Pop Quiz time:

If I were to ask, “What is the purpose of the Women’s March movement?”, how would you answer?

 

Now granted, my physiological plumbing precludes me from understanding their messaging (according to their pamphlets) but I was under the impression they were fighting for the protection of women and demanding that their voices be heard. Imagine my surprise to learn they actually are willing to castigate a female victim to back a sociopathic bi-polar predator in the name of political correctness.

 

Since the election of Donald Trump the feminist-driven advocacy group Women’s March has risen to a high profile position of opposition and — using the vogue vernacular of vaginal leftists — Resist-ance. Through numerous marches, endless hectoring speeches, and a marching battalion of cervical chapeaus, the group has become the self-appointed voice of women in the Trump Era.

 

The driving message is that the President poses a direct threat against the entire gender and the removal of women’s rights; just don’t ask them which rights Trump has removed. Should you lapse, you’ll receive a 10 minute long non-answer of non-rights-suppression. For over a year now Women’s March has postured about backing women and given extensive lip service to giving victims a voice.  This makes the group’s decision to essentially tell Hollywood rape victim Rose McGowan to pipe down rather astounding.

McGowan, just in case you missed it, was crucial in spearheading the #MeToo movement by announcing the sexual assaults she endured by Harvey Weinstein, leading to his downfall and that of numerous other Hollywood players. She has just released a book, entitled “Brave”, and last week she was at a Barnes & Noble location in Manhattan to discuss the book. During her talk an audience member rose, and confronted the actress. A self-proclaimed trans-activist named Andi Dier began berating McGowan over comments she made on a podcast with RuPaul.

 

The two women shouted back and forth briefly until Dier was escorted out. At issue was the fact that McGowan was not fully deferential to trans women in her comments. What those quotes had to do with her book, or her being victimized by Weinstein is a complete mystery. But Dier has, for reasons unclear to my testosterone-polluted soul, become embraced by the left and — rather surprisingly — the Women’s March. Scanning through media reports the interpretation of the argument was clearly one-sided.

 

McGowan was “Confronted on trans rights”. She delivered “A shocking outburst at a trans woman”. Her comments amounted to “A transphobic rage”, and her argument was “a privilege tantrum”. All that, despite the fact it was Dier who initiated all of this by standing and shouting at McGowan, about a non-sequitur subject in relation to her book and sexual assault. Dier was not taken to task for hurling insults and invective, only McGowan. Also joining the chorus was the ever-emotionally-balanced thinkers at Slate. They felt the need to lecture McGowan on what it takes to “truly” be a woman.

It’s clear from these comments that McGowan believes trans women fall short of full womanhood. She points to specific experiences that she considers central to true womanhood—having a period, growing breasts, being subjected to male attention at an early age. This trans-exclusionary idea of womanhood leads to an impoverished and incomplete feminism, one that doesn’t just alienate trans people but also leaves out the experiences of many cis women.

 

It seems that when it comes to garnering intersectional support Dier has more demographically-approved boxes checked off than McGowan, and it all comes down to language. Note the reflexive talking point glossary that gets tossed out; cis-gendered, transphobic, TERF, et al. In a post-confrontation interview Dier focuses on verbal offenses and repeated claims of trans murders. (To clarify the facts, statistically trans people actually have a lower murder rate.)

 

There has been an eagerness by many leftist-activists to default to support of Andi Dier in this confrontation. The problem? In their zeal to back the “correct” social posturing, they ignore the character of the individual. Since the official backing of many outlets of Dier took place it has been revealed that many teenage females contend they have been victims of inappropriate behavior at the hands of this activist. Wonderful. A pro-women’s group has shunned a female victim in order to align themselves with a predator. Just wonderful. I did not expect this from the outfit that has given Linda Sarsour a platform!

 

Additionally, it has also been found this person screeching loudly about violence against trans people has a history of calling for the death of those who may have a differing opinion. Andi Dier’s social media is rife with instances of telling people to kill themselves, all because of social grievance disagreement.

Here is Dier committing a self-proclained thought crime — denying someone of their claimed gender:

 

Then we have Dier, who insists death is a constant threat for trans people, wishing death upon others:

 

And best yet, while proclaiming death threats are the worst crime against a trans individual, Dier calls for the death of person for being trans:

And this is the type of character being held up as the proper mindset by the supposed leaders of the movement??? Sure, I’m not supposed to understand, as I am chromosomally-stunted and prevented from grasping. But this seems a questionable person to back.

The Women’s March has risen as a way to fight back at a President they declare represents male aggression and misogyny. The numerous speeches given at WM rallies have talked about needing to battle sexual assault and giving a voice to the victims. Now the very actress who helped instigate the #MeToo movement is being told by the Women’s March to sit down and shut up, because supporting a predator is the “correct” thing to say.