Nice to see the BBC reporting on marches again

[Kris]

Genuinely interested to know what non reported marches you are referring to.

Me too.

Looks like Wales Bales and Steve R don't want to report on these non-reported on marches either.

[Mrs Steve R]

do these marches really matter though, yes its great to have a Jolly out in London, i expect a fair few of them popped along to Oxford street after it to do some girlie shopping and then a glass of prosecco in covent gardens

London organisers announced on stage that between 80,000 and 100,000 women and men had taken part in the rally, but police have not given an independent estimate. so we can take 20 K of that total

3.000 in sydney

these protests will not do anything, Trump is in power

What women's rights has he taken away?

Looks like Wales Bales and Steve R don't want to report on these non-reported on marches either.

Mrs Steve R to you, what would be satisfactory evidence for you if there are no reports? none I'm thinking, all I can suggest is that you go through youtube with a fine tooth comb, find all the old live streams to different protests and then google to see if they have been reported on, I really don't care enough if you believe me or not to do that tbh, it might take you some time but have fun.

[Wales-Bales]

Mrs Steve R to you, what would be satisfactory evidence for you if there are no reports? none I'm thinking, all I can suggest is that you go through youtube with a fine tooth comb, find all the old live streams to different protests and then google to see if they have been reported on, I really don't care enough if you believe me or not to do that tbh, it might take you some time but have fun.

What the lady said, but I can tell what they did cover. I definitely saw coverage of the Remainers protesting in London, and about 6 people demonstrating outside the Russian Embassy with a pile of mannequins.

[Kris]

What women's rights has he taken away?


Mrs Steve R to you, what would be satisfactory evidence for you if there are no reports? none I'm thinking, all I can suggest is that you go through youtube with a fine tooth comb, find all the old live streams to different protests and then google to see if they have been reported on, I really don't care enough if you believe me or not to do that tbh, it might take you some time but have fun.

Why is that funny?


Lady? Even though I'm a woman I still don't know what rights I have lost because of Trump?

What the lady said, but I can tell what they did cover. I definitely saw coverage of the Remainers protesting in London, and about 6 people demonstrating outside the Russian Embassy with a pile of mannequins.

It's really amazing. You've both bean moaning about the lack of coverage for other marches yet you are both unable to provide an example to back up your claim. One of you tells me to "do my own research innit", and the other tells me yet more examples of marches that *have* been covered.

MRS Steve R, maybe you are one of the older fashioned ladies. Nothing wrong with that, but calling yourself Mrs Husband's Name is something that would have some feminists up in arms. Nothing wrong with that either, but the fact you are calling yourself Mrs Husband's name may mean that you are not tuned into the argument of the women who were marching.

In answer to your question, you won't lose ANY rights due to Trump being elected. As far as I can make out, he has been made President of the USA, and doesn't have any ability to change laws in the UK.

What do the women who were marching think they have lost? They have lost some equality. In the 70s and 80s it was more or less accepted that a boss smacking his female employee's arse, forcing her to wear certain clothing, paying her less than her male counterparts, giving her an unwanted shoulder massage etc etc.

Trump has, unwittingly, given the pervy boss a bit more "courage" to push the boundaries again. No, there won't be any changes in laws that take away American women's rights. The damage is more discreet than that.

Those women may think that Trump will set the women's movement back 20-30 years. They may be incorrect, but considering the battles that feminism has had to fight and win they have earned the right to defend themselves.

[Mrs Steve R]

Well he says he is in favour of Women's rights but when some of them choose to exercise their right to protest, he makes a mockery of it simply because he doesn't like them speaking out against something he likes.

I didn't think it was a bad question, especially as nobody here has lost any rights because of Trump have they?

It's really amazing. You've both bean moaning about the lack of coverage for other marches yet you are both unable to provide an example to back up your claim. One of you tells me to "do my own research innit", and the other tells me yet more examples of marches that *have* been covered.

MRS Steve R, maybe you are one of the older fashioned ladies. Nothing wrong with that, but calling yourself Mrs Husband's Name is something that would have some feminists up in arms. Nothing wrong with that either, but the fact you are calling yourself Mrs Husband's name may mean that you are not tuned into the argument of the women who were marching.

In answer to your question, you won't lose ANY rights due to Trump being elected. As far as I can make out, he has been made President of the USA, and doesn't have any ability to change laws in the UK.

What do the women who were marching think they have lost? They have lost some equality. In the 70s and 80s it was more or less accepted that a boss smacking his female employee's arse, forcing her to wear certain clothing, paying her less than her male counterparts, giving her an unwanted shoulder massage etc etc.

Trump has, unwittingly, given the pervy boss a bit more "courage" to push the boundaries again. No, there won't be any changes in laws that take away American women's rights. The damage is more discreet than that.

Those women may think that Trump will set the women's movement back 20-30 years. They may be incorrect, but considering the battles that feminism has had to fight and win they have earned the right to defend themselves.

If I had started the thread I might have gone to the effort of preparing a couple of examples but knowing it would not make the slightest bit of difference to what any of you think why should I bother wasting my time?

Calling myself my husbands name on a forum will have the feminists up in arms? GOOD I corrected you on my name because Steve R is a different poster. (he's not my husband either)
No I'm not really tuned in with the argument of the women who were marching tbh, what was the point? like you said nobody has lost any rights, it was more about outrage, if I'm honest I've read things on here about women that are worse than what Trump said or did, should I walk the streets dressed as a massive vagina every time that happens?

[goslow]

I didn't think it was a bad question, especially as nobody here has lost any rights because of Trump have they?


If I had started the thread I might have gone to the effort of preparing a couple of examples but knowing it would not make the slightest bit of difference to what any of you think why should I bother wasting my time?

Calling myself my husbands name on a forum will have the feminists up in arms? GOOD I corrected you on my name because Steve R is a different poster. (he's not my husband either)
No I'm not really tuned in with the argument of the women who were marching tbh, what was the point? like you said nobody has lost any rights, it was more about outrage, if I'm honest I've read things on here about women that are worse than what Trump said or did, should I walk the streets dressed as a massive vagina every time that happens?

image.jpg

[Mrs Steve R]

so who exactly was cooking the tea when all this was going on?

image.jpg

[Eric Cartman]

I didn't think it was a bad question, especially as nobody here has lost any rights because of Trump have they?

Which question? I lazily quoted the whole passage but was only really concentrating on those two statements.

[Mrs Steve R]

Which question? I lazily quoted the whole passage but was only really concentrating on those two statements.

I forget, something about why these people were not marching for people who had actually lost rights or had never had them.

[the other bob wilson]

It's really amazing. You've both bean moaning about the lack of coverage for other marches yet you are both unable to provide an example to back up your claim. One of you tells me to "do my own research innit", and the other tells me yet more examples of marches that *have* been covered.

MRS Steve R, maybe you are one of the older fashioned ladies. Nothing wrong with that, but calling yourself Mrs Husband's Name is something that would have some feminists up in arms. Nothing wrong with that either, but the fact you are calling yourself Mrs Husband's name may mean that you are not tuned into the argument of the women who were marching.

In answer to your question, you won't lose ANY rights due to Trump being elected. As far as I can make out, he has been made President of the USA, and doesn't have any ability to change laws in the UK.

What do the women who were marching think they have lost? They have lost some equality. In the 70s and 80s it was more or less accepted that a boss smacking his female employee's arse, forcing her to wear certain clothing, paying her less than her male counterparts, giving her an unwanted shoulder massage etc etc.

Trump has, unwittingly, given the pervy boss a bit more "courage" to push the boundaries again. No, there won't be any changes in laws that take away American women's rights. The damage is more discreet than that.

Those women may think that Trump will set the women's movement back 20-30 years. They may be incorrect, but considering the battles that feminism has had to fight and win they have earned the right to defend themselves.

My original post was not specifically about the Women's marches, I was really interested in finding out about these marches that the BBC had ignored because I assumed that they must have happened given the nudge, nudge, wink, wink conversation between Mrs Steve R and Wales Bales at the start of the thread. I had no agenda in asking for more info about these marches which the BBC, and the mainstream media I presume, had ignored, but it looks like it was just a case of the two of them assuming that they had happened - they may be right, but what they said loses a lot of it's impact when they don't seem to be able to back it up.

[Mrs Steve R]

My original post was not specifically about the Women's marches, I was really interested in finding out about these marches that the BBC had ignored because I assumed that they must have happened given the nudge, nudge, wink, wink conversation between Mrs Steve R and Wales Bales at the start of the thread. I had no agenda in asking for more info about these marches which the BBC, and the mainstream media I presume, had ignored, but it looks like it was just a case of the two of them assuming that they had happened - they may be right, but what they said loses a lot of it's impact when they don't seem to be able to back it up.

As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?

[the other bob wilson]

As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?

Thanks, here's the Independent story you refer to

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6765976.html

This, an earlier story by the Mirror and fair play to what I would have thought would have been one of the biggest culprits in ignoring something like that, something in the Mail were the only instances of mainstream media reporting that I could find when I Googled "London Muslims March Against ISIS". I then searched the BBC website for "Muslims March Against ISIS" and it didn't return anything. Looking at the pictures of the event in the Independent and the Mail, you would have thought that the size of the march and the sentiment being expressed would have attracted more attention than it did, so I agree with you both that, in this case, the coverage by the mainstream media (in particular the BBC) left a lot to be desired.

[goslow]

As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?

The article says there were thousands protesting about terrorism but the bloke it quoted says hundreds?

[lardy]

As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?

I hadn't heard of this march. Without doubt, it was newsworthy.

When you think how many people say 'why doesn't the muslim community ever speak out', it's something to bear in mind.

[goslow]

[QUOTE=Mrs Steve R;4712974]As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?[/QUOTE

Dp

[goslow]

As I'm now being badgered here's a quick one before I go to bed.

London Muslims March Against ISIS Goes Unreported By Mainstream Media
http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/0...nstream-media/

The Independent did a story about the fact that it had not been covered after his tweets went viral, given the current climate I'd say that was something that should of had plenty of media coverage wouldn't you?

And it wasn't an anti isis march.