The election of Donald Trump exposed a Grand Canyon of a divide in the United States. Americans are staring angrily across a vast geographic, education, class, racial and cultural chasm.
The Women’s March on Washington will only reinforce that divide.
“There may well be a few small town factory workers and military wives among the women at the rally, but they will be alien creatures in a blue sea of elites.”
Of course, the organizers have been careful to describe an inclusive event reflecting all of America. They promise representatives or sister rallies in 41 states. “We march to ensure that no woman is forgotten,” writes Women for Women International, one of the march’s partner organizations, on its website.
I’m not a Trump supporter, but having talked to and read interviews with some of the 56 percent of white women and 43 percent of women overall who are, I think it’s safe to say this kind of talk will fool nobody.
Those women will – correctly – view the rally as organized by and for the women on the other side of the canyon. News media stories about the marchers refer to reproductive health clinic managers, professors, writers, attorneys, fashion designers, university students and an artist who is bringing her bachelorette party. There may well be a few small town factory workers and military wives among the 200,000 women expected to link arms on Jan. 21, but they will be alien creatures in a blue sea of creative and professional class elites.
The women of the other side will – also correctly – know that the marchers look down on them them as at best benighted fools and at worst racist haters. On her first show after the election Samantha Bee, one of the spokeswomen for the march, blasted “Caucasian Nation“ women for betraying their sex. Chelsea Handler, who is leading a satellite march in Hollywood-studded Sundance, described them as “self-mutilating.”
If march enthusiasts are serious about wanting to speak for women, rather than laughing along with liberal comedians who treat the rubes like chopped liver, they would do well to read perceptive writers like Salena Zito, Chris Arnade and Joan Williams, and of course J.D. Vance of “Hillbilly Elegy” fame. They might learn that though they disliked Hillary Clinton, especially in the Rust Belt states, a significant number of Trump supporting women voted for Barack Obama. Many of them were eager to vote for a woman president. They put jobs, terrorism and health care before social issues, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t put off by Trump’s sexism.
The election was “a warning that feminism, as it has been defined, did not inspire enough people in enough places around the country,” Susan Chira wrote in The Times recently. Marchers should take heed.
This piece originally appeared in the New York Times Room for Debate series
______________________
Kay S. Hymowitz is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and contributing editor at City Journal. She is the author of the book, The New Brooklyn.
This piece originally appeared in New York Times Room for Debate