For all of the hundreds of millions of tax dollars that have gone to Planned Parenthood, the organization is at least good for a laugh now and then.
#WomensMarch was about solidarity—as people of color, LGBTQ folks, immigrants, people of all religions & incomes. https://t.co/Zh45is6Gqx pic.twitter.com/bThXbAH71S
— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) January 25, 2017
Yep, the Women’s March on Washington was all about solidarity, once the organizers worked out those initial squabbles about race and intersectionality, whether Hillary Clinton should be added as an honoree, and clarified that, as long as they were prepared to listen rather than lead, men were welcome, but pro-life groups were not.
In retrospect, though, the march in the end was all about solidarity … with the exception of trans people and others who felt excluded because of the march’s focus on genital-based feminism. What’s important, though, was the people stood united under a shared fantasy of blowing up the White House.
The Women’s March has inspired a Scientists’ March on Washington, and the organizers are trying to steer clear of having to send those engraved invitations after the fact by making it clear that the march is open to “anyone who values empirical science. That’s it.”
First women, now scientists to march on Washington #ScienceMarch https://t.co/0BZzJ0BgfZ via @usatoday
— March for Science (@MarchForScience) January 26, 2017
However, there does seem to be some fine print attached: Organizers have declared there are “certain things that we accept as facts with no alternatives,” including anthropogenic global warming and evolution. Sorry, heretics.
It would seem a march predicated on hard science would be a cinch to pull off, but this march too is confronting questions of inclusiveness and diversity.
For those wondering, #intersectionality is a core principle of #ScienceMarch, and we will soon be releasing our formal vision.
— March for Science (@MarchForScience) January 25, 2017
Wait, wasn’t valuing empirical science the only requirement to attend? This is getting tricky.
Tell me more about how science isn't politicized. https://t.co/bCpfycXAka
— Jason (@jasonelevation) January 26, 2017
https://twitter.com/archaeo_canuck/status/824737704130719746
intersectionality comes from critical "theory". It's a methodology, not a science. Not an ideology. Dangerous precedent.
— Daniel Nyari (@danielnyari) January 25, 2017
On campus it is more like a cult. https://t.co/qgJJv7FV4p
— Christina Sommers ? (@CHSommers) January 26, 2017
Dude, does Christina Hoff Sommers even own a lab coat? Seriously.
And it's contradicted by the psych research showing prejudice is not simply additive across dimensions of sex, race, class, etc
— Geoffrey Miller (@primalpoly) January 26, 2017
Having intersectionality as part of #sciencemarch is definitely going to prove that science isn't a liberal conspiracy! #notreally pic.twitter.com/fdDG7xWokQ
— Diana S. Fleischman (@sentientist) January 26, 2017
https://twitter.com/AlexBerezow/status/824433665602056192
50 years of experimental research clearly shows that identifying and dividing people by groups INCREASES bias and conflict, full stop.
— Clay Routledge (@clayroutledge) January 26, 2017
Intersectionality?! So it's not about, but politics? Imagine my surprise! #ScienceMarch
— Garth Godsman (@GarthGodsman) January 26, 2017
Organizers noted Thursday that inclusiveness also is a top priority, and the diversity committee is on it. The official website currently notes, “Science is done by POC, women, immigrants, LGBTQ, indigenous people, people of all beliefs and non-belief. We hope that this diversity is reflected in both the leadership of the march and the march itself.”
Thanks 4 feedback on our diversity statement! Inclusiveness is a top priority & we're drafting a comprehensive statement to be released soon
— March for Science (@MarchForScience) January 26, 2017
keep it simple.
All are welcome is as includive as it gets without risk of leaving someone out.— A. (@amya237) January 26, 2017
Too late.
I know it wasn't your comprehensive statement, but its still a shame it didn't include disabled indiviuals. At all.
— Hanna 'MORE PERI PERI PLEASE' Marie, M.A. (@tinysapien) January 26, 2017
Don't do what women's march did- exclude disabled people in the first draft. Get it right and follow through. #CripTheVote
— Lara Schwartz (@Lara_Schwartz) January 26, 2017
Wonderful. Please don't forget about neurodiversity. My 9 year old autistic child wants to be a scientist.
— Hope Moriki (@HopeMoriki) January 26, 2017
https://twitter.com/sadcinnamonroll/status/824711254149332993
So important to emphasize diversity. Hidden Figures – never again! #diversity#science#resist
— Gayle Logan (@grammyisabel) January 26, 2017
cool but focus on science
— Will in Seattle (@WillSeattle) January 26, 2017
Absolutely, focus on science while emphasizing diversity and acknowledging the intersection of societal systems of oppression. And make sure celebrated white male TV host Bill Nye is there with a slide show of photos he took of the weather report on his TV.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member