No, that isn't what "respect" means to me. Hardly. You may have forgotten some past exchanges we've had on this board. But trust me, I have not. Especially when this is more of the same here.
We can completely agree to disagree. I'm fine with that. Just don't couch it in flowery language, blow smoke up my skirt, and tell me about how much you respect me. You have done almost nothing but negate my feelings and the feelings of many who marched (not that I shall speak for them) - you won't find any homogeneity among 2.8 million humans of that you can be sure. More on that later.
And as for taking "great pains to affirm my beliefs" I don't need your "great pains". When the premise of the discussion boils down to a "yes, but" then that is not an affirmation.
I haven't forgotten either; and if memory serves (it does, trust me) it was more of the same. Any response other than "Yes, Harmony, you're right Harmony, and I agree 100% Harmony" is not acceptable. Life is all about "yes, but's" because life isn't neat and clean, black and white. The "yes" is very much an affirmation. The "but" doesn't negate that, it adds to it, or compliments it. That's all. I don't know what is more affirmative than "yes, you're my equal, and yes your opinion matters", which is a very large part of what I said to you. It's actually a form of respect to say "but, I read your point, understand it, and have taken the time to digest it, and here's something to think about." EVERYONE has something to learn. NONE of us have it all sussed out 100%. Not you, not me, not Trump.
First, why bring up Hillary here? She didn't plan or organize the march. I'm not exactly sure about this but I don't believe she even attended the march at all. Are you assuming that all of the women who marched last Saturday voted for Hillary? If so, I would caution you against that belief. I marched with a group of about 20 friends and family members. I'd wager less than half voted for her.
The point about Hillary was simple: A vote for Trump wasn't NECESSARILY a vote against women. There are plenty of people - I'm included here - that feel we are WELL past the point at which a woman should lead our country. All things being equal, I could have voted for her. But - and here's the point about "priorities" - it wasn't as important to pass a milestone as it was to have someone else in office that could keep us - economically - in a position to keep pursuing the rights that we all hold dear.
You mention "lies and subterfuge" and indicate that 2.8 million women (and men) see Trump as the "only one" to blame. I find this laughable. You aren't paying attention. Trump may have been on the minds of many marchers but he is by FAR not the "only one". He just happens to be current lightening rod, for lack of a better phrase. And so far, I'm not seeing anything in his behavior to indicate that will change any time soon.
No, no, the "lying and subterfuge" wasn't YOU, it was the organizers. Why did they tell the woman in that op-ed that it was "about women" and "bipartisan" when it was ACTUALLY about "anti-Trump", the very definition of "partisan"? Why was she - a feminist who, like me and millions of others, believe it is an important issue but not one to crash the economy over - made to feel unwelcome? You CLEARLY know what that feels like (I say in a non-sarcastic way) so why is it okay that SHE was made to feel that way?
As to "lies and subterfuge" those are very loaded words. You want to back those up? Who is lying? Did you even read anything from the link I posted?
I most certainly did. That was one site, one PAGE, and there were over fifty organizations that went into organizing that march, none of whom were represented on that page. Your site was informative, relevant, but not, in my opinion the complete picture. There is, for example, no mention of George Soros, the primary bankroller of that march, anywhere on there. He is about as far from "bipartisan" as you can find, and is about as interested in "bipartisan debate about the issues of women" as he is Dream Theater's latest album. He is possibly even someone you would abhor, as he uses his money to bully his opinions on others, presumably something a true feminist would have a problem with.
I'm sorry Ms. Noamani felt unwelcomed to march with us. I don't have specific details about that other than her word for it - which you seem to believe as 100% gospel. I guess it wouldn't be possible that she has any agenda or ax to grind. Google searching her name brought up some interesting topics but my goal is not to put her on trial here, merely to point out she is one woman who felt disgruntled by our actions. I'm certain there are others. Had I the opportunity to talk with them individually I would have invited them along with my group.
Not gospel. Looking to have a dialogue on it. This isn't a card game where one card beats another and no questions asked. It's a conversation, one from which we can both learn. If she has an axe to grind, help me understand. And perhaps you can assimilate that a) not everyone thinks it was the koombayah session you do, and b) not everyone that disagrees with you is worthy of your scorn.
You see, this group I was in...we all don't agree on a plethora of things: Vaccines, stay-at-home moms, spanking kids, public breastfeeding, porn, GMOs, who we voted for in the election. But that wasn't the point. You speak of "implications of that march" what implications would you apply to me and my group?
None. I don't know you and your group. I'm speaking on broader terms (as were most of the others at that point of the discussion, talking also about the implications and meaning of the march. It seems like it's okay to generalize for the 500,000 people when it SUPPORTS your position or the outcome of the march, but not so if it's not fully in communion with it. We can either generalize or we cannot.
This is where you and I broke down in our communication the last time. You attempted to inform me that how I felt about my personal experience with religion was wrong. Here is the take home message. You don't get to tell me what my experience is. You don't get to minimize it. You don't get to explain it away. You don't get to try and make me feel bad for having my experience. It is my experience.
I don't know the first thing about your experience. It's not your EXPERIENCE that I'm saying is wrong. Actually, I'm not saying ANYTHING about you is wrong. I am saying that there's more to the story. If you incorporate all those things in, and you still feel like you do, you have my sincere admiration. I'm more about the blanket anger and rejection of any idea that even HINTS at disagreement with the general vibe. Put simply, you're pushing the "pro-women angle" and I'm just suggesting that the organizers had more in mind, and that the "more" wasn't as purely admirable as the "pro-women angle". If you choose to ignore the politics of George Soros, that's your prerogative, and I am in no way, shape or form saying you're wrong. I AM saying, don't be surprised if others don't.
Last Saturday almost 3 million people marched for some of or all of the reasons that chknptpie listed. We all don't have to agree on each one. We all don't have to agree on what we will do going forward. But for one, brief, shining moment we were together and supporting one another. We were all ages, all colors, all shapes, all religions, all socioeconomic status. It was peaceful. And it was beautiful. And nothing you or anyone else can say is going to change MY experience. Because I won't let you.
I'm not trying to. You haven't read a damn word I've written, or you don't care, because you'd know that the last thing I want to do (or even feel I'm CAPABLE of doing) is changing your experience. I'm rather glad you HAD that beautiful experience, from a human being perspective. None of this is about that, and I'm sorry if you're so sensitive that you feel someone else can take that from you. They can't.