Women's March Cancelled...Too White

First, I am now thinking that each of us can love each other person equally, even if others are bigots and not equal with different people. We might get ourselves distracted with criticizing how ones in public are favoring one group over another, and this can keep us from seeing if we ourselves are loving each person the way Jesus wants.

dgiharris said:

If you have money, you are treated a certain way and if you do NOT have money you are treated as inferior.

Click to expand...

And do only whites do this? How about minority people? Do they do this or would they? In Africa there are blacks who have conducted ethnic cleansing and dismembered women, in their sort of feeling superior to others. If the United States majority was black or Hispanic or Native American . . . and if they really are equal to white people . . . it is possible ones of them in some number would be holding slaves or wanting to, and/or would be promoting how they consider themselves to be superior.

Because we all are equal, in our ability to sin. So, we all need to equally look at our own selves.

Ones now might be using white racism to excuse themselves to feel superior. I am "white", and I can use my not being racist to excuse myself to look down on racists, as though I am superior. Self-righteous comparing is wrong, too!!

In how we pick and choose whom we love, we can be exalting our own selves as being somehow superior. But Jesus says, "if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" in Matthew 5:46.

And I think that no law or reform of policy can change our nature so we really are loving each person the way Jesus wants. And I now understand that God uses our personal example to help others in how we all need to change . . . first in our nature so we can really love. Or else, we will somehow be pointing at someone else, and looking down.

pray . . . love "hopes all things" (in 1 Corinthians 13:7).

dgiharris said:

Needless to say, canceling a march you want to have just because it will be mostly attended by Whites is all kinds of stupid.

Click to expand...

Even though I think a march for a certain group can be a way of keeping the marchers from looking at their own selves . . . but complaining about somebody else . . . the ladies could still have the march but hold banners saying they miss the Hispanics and blacks and Orientals and Native Americans and everyone else.

And let ones of the minority groups speak for their own selves about why they did not join in the parade. It can be that activists make themselves the representatives of any and all members of some group. Then they try to make one-size-fits-all judgments about majority and minority groups.

Now I'm curious if the report even gets into what the parade is about and why minority people did not join in . . . or sign up. How do the planners know who would be coming? Did they poll people, ahead of time, to see what race each marcher would be? Or, did all marchers show up, then decide there were too many whites????

Let me check, now . . . lolololololololol >

Oh my > it seems much more complicated than simply being an issue of how much of the group marching would be "white".

Part of the decision seems based on past tendencies over the years. Over the years they have been getting mainly white participation; so they are concerned about their outreach ways.

Ana the Ist you said:

Pretty disgusting.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

This seems like too easy of an answer. Did you read about their real reasoning? "Because there are too many white people" seems like too simplistic of a representation.

In any case, Ana, it looks like it is a liberal thing which you and I know might not approve of me, which would consider me a hate group person since I don't believe in certain things which the "inclusive" people believe in.

And they are having problems with inclusiveness. They want to include Muslims. But a number of Sharia Law people believe in punishing people for sodomy. Also, Jews may officially not believe in sodomy. This moral stance is part of many Muslim and Jewish people's moral identity, based on their scriptures. So, in order for them to be acceptable to the liberal march organizers, I would say they would need to stop being Muslim or Jewish. They would need to abandon their religious writings and leaders.

And a number of Muslims consider Jews to be infidels, whether they feel they need to kill them or not. Even Muslim "moderates", it seems, have a major problem with Israel.

And parade leaders apparently have been negotiating with certain Muslim people who are openly anti-Israel, even known as hate people who are anti-Semitic.

And at the grassroots of it, how many of the whites who would march have personal friendships with minority people so they could personally make them feel welcome to attend the parade???????

If you outreach to them only in a formal and ideological way . . . this is not personally loving them in their real lives, so they are truly included. If they do not feel like they are family with you . . . you do not have love together. And if this is so, what do you have? What really is going on?

same questions for me

I see that it is possible that ones want political change so they can have things they want for themselves. They might not really be sharing personally with many other people, but seeking others to help them do their own isolated things with others they use for the pleasures they prefer. So, ones of different groups can be isolated with others like themselves, yet trying to get ones outside their groups to care about them. But how much, really, do the minority ones care about others, as themselves, really?

People are checking if they already are getting what they want, and if joining a rally can really help them to get more of what they want. They might not come if they feel it won't help them get more of how they want to live.

And in case organizers are trying to get everyone to change so ones into sodomy can have more rights, how is that going to help others to get the pleasure which they prefer???? People already are isolated with pleasure ways which they prefer the way they want; so they might not care about anyone else.

And Christians understand that we must not discriminate by saying only certain people need the forgiveness of Jesus on the cross. We would be really hating people who are wrong, if we told them they don't need to be forgiven while we do. We would be helping them to miss out on the forgiveness and how Jesus makes us free from our various ways of selfish and self-isolating pleasure seeking.

Hazelelponi said:

The statement sounded to my ears like something a racist Archie Bunker would say, so onward!

Click to expand...

Maybe the problem is on your end?

Nithavela said:

Maybe the problem is on your end?

Click to expand...

yeah it might be... it really might be because racism bothers me to no end.

It especially bothers me when it comes from those who claim they aren't racist. The claims don't appear to match up with the words however.

Racism is easy when it comes from those who are open about what they feel. They are, who they are, and you can deal with them at face value.

But this "I'm not a racist I'm just using Archie Bunkers wording for people from different races than me" Well that is just ridiculous..

I've been one of those people who the left wanted to hold up as their newest poster child before. I had far more self respect than to allow myself to be used as a symbol of the left's "diversity" though.

I've got nothing for those who just want to use others to accomplish their own ends without a care in the world for those they are using.

I've never met a proponent of identity politics who cared one whit about what I thought, felt, or desired - even if the topic was only lunch. Now to boot they want to bring back bigoted colloquialisms.. lol. Fun non-racist days we live in aye?

Hazelelponi said:

yeah it might be... it really might be because racism bothers me to no end.

It especially bothers me when it comes from those who claim they aren't racist. The claims don't appear to match up with the words however.

Racism is easy when it comes from those who are open about what they feel. They are, who they are, and you can deal with them at face value.

But this "I'm not a racist I'm just using Archie Bunkers wording for people from different races than me" Well that is just ridiculous..

I've been one of those people who the left wanted to hold up as their newest poster child before. I had far more self respect than to allow myself to be used as a symbol of the left's "diversity" though.

I've got nothing for those who just want to use others to accomplish their own ends without a care in the world for those they are using.

I've never met a proponent of identity politics who cared one whit about what I thought, felt, or desired - even if the topic was only lunch. Now to boot they want to bring back bigoted colloquialisms.. lol. Fun non-racist days we live in aye?

Click to expand...

Yes, its. truly a riot.

Also, I have no idea who or what archie bunkers is.

Poor choice on their part to cancel it for that reason. However, I don't know that it's fair to say "One side of the political spectrum".

Based on the overwhelmingly mixed responses they got as a result of doing this, I don't think it's accurate to say "one side of the political spectrum views white skin as a bad thing". It'd be more accurate to say:

A faction from within the left was so desperate to convey racial inclusiveness, that they made a short-sighted decision to do something that actually ended up conveying the opposite.


It should also be noted that this "The Eureka group", by your own link, isn't an officially recognized chapter of the "California Women's March" group, it's just some independent group that co-opted the concept. The fact that I see so many posters railing against the "Women's March" group in this thread leads me to believe that most who are replying didn't take the time to actually read the article, and instead, saw a thread title and thought "Hmmm...this ought to be a good opportunity to bash those libs, I'm in!"

Seems like the only responders to this thread who've actually read the article are @Nithavela and myself.


...but even with that in mind, if you actually read the context of their statement:
"We recognize the majority of our current leadership team is white, and planning for this event has been centered around our experiences," the statement said. "In recognizing our failure to put enough effort into being more inclusive, we are attempting to make things right by taking this time to create a more balanced leadership team."

That's a far cry from drawing the conclusion "this group thinks having white skin is a bad thing".

Wanting to have various voices represented isn't a bad thing. I do find it interesting how some on the right set their standards for what constitutes racist behavior. They label artificially imposed equality measures (which, for the record, I'm not a huge fan of either) as "racism", but then label actual displays of racism as "freedom of speech" or "good governance" or "preserving history"

So, if we're keeping score:
Things like voter ID laws, drug laws that disproportionately impact minorities, and public displays of confederate iconography...not racist

Things like the alt-right, and the unite the right march, not evidence that there's a racism problem on the right wing "they're just a few bad apples"
...but...
One small offshoot group postponing a single, small event because they want a more diverse leadership team = empirical evidence that "the left", as a whole, wants to put white people in a place of inferiority.

...yeah...not quite lol Read the article folks.

com7fy8 said:

I'm thinking that Orientals do not seem to get much public attention

Click to expand...

do you mean Asian? Oriental refers to things

my child from Asia often gets too much attention
often pictured on school's website with other non-whites which seems to "advertise" school as more diverse than surrounding schools

zippy2006 said:

Maybe they are one stop closer to realizing that these constant "Women's Marches"...

Click to expand...

Hazelelponi said:

The statement sounded to my ears like something a racist Archie Bunker would say, so onward! in the fight against racism, you know, whenever people are finished bringing back bigoted colloquialisms.

Click to expand...

Just want to point out that Nithavela is from Germany.

USincognito said:

Just want to point out the Nithavela is from Germany.

Click to expand...

On my phone I dont get to see the readout on what country or religion people are. So that is helpful thank you.

ThatRobGuy said:

Seems like the only responders to this thread who've actually read the article are @Nithavela and myself.
.

Click to expand...

Shame on me for responding without reading the article

but i've been super busy as of late...

actually, I think I might be bowing out from CF. I don't think discourse here is the best use of my time.

WHat I've been kicking around in my head was creating video retorts to the arguments that pop up here and linking the video to the thread. Of course, it will take me about a month to do a proper video but over time, my video retorts will add up and allow people to just post a link to my youtube video as a retort...

basically, I'm so tired of the same people bringing up the same incorrect flawed arguments over and over again. It gets annoying. With a video, I can show actual stats and data and evidence and make a coherent argument in a way that more people will hopefully pay attention to vs a giant wall of text... My goal of course would be to have each video under 3 minutes, 5 minutes max and to also include a little bit of humor.

So you will have to hold the line against the forces of cognitive dissonance... but know that reinforcements (albeit a little late) are coming

Minorities aren't really as left-leaning as the Democrats want you to believe. There are many areas where are more conservative then whites. (e.g., abortion and same-sex marriage are important for Catholic Latinos)

The reason why they overwhelmingly vote Democratic is the modern Republican party simply doesn't care about them.

christine40 said:

do you mean Asian? Oriental refers to things

Click to expand...

Thank you, Christine Asians certainly are not Oriental rugs for us to walk on!! I appreciate your attention to let me know this; I am 71 years old and never have been told this, or I wasn't listening!

christine40 said:

my child from Asia often gets too much attention
often pictured on school's website with other non-whites which seems to "advertise" school as more diverse than surrounding schools

Click to expand...

People can be used, in one way or another. But ones who only are using people, of another group, are also not loving those of their same group; I mean > Jesus says the one unjust in little is also unjust in much > Luke 16:10 < I think this means our nature works the same way with what is little or what is much. So, like this, if someone does not love ones who are not very involved with them, they also are not real in how they love ones who are closely involved with them. Because God's love is all-loving, and selfish love is possessing, using someone for what a person wants.

"if you love those who love you, what reward have you?" (in Matthew 5:46)

So, if ones at the most only use people who are of other groups, these are missing out on much more than money and fame and education; and this is because they have not discovered real love with one another > God's all-loving love would also have them delighted to love any and all others.

So discrimination and using people can hurt the bigot oneself much more than anyone else.

Thank you

Oh, and I think of this > the wrong people do not decide if we ourselves love the way God wants. So, we do not have to wait for them before we can have all God desires to share with us.

But it is written >

"You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies" (in Psalm 23:5).

We can have all the Lord Jesus desires for us, right in the presence of any enemies, at all. And they need us, to be their example so they can be changed by God and join us. So, even if they are using her, she can be reaching to them

And . . . our real identity is not our gender or about a pleasure preference or nationality or ethnic group or if we are socially free or not. We in Jesus are children of God. And anyone who isn't may be adopted by trusting in Jesus. Satan's kingdom is love-dead, with ones mainly identified with what is true of their bodies, and what selfish pleasures they prefer, how people classify them. Anyone may be adopted and all will be new, no need to wait for unloving people to change. And God is able to use us to help any impossible stubborn person, like how "without a word" Christian wives can win any disobedient husband > 1 Peter 3:1-4 < example works!!!.

Ana the Ist said:

Sure it does...let's look at that very first paragraph again...

"A California Women’s March was canceled because of concerns that its participants have been “overwhelmingly white,” the march’s organizers said."



I know right? It's almost as if they will completely ignore words right in front of their eyes.

Click to expand...

Maybe read beyond the first paragraph?

Hazelelponi said:

P.S. "colored people" hasn't been said since the 1960's.. might like to keep up with the times..

Click to expand...

USincognito said:

If you think that's what a vulva looks like, you need to have a sex ed 101 refresher course.

Click to expand...

If you think that's what cat ears look like, you need... I'm not sure what you need. To watch more cat videos on YouTube maybe?

USincognito said:

The same reason that baby girl blankets are pink?
The same reason Susan G. Komen breast cancer awareness shirts are pink?

Click to expand...

I think what the hats are called provides a clue.

ThatRobGuy said:

I believe some of the protesters who showed up were wearing that... However, if you wish to label an entire movement based on the fringe folks who show up to support it, then might I remind you of the types of people who tend to show up for some right-wing events:

Click to expand...

Isn't that picture of a protest and against the Charlottesville City Council's support for removing a Confederate war memorial? Would one expect to see Confederate flags at such an event?

com7fy8 said:

I'm having my Mongolian sandwich, and I'm thinking that Orientals do not seem to get much public attention, about how they are being treated as equals or not. And Native Americans do not seem to be getting much attention.

If we believe in equality, how about equal attention????

Does the attention increase if a certain group has more votes?

Click to expand...

I love how you worked "orientals" into that post. It's deliciously ironic.

I live with someone whose job is partially related to "Diversity and Inclusion". There's a fine line to tread in this area.

I think the biggest problem a lot of the Women's Marches have had in terms of inclusion and diversity is that many women of color feel that they don't necessarily need "well-meaning white women" marching on their behalf. It kind of feels short-sighted to me, but then I don't face the same issues these marginalized groups do.

I assume that these women who march (including my wife at every opportunity) do so because of a sense of service to women and society in general, not as a "white savior" thing. But these groups do feel a certain angst over being perceived as trying to be the "white savior" role and don't want that to be the message or the intent. So cancelling may appear to be a better alternative.

And besides the article states that this particular group are going to redouble their efforts at inclusion and diversity in place of marching. So it's not like they are just taking a time-out.

GlabrousDory4 said:

...or a good president.

Click to expand...

The president spoke a truth... Many women literally throw themselves at "billionaires" and act... not appropriate and are happy for wealthy men to reciprocate their attentions. Money means a terrible lot to many women and I honestly don't doubt Mr. Trump being a billionaire experienced much of that sort of attention thrown his way.

Women on the left just got terribly offended when the fact many women will use their bodies out of greed was pointed out clearly.

I guess legal prostitution called young women seeking rich man, marriage not necessary but still desired for the alimony, should be kept quiet and not exposed for what it is, according to them, or they will dress up as great big vaginas in protest.

yet no one see's the irony.