No, they don't. That wasn't about safety, it was an opportunistic play to try and strip more rights from men. They got their misogyny law, so yet again it worked.
They most certainly do, even if you want to claim that this was not the reason for the protest. I've had far too many experiences with ordinary, normal women and girls fearing for their safety to agree with this.
Now, what was it "about"? That is a simplification. For any protest, there are theoretically as many motivations as there are participants. I'm not going to write off anyone who attended a protest against the murder of a woman, based on an assumption about what her reasons for attending it were.
It's almost like feminists are trying to create an underclass of brainwashed idiots that they can abuse with impunity.
What you think you want is not always what you actually want. The latter is determined by biology.
Imagine thinking they'd tell us the truth. I can just imagine that...
It's quite concerning that you are outraged that anyone, anywhere would trust a woman that you don't even know. Is this the mirror image of 'believe all women' or what?
Is it? Seems to be pretty easy, they had one million people marching in 2017 for malice.
No, that was opposition to Trump, which was open, that you call malice. I'm challenging the idea that there is a 'secret' agenda, which apparently is never communicated but held by millions of people all the same. Sounds quite unlikely.
They most certainly do, even if you want to claim that this was not the reason for the protest. I've had far too many experiences with ordinary, normal women and girls fearing for their safety to agree with this.
Now, what was it "about"? That is a simplification. For any protest, there are theoretically as many motivations as there are participants. I'm not going to write off anyone who attended a protest against the murder of a woman, based on an assumption about what her reasons for attending it were.
What you think you want is not always what you actually want. The latter is determined by biology.
Imagine rejecting reasonable stuff because the individual who said it happened to be a woman.
It's very difficult to co-ordinate malice.
It's quite concerning that you are outraged that anyone, anywhere would trust a woman that you don't even know. Is this the mirror image of 'believe all women' or what?
No, that was opposition to Trump, which was open, that you call malice. I'm challenging the idea that there is a 'secret' agenda, which apparently is never communicated but held by millions of people all the same. Sounds quite unlikely.