Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, April 12, 2018

No. That's about all there is to say in response to the official Women's March Twitter page, which decried the federal government's move to seize and shut down Backpage.com, a multibillion-dollar internet human trafficking platform.

Except that there is so much more to say, because there is so much wrong with an entity that purports to stand for women in its official capacity both promoting the legalization of prostitution and defending a company that is currently being prosecuted by the federal government for the trafficking of women and children.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This line pretty much sums up the Women's March:

"The Women's March is officially more accepting of prostitution and sex trafficking than it is pro-life women."

There are plenty of nasty fringe groups on the right. The thing is though not only are they not accepted by mainstream conservatives, they are openly shunned. The left simply cannot make the same claim regarding the Women's March, at least not yet. I haven't seen any denunciation of this group from the left side of the aisle.

#1 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 10:06 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Tried to research this but not one single legitimate media source was available to back up the claim that The Women's March did any of the things asserted in that article. I can say though that legalizing prostitution isn't really even controversial, why should a woman be jailed for it? It's her body, her decision. Why should the Women's March be forced to encourage the anti-abortion activists to have a stage provided by pro-choice women? The Women's March stood for women's freedom from patriarchal laws and limits on women's equality.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 11:30 AM | Reply

Danni,

Here you go:

Women's March movement calls shutting down Backpage 'absolute crisis'

wjla.com

Pro-life group removed from Women's March on Washington

www.fox5dc.com

#3 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 12:38 PM | Reply

Links from Sinclair and Fox, thanks a heap Jeff.

This attack on the Women's March is a pile of crap, Trump just couldn't stand it that the Women's March was so much bigger than his inauguration so his allies are now trying to tear it down. Good luck with that. It's just going to get bigger next time Jeff. Your lying media can't kill it because the attendees know your media are all liars. Do you still beat your wife?

#4 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 12:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Here you go:
Women's March movement calls shutting down Backpage 'absolute crisis'
#3 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Yeah, I agree with the Women's March.

Girls were able to control their posts on Backpage from the comfort of their home or hotel room. Now they have to hit the streets for clients. This leaves them more vulnerable to pimps (who are frankly vicious) and johns who might hurt them as well.

It's a matter of pragmatism.

It also makes it harder to crack down on sex traffic too. At least on the websites, you can see the ads, contact information, etc. Now...it's all on the street.

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 01:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The problem was the child sex trafficking.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 01:02 PM | Reply

Pro-life group removed from Women's March on Washington
www.fox5dc.com

#3 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

New Wave Feminists is the group that got removed.

They are not a Feminist group. Their only position, even on their own website, is a Pro-Life position. There is nothing there about anything even remotely related to Feminism or equality.

That's why they were removed.

#7 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 01:04 PM | Reply

#7

Basically, any woman with a pro-life stance wasn't welcome.

Feminism isn't defined by abortion, btw.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 01:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Danni,

You are completely unhinged today.

#9 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 01:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#5 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

Interesting and thought-provoking points you raised. I'll give that a NW.

#10 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 01:17 PM | Reply

I don't follow the logic of a women's march excluding certain women.

#11 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 01:18 PM | Reply

I don't follow the logic of a women's march excluding certain women.

#11 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

The Women's March is about equality. That group had nothing to do with equality despite being a "women's group." It is a single issue "Pro-Life" group. Every poster or event is a pro-life event for them. The Feminism and Equality part is left as an after-thought.

And I use the term "Group" with a grain of salt because it appears to be one woman joined occasionally by a few of her friends.

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 02:54 PM | Reply

"I don't follow the logic of a women's march excluding certain women."

Because it was about empowering women not taking away rights from them.

"Feminism isn't defined by abortion, btw."

The right for a woman to control her own body is the very basis of feminism. That's why our side of that argument is labelled "Choice."

#13 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 03:16 PM | Reply

#13 Roughly half of the women in this country are pro-life. Are you saying none of them should be welcomed in a women's march?

Why call it a women's march if that's not what it is. A better name would be "Women who are beholden to left-wing politics March". At least that would be honest.

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 03:19 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

I don't have any problems with good-looking working girls plying their trade, but why don't dems add legal prostitution to their platform, if they are such great women's rights activists?

#15 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-04-12 03:29 PM | Reply

#13 Roughly half of the women in this country are pro-life. Are you saying none of them should be welcomed in a women's march?
Why call it a women's march if that's not what it is. A better name would be "Women who are beholden to left-wing politics March". At least that would be honest.

#14 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

No. What I said was that the march welcomed groups promoting equality. This group was not promoting equality. It's ONLY platform was Pro-Life. That's the ONLY thing even on their website.

#16 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 03:32 PM | Reply

I don't have any problems with good-looking working girls plying their trade, but why don't dems add legal prostitution to their platform, if they are such great women's rights activists?

#15 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Why don't the Republicans do it now that Trump has paid so many working girls for their time and apparently their silence?

#17 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 03:33 PM | Reply

No. What I said was that the march welcomed groups promoting equality. This group was not promoting equality. It's ONLY platform was Pro-Life. That's the ONLY thing even on their website.

#16 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

I understand what you are saying, I just happen to disagree with that POV.

#18 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 03:34 PM | Reply

No. What I said was that the march welcomed groups promoting equality. This group was not promoting equality. It's ONLY platform was Pro-Life. That's the ONLY thing even on their website.
#16 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT
I understand what you are saying, I just happen to disagree with that POV.
#18 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Honestly, I don't think i would have banned them either unless this woman had a history of trying to hijack events or had some outlandish beliefs not on her web page.

#19 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 04:11 PM | Reply

#13 Roughly half of the women in this country are pro-life. Are you saying none of them should be welcomed in a women's march?
Why call it a women's march if that's not what it is. A better name would be "Women who are beholden to left-wing politics March". At least that would be honest.

#14 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Lets stick with the facts: We actually don't know why she was banned. The March hasn't said it either.

This woman could have some serious issues when it comes to being a part of events. She could try to take them over. She could actually stand against actual equality itself. It's actually hard to know because her damn website is a single issue: Abortion.

#20 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 04:12 PM | Reply

"#13 Roughly half of the women in this country are pro-life. Are you saying none of them should be welcomed in a women's march?"

"Men and women express similar views on abortion; 59% of women say it should be legal in all or most cases, as do 55% of men."

www.pewforum.org

They are welcome but not if they were going to use the march as a platform to push the view that the right to abortion should be taken away. They don't have to "choose" to have an abortion, that is their business and their right but they want to take that right away from women who think that they, themselves, should be the one to decide.

#21 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 04:15 PM | Reply

This woman could have some serious issues when it comes to being a part of events. She could try to take them over. She could actually stand against actual equality itself. It's actually hard to know because her damn website is a single issue: Abortion.

#20 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

That's an interesting take. I guess it's plausible that the organizers of the march felt this group might try to troll the event. If I were strongly pro-life and I wanted to take that message to this march I would make a sign that reads: "Choose life". I wouldn't go any further than that out of respect for the fact that A) The march wasn't about abortion and B) Out of respect for the many women there who are strongly pro-choice.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 06:53 PM | Reply

Why don't the Republicans do it now that Trump has paid so many working girls for their time and apparently their silence?

#17 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

So, Trump is the poster boy for legalized prostitution. Classic!

#23 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 06:55 PM | Reply

I don't see sex workers or porn industry as 'empowering women', equality, freedom from patriarchy, or in simply sending the right message to young women.

That said, if that's what people want to do, I don't care. What I DO care about is human trafficking and girls/women trying to get out.

I don't believe we should police it, but I also don't believe we should celebrate it as a society, or porote and enable it to continue.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I would expect less than 10% want to be in that line of work.

#24 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2018-04-12 07:28 PM | Reply

promote

#25 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2018-04-12 07:29 PM | Reply

"I wanted to take that message to this march I would make a sign that reads: "Choose life". I wouldn't go any further than that out of respect for the fact that A) The march wasn't about abortion and B) Out of respect for the many women there who are strongly pro-choice."

But the so-called Pro-Life crowd is very likely not like you Jeff. They would be carrying around pictures of fetuses and the whole nine yards trying to throw guilt on anyone who disagreed with them. Screaming "murderer!" Hell, they would even be friendlier towards the Nazis than the pro-choice women.

#26 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 07:37 PM | Reply

"I don't believe we should police it, but I also don't believe we should celebrate it as a society, or porote and enable it to continue."

Just like drugs, if you legalize it and regulate it you can be sure those things aren't happening much better than if you criminalize it. Then you can also take better care of their health issues. They won't be getting beat up or killed by pimps.

#27 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-12 07:42 PM | Reply

Just like drugs, if you legalize it and regulate it you can be sure those things aren't happening much better than if you criminalize it. Then you can also take better care of their health issues. They won't be getting beat up or killed by pimps.

#27 | POSTED BY DANNI

Regulated prostitution works pretty much everywhere it exists. It's not called the world's oldest profession for no reason whatsoever. The market will always be there so why not make it as safe as possible and tax the transactions.

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 08:09 PM | Reply

I just believe it demeans women, and in many cases, breaks them.

Some never escape. ..it's just sad to me, that's all.

#29 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2018-04-12 10:55 PM | Reply

You know, I've read in-depth articles where many women in the sex industry were victims of child abuse, which just makes it that much more heartbreaking.

#30 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2018-04-12 11:16 PM | Reply

#29 and #30

Yes, Sheeple.

Agreed.

The Libertarian in me supports legalized and regulated prostitution.

But, like you said, it's a very damaging profession from a psychological, emotional and personal self-esteem standpoint.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-04-12 11:20 PM | Reply

Oh, great.

More of Jeffy's "Hey, look! I found some liberal stuff that sux!"

#32 | Posted by Angrydad at 2018-04-13 07:52 AM | Reply

Why don't the Republicans do it now that Trump has paid so many working girls for their time and apparently their silence? - #17 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-04-12 03:33 PM
Snoofy are you watching this thread? ^^^^^^^^^ That is whataboutism.

#33 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-04-13 08:23 AM | Reply

"I just believe it demeans women, and in many cases, breaks them."

Of course it does but people make choices and I'm not here to tell anyone else how to live. Legalized prostitution is better than having women selling their bodies out on the street to any crazy, violent nut job that comes along.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2018-04-13 10:27 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort