Posted on 12/11/2016 4:27:30 PM PST by Chickensoup
Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton came as a shock to many — and for many women who opposed Trump in particular, Clinton’s loss was personally devastating. But in the days since the election, desperation and fear have swelled into a plan for action: a “Women’s March on Washington” on January 21, the day after Trump’s inauguration and the first full day of his administration.
What started as a viral idea on social media has snowballed into a potentially massive event, with more than 100,000 people already saying on Facebook that they plan to attend. It has the potential to be the biggest mass mobilization yet that America has seen in response to a presidential inauguration — about 60,000 people protested Richard Nixon’s 1973 inauguration at the height of the Vietnam War, and thousands protested George W. Bush’s 2001 inauguration.
For those who can’t make it to Washington on January 21, numerous other women’s marches are now cropping up across the country to be held the same day. And in a separate event on December 12, women plan to “strike out and protest” the election results before the Electoral College meets on December 19.
Although the Women’s March on Washington has been an organic, grassroots effort, it has also been a chaotic one at times. For a while, it seemed doubtful that the march would actually come together in a successful or safe way.
Sure, lots of people didn’t want to waste the plane tickets they bought in hopes of seeing the first woman president sworn in — but would it really be worth it? Could the necessary permits be obtained in time? Would it just be too much to handle logistically, given how chaotic DC tends to be during inauguration weekend? Would it be safe, given the current political climate and given how often large Trump events incite violence? And even if it all worked out, what would it actually accomplish?
Now professional organizers have taken the reins, and it looks like the logistics will come together — although the original plan to march from the Lincoln Memorial won’t work for permitting reasons. And the broader impact remains to be seen.
But the huge, spontaneous groundswell behind the march says a lot about this moment in American politics. It’s another sign that Trump could spark a new golden age of activism on the left. And it’s a sobering reminder of why that might be the case: People are genuinely afraid for their civil rights under Trump, and women in particular could have a lot to lose.
There’s been a lot of confusion over permits for the march, but organizers say it’s under control
The original plan was to march from the Lincoln Memorial to the White House. That plan isn’t going to work — but organizers promise that the march will go on, that it will start from a location near the National Mall on January 21st, and that nobody needs to change their flights.
“We are in conversation with the police. We have secured another location,” Women’s March spokeswoman Cassady Fendlay told the Guardian. Fendlay didn’t specify to the Guardian where that location was, but said it would be near the Lincoln Memorial.
The original plan had to be scrapped because the Lincoln Memorial, along with the rest of the Mall, is effectively reserved for a period of time around Inauguration Day to allow for set-up and clean-up.
But when headlines like “Women’s March on Washington Barred from Lincoln Memorial” started ricocheting around the internet, it caused some confusion. Some people thought the Women’s March was being specifically targeted and kept from protesting, or that Trump’s team was working with the National Park Service to block the Women’s March from getting the permits it needed.
Based on reporting from Perry Stein at the Washington Post, this doesn’t appear to be the case. All other groups are currently in limbo waiting to hear whether they can get permits for events on the National Mall.
That’s because, as National Park Service spokesman Mike Litterst told the Post, the park service itself applies for massive, sweeping permits on the Mall a year in advance to accommodate the Inauguration. But it’s up to the Presidential Inaugural Committee to actually make plans and decide which permits it needs and which it doesn’t. Once the inaugural committee relinquishes some of the permits that have been reserved for it, those can be given to outside groups.
Trump’s inaugural committee hasn’t finalized its plans yet, a spokesperson told the Post. Litterst told the Post that it’s not unusual for this to be the case around this time of year — but what is unusual is the huge level of interest in holding rallies and protests that weekend.
Some advocates are still skeptical that all of this is normal and above-board. Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, a lawyer and executive director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, gave a press conference for the Answer (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition, another group that’s trying to get protest permits for Inauguration weekend.
Verheyden-Hilliard said that it’s “extremely unique” for the park service to block protesters from using public land days after the inauguration. “This is an extraordinary land grab,” Verheyden-Hilliard told the Post. “It’s having, I think, the intended stifling effect. It’s having a distinctive negative on people’s ability to organize.”
Litterst told Vox that while he can’t comment on Verheyden-Hilliard’s remarks due to pending litigation, this permitting procedure has been in place since 2008.
The permit for the Lincoln Memorial specifically runs between January 6 and February 10, Litterst said, although the space can be opened up sooner than February 10 if clean-up is finished sooner. Traditionally, he said, the Lincoln Memorial is used for an Inauguration opening ceremony of sorts — which involves constructing a stage, light towers, speaker systems, and other logistics.
Setting that up and tearing it down requires a lot of construction, Litterst said, so it’s just not feasible or safe to open it up to the public only a day after the Inauguration ceremonies. “It’s simply not a safe area to have, especially, a group of 200,000 people in or around,” he said.
Litterst also said the National Park Service hasn’t denied the permit request from the Women’s March. “It’s just a matter of, since the Lincoln Memorial isn't available, trying to find that alternate location.”
Why a women’s march?
The march “represents women and people who identify as women, of all backgrounds, races, religions, ages and abilities,” according a press statement from organizers.
Men are also encouraged to participate, though. “We welcome our male allies,” Bob Bland, one of the first women to organize the march on social media, told the Washington Post. “We want this to be as inclusive as possible while acknowledging that it’s okay to have a women-centered march.”
The event is being promoted as a “march” or a “rally,” but emphatically not a “protest.” Organizers say that the march isn’t anti-Trump — rather, it’s an affirmative message to the new administration that “women’s rights are human rights.”
“Women’s rights are human rights” really shouldn’t be a controversial or politically polarizing statement. But it’s also a famous line from Hillary Clinton’s 1995 speech on women’s issues in Beijing, and it’s pretty obvious that the march is motivated by worries about how women and their rights will be treated under Trump.
Many women were horrified that America chose Trump, an alleged sexual predator, over Clinton, who could have been its first woman president, and that an obviously unqualified man beat out an obviously qualified woman.
Especially for women of color, queer and trans women, and women who belong to other marginalized groups, a Trump presidency could present an existential threat: from a Justice Department that could roll back major civil rights gains, to families being torn apart through mass deportation, to Muslim women feeling too afraid of hateful acts and violence to wear the hijab and freely express their religion, to drastic reductions in access to reproductive health care that would disproportionately harm poor women and women of color.
“The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us — immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault,” a statement from organizers reads. “The Women’s March on Washington will send a bold message to our new administration on their first day in office, and to the world that women's rights are human rights.”
How the march began, and how the organizing effort evolved
According to organizers, it all started with one Hawaiian grandmother who invited 40 of her friends to march on Washington with her. Then those friends invited their friends. Then the idea went viral after it spread to the huge, secret, pro-Hillary Clinton Facebook group Pantsuit Nation.
Several different Facebook pages popped up to coordinate plans to descend upon DC. "It's the most organic thing you’ve ever heard of," Bland, a New York-based entrepreneur, fashion designer, and activist, told DCist.
Soon, Bland joined with other activists to consolidate their Facebook pages and unite their efforts. A loose organizing structure emerged — one big Facebook page for the national event, plus a page each for all 50 states for locals to coordinate transportation and lodging.
The march quickly faced some pushback over issues of diversity and inclusion. For one thing, Bland and all of the other original organizers were white women. And the original proposed name, the “Million Women March,” was scrapped because there was already a “Million Woman March,” attended by hundreds of thousands of black women, in Philadelphia in 1997.
Now, though, three prominent women of color who are experienced activists and organizers have joined Bland as national co-chairs of the event: Tamika D. Mallory, Carmen Perez, and Linda Sarsour. Together, the three led a march from New York City to Washington, DC, in 2015 to demand changes in America’s criminal justice system.
Mallory has worked closely with the Obama administration on civil rights and criminal justice issues, and served as the youngest executive director of National Action Network. Perez works on juvenile and criminal justice issues in California and New York and is the executive director of The Gathering for Justice. Sarsour is a Brooklyn-born Palestinian-American Muslim racial justice and civil rights activist, and is the executive director of the Arab American Association of New York.
There was also some diversity-related pushback against the current name, the “Women’s March on Washington,” due to concerns that it appropriated the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom where Martin Luther King Jr. made his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.
In response to those objections, organizers released a statement calling the march’s current name a “tribute” to the 1963 march — which, they said, “set a precedent” for similar massive marches to demand human rights, including other historic events like the 1965 March on Washington for Peace in Vietnam and the four Marches on Washington for the rights of LGBTQ people in 1979, 1987, 1993 and 2000.
Organizers also say they are committed to the six principles of Kingian nonviolence.
What began as a viral outcry on Facebook now has an official coordinating committee, complete with press contacts, working with the national co-chairs to pull everything together.
What comes next
There are still plenty of details to be worked out, including the exact time and location, route, and program.
Fundraising and organizing for travel and other logistics are being handled at the state and local level, organizers said, so anyone who wants to learn more about joining the march should check out the Facebook pages for both the national march and for their individual state.
Organizers promised in a press statement that a program “featuring nationally recognized artists, entertainers, advocates, entrepreneurs, thought leaders, and others will be announced in the coming weeks.” They’re also working on recruiting larger organizations to join the effort as coalition partners.
As far as safety is concerned, the Women’s March “has a team of experienced and professional national organizers working to ensure that every safety protocol is followed.” More details on safety will be released as the date draws closer.
And the four national co-chairs say they hope that the work of the march will reach far beyond January 21. “The work of this march is not only to stand together in sisterhood and solidarity for the protection of our rights, our safety, our families and our environment — but it is also to build relationships and mend the divides between our communities,” the co-chairs said in a statement. “It’s hard work, and it will be ongoing.”
This is going to be a big deal. They are using a website called Rallybus.net which purportedly functions as a UBER for buses.
Permitting is an issue. Leftists don't like to be crossed and this will be an issue for the Inauguration.
This article is all over the Washington Post and other papers but I could not see it there because of firewall. Leftist media is advertising this and will be pushing it in coming days.
It could be the biggest mobilization yet in response to a presidential inauguration.
Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton came as a shock to many — and for many women who opposed Trump in particular, Clinton’s loss was personally devastating. But in the days since the election, desperation and fear have swelled into a plan for action: a “Women’s March on Washington” on January 21, the day after Trump’s inauguration and the first full day of his administration.
What started as a viral idea on social media has snowballed into a potentially massive event, with more than 100,000 people already saying on Facebook that they plan to attend. It has the potential to be the biggest mass mobilization yet that America has seen in response to a presidential inauguration — about 60,000 people protested Richard Nixon’s 1973 inauguration at the height of the Vietnam War, and thousands protested George W. Bush’s 2001 inauguration.
For those who can’t make it to Washington on January 21, numerous other women’s marches are now cropping up across the country to be held the same day. And in a separate event on December 12, women plan to “strike out and protest” the election results before the Electoral College meets on December 19.
Although the Women’s March on Washington has been an organic, grassroots effort, it has also been a chaotic one at times. For a while, it seemed doubtful that the march would actually come together in a successful or safe way.
Sure, lots of people didn’t want to waste the plane tickets they bought in hopes of seeing the first woman president sworn in — but would it really be worth it? Could the necessary permits be obtained in time? Would it just be too much to handle logistically, given how chaotic DC tends to be during inauguration weekend? Would it be safe, given the current political climate and given how often large Trump events incite violence? And even if it all worked out, what would it actually accomplish?
Now professional organizers have taken the reins, and it looks like the logistics will come together — although the original plan to march from the Lincoln Memorial won’t work for permitting reasons. And the broader impact remains to be seen.
But the huge, spontaneous groundswell behind the march says a lot about this moment in American politics. It’s another sign that Trump could spark a new golden age of activism on the left. And it’s a sobering reminder of why that might be the case: People are genuinely afraid for their civil rights under Trump, and women in particular could have a lot to lose.
There’s been a lot of confusion over permits for the march, but organizers say it’s under control
The original plan was to march from the Lincoln Memorial to the White House. That plan isn’t going to work — but organizers promise that the march will go on, that it will start from a location near the National Mall on January 21st, and that nobody needs to change their flights.
“We are in conversation with the police. We have secured another location,” Women’s March spokeswoman Cassady Fendlay told the Guardian. Fendlay didn’t specify to the Guardian where that location was, but said it would be near the Lincoln Memorial.
The original plan had to be scrapped because the Lincoln Memorial, along with the rest of the Mall, is effectively reserved for a period of time around Inauguration Day to allow for set-up and clean-up.
But when headlines like “Women’s March on Washington Barred from Lincoln Memorial” started ricocheting around the internet, it caused some confusion. Some people thought the Women’s March was being specifically targeted and kept from protesting, or that Trump’s team was working with the National Park Service to block the Women’s March from getting the permits it needed.
Based on reporting from Perry Stein at the Washington Post, this doesn’t appear to be the case. All other groups are currently in limbo waiting to hear whether they can get permits for events on the National Mall.
That’s because, as National Park Service spokesman Mike Litterst told the Post, the park service itself applies for massive, sweeping permits on the Mall a year in advance to accommodate the Inauguration. But it’s up to the Presidential Inaugural Committee to actually make plans and decide which permits it needs and which it doesn’t. Once the inaugural committee relinquishes some of the permits that have been reserved for it, those can be given to outside groups.
Trump’s inaugural committee hasn’t finalized its plans yet, a spokesperson told the Post. Litterst told the Post that it’s not unusual for this to be the case around this time of year — but what is unusual is the huge level of interest in holding rallies and protests that weekend.
Some advocates are still skeptical that all of this is normal and above-board. Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, a lawyer and executive director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, gave a press conference for the Answer (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) Coalition, another group that’s trying to get protest permits for Inauguration weekend.
Verheyden-Hilliard said that it’s “extremely unique” for the park service to block protesters from using public land days after the inauguration. “This is an extraordinary land grab,” Verheyden-Hilliard told the Post. “It’s having, I think, the intended stifling effect. It’s having a distinctive negative on people’s ability to organize.”
Litterst told Vox that while he can’t comment on Verheyden-Hilliard’s remarks due to pending litigation, this permitting procedure has been in place since 2008.
The permit for the Lincoln Memorial specifically runs between January 6 and February 10, Litterst said, although the space can be opened up sooner than February 10 if clean-up is finished sooner. Traditionally, he said, the Lincoln Memorial is used for an Inauguration opening ceremony of sorts — which involves constructing a stage, light towers, speaker systems, and other logistics.
Setting that up and tearing it down requires a lot of construction, Litterst said, so it’s just not feasible or safe to open it up to the public only a day after the Inauguration ceremonies. “It’s simply not a safe area to have, especially, a group of 200,000 people in or around,” he said.
Litterst also said the National Park Service hasn’t denied the permit request from the Women’s March. “It’s just a matter of, since the Lincoln Memorial isn't available, trying to find that alternate location.”
Why a women’s march?
The march “represents women and people who identify as women, of all backgrounds, races, religions, ages and abilities,” according a press statement from organizers.
Men are also encouraged to participate, though. “We welcome our male allies,” Bob Bland, one of the first women to organize the march on social media, told the Washington Post. “We want this to be as inclusive as possible while acknowledging that it’s okay to have a women-centered march.”
The event is being promoted as a “march” or a “rally,” but emphatically not a “protest.” Organizers say that the march isn’t anti-Trump — rather, it’s an affirmative message to the new administration that “women’s rights are human rights.”
“Women’s rights are human rights” really shouldn’t be a controversial or politically polarizing statement. But it’s also a famous line from Hillary Clinton’s 1995 speech on women’s issues in Beijing, and it’s pretty obvious that the march is motivated by worries about how women and their rights will be treated under Trump.
Many women were horrified that America chose Trump, an alleged sexual predator, over Clinton, who could have been its first woman president, and that an obviously unqualified man beat out an obviously qualified woman.
Especially for women of color, queer and trans women, and women who belong to other marginalized groups, a Trump presidency could present an existential threat: from a Justice Department that could roll back major civil rights gains, to families being torn apart through mass deportation, to Muslim women feeling too afraid of hateful acts and violence to wear the hijab and freely express their religion, to drastic reductions in access to reproductive health care that would disproportionately harm poor women and women of color.
“The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us — immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault,” a statement from organizers reads. “The Women’s March on Washington will send a bold message to our new administration on their first day in office, and to the world that women's rights are human rights.”
How the march began, and how the organizing effort evolved
According to organizers, it all started with one Hawaiian grandmother who invited 40 of her friends to march on Washington with her. Then those friends invited their friends. Then the idea went viral after it spread to the huge, secret, pro-Hillary Clinton Facebook group Pantsuit Nation.
Several different Facebook pages popped up to coordinate plans to descend upon DC. "It's the most organic thing you’ve ever heard of," Bland, a New York-based entrepreneur, fashion designer, and activist, told DCist.
Soon, Bland joined with other activists to consolidate their Facebook pages and unite their efforts. A loose organizing structure emerged — one big Facebook page for the national event, plus a page each for all 50 states for locals to coordinate transportation and lodging.
The march quickly faced some pushback over issues of diversity and inclusion. For one thing, Bland and all of the other original organizers were white women. And the original proposed name, the “Million Women March,” was scrapped because there was already a “Million Woman March,” attended by hundreds of thousands of black women, in Philadelphia in 1997.
Now, though, three prominent women of color who are experienced activists and organizers have joined Bland as national co-chairs of the event: Tamika D. Mallory, Carmen Perez, and Linda Sarsour. Together, the three led a march from New York City to Washington, DC, in 2015 to demand changes in America’s criminal justice system.
Mallory has worked closely with the Obama administration on civil rights and criminal justice issues, and served as the youngest executive director of National Action Network. Perez works on juvenile and criminal justice issues in California and New York and is the executive director of The Gathering for Justice. Sarsour is a Brooklyn-born Palestinian-American Muslim racial justice and civil rights activist, and is the executive director of the Arab American Association of New York.
There was also some diversity-related pushback against the current name, the “Women’s March on Washington,” due to concerns that it appropriated the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom where Martin Luther King Jr. made his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.
In response to those objections, organizers released a statement calling the march’s current name a “tribute” to the 1963 march — which, they said, “set a precedent” for similar massive marches to demand human rights, including other historic events like the 1965 March on Washington for Peace in Vietnam and the four Marches on Washington for the rights of LGBTQ people in 1979, 1987, 1993 and 2000.
Organizers also say they are committed to the six principles of Kingian nonviolence.
What began as a viral outcry on Facebook now has an official coordinating committee, complete with press contacts, working with the national co-chairs to pull everything together.
What comes next
There are still plenty of details to be worked out, including the exact time and location, route, and program.
Fundraising and organizing for travel and other logistics are being handled at the state and local level, organizers said, so anyone who wants to learn more about joining the march should check out the Facebook pages for both the national march and for their individual state.
Organizers promised in a press statement that a program “featuring nationally recognized artists, entertainers, advocates, entrepreneurs, thought leaders, and others will be announced in the coming weeks.” They’re also working on recruiting larger organizations to join the effort as coalition partners.
As far as safety is concerned, the Women’s March “has a team of experienced and professional national organizers working to ensure that every safety protocol is followed.” More details on safety will be released as the date draws closer.
And the four national co-chairs say they hope that the work of the march will reach far beyond January 21. “The work of this march is not only to stand together in sisterhood and solidarity for the protection of our rights, our safety, our families and our environment — but it is also to build relationships and mend the divides between our communities,” the co-chairs said in a statement. “It’s hard work, and it will be ongoing.”
All the leftists I know are planning to go, they are passing around information at work and there are already four full buses from our community and many more are planned.
This is going to be a big deal. They are using a website called Rallybus.net which purportedly functions as a UBER for buses.
Permitting is an issue. Leftists don’t like to be crossed and this will be an issue for the Inauguration.
This article is all over the Washington Post and other papers but I could not see it there because of firewall. Leftist media is advertising this and will be pushing it in coming days.
We don’t need them to ugly up the streets.
My prediction.
About 100 women will show up. Media will say ‘tens of thousands”.
SUCK IT UP,BUTTERCUP!!!
I think it will be big, and it is being billed as a Women’s Rally because the true billing as a leftist street battle is not so acceptable.
It is a month and a half, and I know a number of women who have already gotten tickets. who have put down their money. Not particularly activist women, but leftist that will do what they are told and feel what they are told. Many men will be going too. It is not really what is purported.
“The march “represents women and people who identify as women, “
—
In other words,women and freaks.
.
Make darn sure they clean up all their mess and litter or charge them to leave town.
Hope for bad weather.
I hope it is really cold and the snow is blowing sideways ... they can then add “Global Warming” to their protest.
Karl Rove will crank up his weather machine to deliver a blizzard for Inauguration Day and the days after it.
We put up with Nobama for 8 years of his America Destroying hell.
Now the libtard snowflakes can’t even make it through the Trump inauguration without going berserk.
Suffer!!
You have all earned it.
No Trump events do not “incite violence.”
Violent people come to attack Trump voters.
Say feminists: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Says me: “A man needs a woman like a fish needs a hook.”
I’m hoping for grapefruit-sized hail, so there are a few fatalities from skull fractures. Failing that, police batons.
Couldn’t agree more.
They're feminists. They can set up a nice bonfire with their bras.
Now professional organizers have taken the reins,
They have always had the reins and leaking it on facebook
doesn’t make it grass roots either.
Fools.
“People are genuinely afraid for their civil rights under Trump, and women in particular could have a lot to lose”
This all about primal screams of anger about losing. No policy issues are on the table, except maybe abortion, which, at a minimum, will be legal in the blue states these women live in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.