spring of 1994 I guess it's partly my burden to bear.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: RevDisk on January 22, 2017, 04:11:07 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2uRC5AUUAUzgme.jpg)

I have no idea what this sign is saying. I mean, I can read the individual words, but who is "they"? Men, I assume? Since when have men NOT paid for razors? I've always paid for mine, and I've never heard any males reporting a source of free razors.

Katie Hopkins doesn't seem to be entirely sympathetic to "the cause," but she does offer a fairly cogent perspective on the march: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4144242/KATIE-HOPKINS-Having-vagina-biology-not-argument.html

Took a couple seconds of googling. That photo was obviously taken in Trafalgar Square so I thought something was wonky.

Google said it was about a UK tax on feminine products. It's not in the US. It was largely due to the EU regulations, which have minimum tax rules. Sanitary products were deemed "luxury" items, and thus subject to a 5% tax. Men's razors were classed as "essential" and not subject to VAT. It is completely logical to view that as completely stupid and counter to simple logic. As razors are not essential and feminine hygiene products are essential. Some people got more worked up about the matter than probably warranted, but the underlying issue is legitimate. I'd be pissed too.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 22, 2017, 04:24:54 PM
Took a couple seconds of googling. That photo was obviously taken in Trafalgar Square so I thought something was wonky.

My bad. I grabbed it from a Twitchy thread of signs at the women's march and didn't pay attention to the background.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: RevDisk on January 22, 2017, 04:31:17 PM
My bad. I grabbed it from a Twitchy thread of signs at the women's march and didn't pay attention to the background.

I was scratching my head too, pretty much thinking "WTF". Then looked at the dome and said "Hey, that looks kinda familiar..."

It's hard keeping track of all the global outrage of the day things. This one is pretty legit, plenty of others are much less so.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 22, 2017, 04:51:12 PM
So .gov does it again.   :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Neemi on January 22, 2017, 04:57:33 PM
I think hospitals charge for everything, right down to the stupid booty socks they make you wear, and I can't see how they would be even expected to provide razors for general grooming purposes.
Plus, I doubt they'd have tampons. They'd have pads, as most of the patients needing the items wouldn't be in a condition to use tampons.

Hospitals charge for everything they can, yes. I worked in a for-profit ER for a while and we had to scan *everything* before giving it to a patient. Except for the crutches. Apparently Medicaid/Medicare says you can't charge for those, so those didn't get scanned. Or given out very often.

Most hospitals I've worked in or have visited have courtesy tampons and pads in every bathroom... Razors, on the other hand, weren't available in the ERs period - they were a "safety hazard". In fact, the only razors I've seen in those hospitals are locked up in emergency defibrillation kits and in the OR rooms.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 22, 2017, 05:01:53 PM
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/16195618_1294175467307652_3363138969426943809_n.jpg?oh=4a13dc9454d860709ffd4f7f007276a3&oe=590183E2)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 22, 2017, 05:21:37 PM
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16002736_10154260958287596_7926780009231591348_n.jpg?oh=968f76326a6903a122e29a3a24831848&oe=591272D8)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: wmenorr67 on January 23, 2017, 08:17:01 AM
Can someone find and post the pic of the sign saying she wanted the same rights a guns. :rofl:
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 23, 2017, 08:20:07 AM
Huh. The right to be bought, sold, modified, silenced, and even the right to be chopped up and sold for scrap?  :rofl:


(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydaynodaysoff.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F01%2FGun-Rights-Savage-Trump-March-Sign-Response.jpg&hash=cb41e6b820aff962ca6d83a445a707536e2ea8b7)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: wmenorr67 on January 23, 2017, 08:23:58 AM
Not allowed in some churches, in the post office, most government offices and most schools.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 23, 2017, 09:18:34 AM
Would that mean I can round up random broads, and take them to the "buy-back" for $100/head?
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: RevDisk on January 23, 2017, 09:31:49 AM
Not allowed in some churches, in the post office, most government offices and most schools.

Subject to a mandatory tax when produced, new purchases require federal paperwork and background check (though some used transfers do not), about a thousand laws on sizing/shapes/accessories, laws on storage and handling, not all models are legal in all states, people are agitating to make oversized versions a felony, etc etc
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Triphammer on January 23, 2017, 09:54:52 AM
https://i.imgur.com/NxfhzxL.jpg

Now what the hell? Did bacon make him do it? I knew I didn't trust this guy.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 23, 2017, 10:01:19 AM
https://i.imgur.com/NxfhzxL.jpg

Now what the hell? Did bacon make him do it? I knew I didn't trust this guy.

Sadly, in real life he is nothing like his character on Parks and Recreation.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: T.O.M. on January 23, 2017, 10:25:47 AM
Sadly, in real life he is nothing like his character on Parks and Recreation.

Sometimes I wonder about some of the Hollywood types...do they do things like this because they believe in it, or do they make the choice to appear to believe in such things because it helps their career? 
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 23, 2017, 06:30:04 PM
Now the Nasty Women March is in trouble for being so genitalia-focused - because it "others" the trannies.  :rofl:

http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/01/23/trouble-in-lady-parts-paradise-looks-like-the-womens-march-messed-up-big-time/
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Mannlicher on January 23, 2017, 06:49:34 PM
follow the money is usually a good guide. 
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/

and lets not forget the leader, Linda Sarsour.  Muslim, ties to terror.................
http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/21/womens-march-organizer-recently-met-ex-hamas-operative-has-family-ties-to-terror-group/
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 23, 2017, 11:30:27 PM
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/16142508_1851503281737654_3832329880962601435_n.jpg?oh=441611e39b9bc468eb44cfe02ba71210&oe=590359F2)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 24, 2017, 07:44:01 AM
Quote
@AndySwan

The Men's March Against Fascism didn't have nearly as many signs.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C23TKLSWgAEEPNl.jpg)


https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/823546757216956416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 24, 2017, 09:02:13 AM
[img width=500]https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/16142508_1851503281737654_3832329880962601435_n.jpg?oh=441611e39b9bc468eb44cfe02ba71210&oe=590359F2

 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2017, 12:40:27 PM
(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16265958_1182675928520357_4767253876677083290_n.jpg?oh=c8de5367a96b34a5998eac35679da728&oe=594C2E18)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: bedlamite on January 24, 2017, 12:52:42 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us)

They seem surprised that they weren't allowed to enter a foreign country in order to protest.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: brimic on January 24, 2017, 12:55:15 PM
Subject to a mandatory tax when produced, new purchases require federal paperwork and background check (though some used transfers do not), about a thousand laws on sizing/shapes/accessories, laws on storage and handling, not all models are legal in all states, people are agitating to make oversized versions a felony, etc etc
...and making forward grips on the short models illegal...
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 24, 2017, 06:41:59 PM
The only ones professional enough to...

https://twitter.com/brfreed/status/822931380187365377/photo/1
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 24, 2017, 11:00:08 PM
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/16195880_776256179192001_4596261652244585204_n.jpg?oh=48c05574cd239212ded78311d0dbb007&oe=590C0385)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: gunsmith on January 24, 2017, 11:33:41 PM
where can I get one of those vagina hats?
I need one for halloween
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: bedlamite on January 24, 2017, 11:51:25 PM
where can I get one of those vagina hats?
I need one for halloween

Evilbay has lots of 'em.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: dogmush on January 24, 2017, 11:52:30 PM
Evilbay has lots of 'em.

Very lightly used, like those that wore them.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Nick1911 on January 25, 2017, 12:55:59 AM
You know, I decided that I would at least go to their site and see what in particular they were campaigning for.

15 minutes in, and I still have no idea what their specific goals are.  I did find some guiding principals, but they were very vague and non-specific - just the basic tenants of any civil disobedience activity following in Gandhi's footsteps.

What do these protesters actually want?
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 25, 2017, 01:01:55 AM
What do these protesters actually want?

They want to wake up tomorrow and read that Hillary is really the President of the U.S.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: TechMan on January 25, 2017, 03:37:24 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/20/womens-march-canada-protesters-denied-entry-us)

They seem surprised that they weren't allowed to enter a foreign country in order to protest.
Dumbasses, I am not a citizen but I want to come into your country to protest.  {SMFH}
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: K Frame on January 25, 2017, 06:32:29 AM
“And that was it, they didn’t give a lot of justification.”

Yeah.... because justification is needed to keep protesters out.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ben on January 25, 2017, 09:04:35 AM
Very lightly used, like those that wore them.

 :rofl: :rofl:
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: zxcvbob on January 25, 2017, 02:00:34 PM
I wonder what Mrs Slocombe would say about the pussyhats?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8a/Mollie_Sugden_as_Mrs_Slocombe.jpg)
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Ron on January 25, 2017, 02:28:43 PM
They just want to be heard and be sure the country knows what they are feeling.

If you have a woman in your life who supported The Womens March just tell her you understand how she feels (assuming you do) and if appropriate, hug her.

Trying to have a philosophical or policy discussion about this demonstration will be doomed to failure.

Those discussions need to take place under different circumstances.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: T.O.M. on January 25, 2017, 02:51:28 PM
They just want to be heard and be sure the country knows what they are feeling.

If you have a woman in your life who supported The Womens March just tell her you understand how she feels (assuming you do) and if appropriate, hug her.

Trying to have a philosophical or policy decision about this demonstration will be doomed to failure.

Those discussions need to take place under different circumstances.

Agreed.  Any worthwhile topics (like equal pay for equal work) get lost among the dancing vajajays.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: MechAg94 on January 25, 2017, 04:15:30 PM
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9824/yazidi-sex-slave-women-march
Yazidi Girls Sold as Sex Slaves while Women March against Trump
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: lee n. field on January 25, 2017, 07:12:59 PM
Free tampons?  You have got to be kidding me.

Can you imagine what gov't provided free tampons would be like?

Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: MechAg94 on January 26, 2017, 11:33:27 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/25/price-admission-to-press-cant-riot-while-youre-working-and-expect-your-pass-to-protect.html

I hadn't realized a few of the people arrested for rioting had press credentials. 
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 26, 2017, 12:59:08 PM
Can you imagine what gov't provided free tampons would be like?



Deutsche Bundesbahn Toilet Paper?
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Scout26 on January 27, 2017, 11:08:17 AM
Today's March for Life.  Michelle Malkin hits one out of the park.

http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/01/27/michelle-malkin-shares-powerful-marchforlife-image-sjws-explode-in-cloud-of-glitter-glue-sweat-and-regret/
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 27, 2017, 05:21:16 PM
http://www.sheswithhim.com/About
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: MillCreek on January 27, 2017, 05:48:04 PM
^^^There are some interesting stories there.  I especially liked the perspective of Lulu, who is from Romania. 
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Tuco on January 27, 2017, 08:43:31 PM
Can you imagine what gov't provided free tampons would be like?

I have no point of reference.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on January 27, 2017, 09:50:40 PM
I have no point of reference.

I figured it would be similar to toilet paper found in public restrooms (non absorbent sandpaper) vs. the good stuff you buy for home (absorbent and soft).

Which is why, should the government ever offer free ladies products, I will pass and just keep buying the nice stuff.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Tuco on January 27, 2017, 10:56:26 PM
I did have some gubment peanut butter once in college.
GI insertables?  Point made.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 27, 2017, 11:10:14 PM
I figured it would be similar to toilet paper found in public restrooms (non absorbent sandpaper) vs. the good stuff you buy for home (absorbent and soft).

Which is why, should the government ever offer free ladies products, I will pass and just keep buying the nice stuff.


The nice stuff is reserved for high-ranking Party members, and their prostitutes, which are the best in the world.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: RocketMan on January 28, 2017, 06:19:27 AM
Quote
There are some interesting stories there.  I especially liked the perspective of Lulu, who is from Romania.

Their perspectives and reasons for voting for Trump were understandable.  Quite thoughtful in most cases.  Definitely not "low information" voters.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 28, 2017, 12:07:55 PM
Their perspectives and reasons for voting for Trump were understandable.  Quite thoughtful in most cases.  Definitely not "low information" voters.

And therefore must be "fake news," because everyone knows that only low information voters supported The Donald.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Angel Eyes on January 29, 2017, 01:59:44 AM
A little background on one of the Women's March speakers: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Hylton

From 1995, when she was still in prison:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199507/crime-and-punishment

Quote
Spurling himself interviewed Donna: "I couldn't believe this girl who was so intelligent and nice-looking could be so unemotional about what she was telling me she and her friends had done. They'd squeezed the victim's testicles with a pair of pliers, beat him, burned him. Actually, I thought the judge's sentence was lenient. Once a jailbird, always a jailbird."

...

But there was another moment, on our second day together, when she slipped verbally, and said in an almost irritable way, "He [the victim] was going to die anyway, so . . ." and then she caught herself. I just looked at her. All her previous protestations that when arrested she'd had no idea Vigliarole was dead were clearly lies.

What a lovely person.  Let's make a movie about her life.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: cordex on January 29, 2017, 07:52:59 AM
Agreed.  Any worthwhile topics (like equal pay for equal work) get lost among the dancing vajajays.
Chris, you know that the "wage gap" isn't really a thing, right?  If you compare like with like (i.e. women  in the same job as men), women absolutely do earn the same as men and in some industries more.

The statistics behind the wage gap line are comparing overall average incomes and ignore that men tend to work in higher risk and higher paying jobs at a greater rate then women, and women tend to find more fulfillment in things outside of work and on average do less to chase careers.

If it were true that women really do earn drastically less then men and do the same work, companies would hire only women to undercut everyone else with their cheap labor.
Title: Re: The Women's March on Washington
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 29, 2017, 11:21:33 AM

If it were true that women really do earn drastically less then men and do the same work, companies would hire only women to undercut everyone else with their cheap labor.

Whereas, as we know, instead they hire those people who "do the work Americans don't want to do."