Looks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's

[riversedge]

I, for one, am glad to see this.



Pat Fuller ? 🇺🇸❄
🖖 Retweeted
Victoria Brownworth? @VABVOX 28m28 minutes ago

Looks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's 2017 not 1917!♀️

Link to tweet

[guillaumeb]

1. An excellent decision. eom

[Demsrule86]

13. Great decision...and a perfect opening night speaker. We need to help all of our elected keep

their jobs and gain more seats to fight Trump.. I am so going!

[sheshe2]

27. Excellent...

Keep us informed. I am to far away to attend,

[guillaumeb]

65. Enjoy, and report back. eom

[Demsrule86]

96. Thanks, I am very excited. I was really sad about all the controversy.

[guillaumeb]

130. Endless and needless division. eom

[Demsrule86]

145. I don't like division. But some things are worth standing up for...this was unfair and a bit slimy..

glad it is over. But politics involve passion and sometimes people get carried away.

[Hortensis]

104. Yes, glad to hear it. Debbie will kick it off on an inclusive note.

What follows will be the responsibility of others.

[Demsrule86]

112. Yes...let's hope that some learned something in 16 because it seems 2000 was not enough.

[iluvtennis]

14. Ditto

[DesertRat]

2. Good decision. I'm glad to hear it. nt

[BigmanPigman]

44. ME TOO! I just posted this under Activist Headquarters

when I saw it on my emails 5 min ago. Then I looked at the rest of DU and saw this post. YEAH!!!!

[procon]

3. An event to raise awareness about women's issues should showcase women.

This was a good decision and it will let women take central roles. Women should lead the way and give testimony to encourage, support, and inspire their sisters in the struggle for rights and equality. Let our brothers, friends and lovers listen and participate as our trusted allies, aligned with the righteousness of our cause, not their own agenda.

[calimary]

56. DAMN right!

[Bettie]

4. Well, we know what that means

Time to move the goal posts! Find another thing to nitpick about to keep us all divided.

[sheshe2]

7. Standing up for women and their equality is not nitpicking.

We are living with an admitted sexual pervert, in our White House, that stalks and preys on women. We have a GOP that is trying to take women's rights and equality away from us. This was a conference advertised to be for women, first conference in 40 years. Then after the refund date they announced that a man would be the first speaker...not a woman, a man. I am so sad that on a Democratic board that defending women and their rights and making our voices heard is just nitpicking to you.

This conference was suppose to be about us.

[George II]

9. +1,000,000

[sheshe2]

17. Thank you George.

[Bettie]

10. I'm fully aware of that.

watch...there will be another quibble with this event and people will once again declare the organizers dead to them.

I'm tired of the infighting. We should be banding together to fight the monsters in the GOP (including the horrific orange clown in the WH) and instead we're fighting over, honestly, the primaries again.

I am a woman, but I don't believe that one speaker makes or breaks an entire conference.

[Mediumsizedhand]

11. Everyone I read here is giving them a thumbs up. Good call. Correct choice. Problem resolved.

You are the only one being negative.

[Bettie]

16. I'm doubtful that there won't be another

attack on this.

Before the Women's March, there were daily posts about how awful it was.

I have no faith in anything anymore.

The only thing I'm sure of is that we will lose big if we stay divided and, given what I see here daily (and how many threads I trash on a usual day), we're right on schedule for that. a

I predict that in the next 24 hours, there will be some new "OH MY!" moment about this conference.

[Mediumsizedhand]

21. It looks the opposite of divided here. So maybe you can join in the unity and help it along.

[Squinch]

24. Do you see the irony of your position? It's there.

[sheshe2]

23. Defending a Woman's rights...

Defending their right to have a conference that was announced to be for Women is fighting the primaries? I think not. Women's issues did not begin and end with the primary and in fact has nothing what so ever have anything to do with it.

It was advertised as the first Women's Conference in 40 years. It was for us. Now it is again.

[melman]

37. Everyone knows the issue was that one particular person

Nothing else. At all. Ever.

[sheshe2]

42. Sorry melman, no.

Not everything is about Bernie. This is about woman and I am appalled you do not understand that. It was not about the man, it was about a man.

[Lordquinton]

73. Then why is there nothing about the other man speaking?

It's clear to everyone what this whole uproar has been about.

[sheshe2]

77. The other man? He was not given a key speaker spot.

I have no problem with any man speaking, no woman does....well unless it was Dump or a GOPer...lol.

You all keep jumping on these threads and telling us it is clear why we protested a man opening a Woman's Conference because it was 'the man' when it was always about 'the women'. Sad that none of you have applauded or supported a Conference that was aimed at women until a few organizers decided differently and made it about politics. For once, just once could you reach out and support women? Gotta tell you, we are pretty magnificent creatures. You should try to get to know us sometime.

[Lordquinton]

87. No where they said he was opening

Or a keynote speaker. He was speaking on the first day, which could have been any number of reasons, but the interpretation was made to make it seem like it was all about him.

Looking at this from a lens bigger than these threads leaves the reason obvious.

[all american girl]

105. They released a statement saying that he was the headline speaker.

The headline speaker should be a woman...we have tons of awesome women who should have been thought of before any man. Sorry, but sometimes it is just about women wanting things for women. I'm not sure why everyone is confused about this, or upset.

[yardwork]

114. Tamika Mallory repeatedly tweeted that Bernie Sanders was opening the conference

They only just now asked Debbie Stabenow to open. It’s less than a week before the conference.

The organizers admitted that they made a mistake and they fixed it.

It’s kind of sad that a handful of men can’t accept that. Did it really mean so much to you to have a man open the Women’s Conference?

[progressoid]

125. You mean this tweet?

Link to tweet

MAXINE WATERS IS THE #WOMENSCONVENTION HEADLINER! Y'all may not have noticed but we announced that weeks ago...#ReclaimingOurTime
1:46 PM - Oct 12, 2017

[yardwork]

142. No, Im talking about all the other tweets she sent this past week.

[progressoid]

146. That's what I was looking for.

I figured it would be easy to find since everyone keeps talking about her tweets. But I guess my old eyes aren't as good as they should be. I went back to the 12th and that's the only one I could find in her twitter feed addressing this.

[yardwork]

147. Thats too bad.

Sea lions are cute this time of year.

[betsuni]

78. No, he was never announced as an opening or headlining speaker.

That's why there was no "uproar," and nobody cares about Sanders being on a panel. Opening, headlining: this is the reason.

[Lordquinton]

88. Good thing he wasn't either of those things

He was speaking on the first day, then it got blown out of proportion. He's a big and popular name, so it would be wise to let people know he was there.

Like my other response says, the reason is clear.

[melman]

92. Not everything is

But this most certainly was, 100% and everyone knows it.

[progressoid]

121. So let's say another male, Barack Obama, had been chosen, there would have been the same outcry?

I'm gonna go ahead and say, no.

[fleabiscuit]

149. Non sequitur. nt

[shanny]

54. Yep.

[sheshe2]

69. Nope.

[Demsrule86]

97. Yes and no, the fact he is male was a factor...a woman should give an opening night speech

at a women's conference. However, Sen. Sanders was not a good choice considering his stance on Identity politics (AkA social justice which includes women's rights) and he also called planned parenthood establishment. His stance on women's abortion rights has been disturbing to many women including me. Some think it is about one man...it is not. It is about women's rights. We are under attack and can not be relegated to the back of the progressive bus while our menfolk who think they know best work on populist economics which really can't include us without social justice. Women's rights are human rights and are not negotiable.


"Reproductive rights advocates have also been disturbed by Sanders’s post-election comments on abortion rights, as Rebecca Nelson notes at Cosmopolitan. Sanders endorsed Heath Mello, a mayoral candidate this year in Omaha, who had sponsored or voted for several anti-abortion bills during his time in the Nebraska state legislature. When criticized, Sanders said such choices might be necessary “if we’re going to become a 50-state party...To others, Sanders’s willingness to budge on the issue of abortion was at odds with his campaign message of proud, unapologetic democratic socialism. If the left doesn’t need to compromise on a $15 minimum wage or single-payer health care, some wondered, why give ground on abortion rights?..."It also fed the fear among many feminists and other activists that Sanders might be willing to sacrifice racial and gender equality in favor of economic populism. “Economic policy is not the singular answer to violence, hatred, oppression, and marginalization,” Carmen Rios wrote at Argot in response to Sanders’s November speech. “That doesn't mean it isn't important — it just means we don't have to choose. It means we cannot choose

This is why Sen. Sanders was not a good choice for a woman's conference and yes his votes are stellar, but his words not so much. Read the article if you have a chance...good article explaining the issue...uses different sources.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/10/13/16469216/bernie-sanders-womens-conference-speech

[Mediumsizedhand]

134. This would be the nitpicking? I felt this was front and center to the issue, myself.

[Demsrule86]

143. I agree...I an not the one who made the nitpicking comment... I feel this was an

important battle...a woman's convention should have a woman starting it off and Sen. Sanders in particular was a bad choice for reason already posted.

[Demsrule86]

28. It meant a great deal to many women...or they wouldn't have changed it...

I can tell you when I complained I was basically told to bad so sad and get lost.

[sheshe2]

40. First you called the pushback 'nitpicking'...

4. Well, we know what that means

Time to move the goal posts! Find another thing to nitpick about to keep us all divided
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029722277#post4

Now you call it a "quibble". What a sad thing to do on a Democratic board. You as a woman are trivializing what all these women stand for. They want there voice heard, and it was, they want equality and the basic human rights over their own bodies at a Conference for Women.

Please do not seek to demean what we have to say and feel by calling it 'nitpicking' and 'quibble' when we express our opinions and protest something that we feel is wrong.

[all american girl]

106. She...thank you!!!!!

I'm so tired that people seem to think women are just being petty, instead of listening to the actual outcry as to why this was wrong.

[sheshe2]

139. Thank you, all american girl.

[susanna]

90. Good for you, Bettie. Others have a different view, and you are hearing them.

on edit: clarity as to who I was responding to because this thread got craaaaaazy.

[Demsrule86]

15. I second that thought. It was not nitpicking but a legitimate concern.

[sheshe2]

25. And we most certainly have a right to our voices.

By calling it nitpicking it diminishes our voice.

[Demsrule86]

29. Yes this is a great outcome and it helps our Michigan elected in 2018 and 2020

That is a good move.

[mcar]

33. Well said, she!

The organizers should have realized this from the get go.

[sheshe2]

45. They should have...

They do know. They heard us, mcar. They listened.

[Gothmog]

63. Great post

[Nevernose]

76. Thats not accurate, not entirely.

Michigan senator Debbie Stabenow is delivering the opening remarks. Sanders and a couple dozen other people are speaking on opening night. That’s not nitpicking; that’s an actual, meaningful difference.

Sanders is also in Congress, fighting tooth and nail against the GOP POS who are “trying to take women's rights and equality away” and found time out of his busy schedule to speak to women about that effort (for free, as best I can tell).

A man who has been a consistent champion of women’s rights — with a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL — has two percent of the total speaking time. Giving someone else two percent of the time in the name of diversity sure as Hell seems like poetic justice to me.

[betsuni]

80. "for free, as best I can tell" -- it's illegal for a Senator to be paid to speak.

[sheshe2]

83. You know...

You all want to pile on, have at it.

One sentence to Senator Stabenow.........then the rest of your post is all about Bernie. This was all about The Women's Conference...Women. All women, colors and preference. The Conference was about empowering women. Our equality and our lives. Yet here you are making it about one man when it was never about him, nor should it have been.

I give up.....carry on just leave the women behind because we obviously mean nothing to you. When you make this all about one man you leave us behind.

[Nevernose]

93. Thats weird. Honestly, and in good faith

I think that’s it’s you that made it about Bernie. I didn’t invite him — the women throwing the conference did that. I spoke in support of the women organizing the women’s conference, without a lot of help from national leaders meaning an actual grassroots effort to promote women.

YOU made two percent of the speakers, and less of the programming, about a man whose biggest claim to fame so far is LOSING to a woman. I wrote three paragraphs: one about the woman actually giving the opening in direct contradiction to what you claimed, and the other two about a human being that has done far more for women’s rights than most living Americans have. You seem to be the one concerned with genitalia. So that’s 100% of that post about women and their supporters. All of it. Maybe I’m wrong, but yours seems to be super concerned with personalities involved. Much less than the people who did all the actual work.

I’m not the one arguing in thread after thread here and across the Internet about how one token voice is silencing women. This is, in fact, the first of these threads I’ve jumped in on.

I’m not making it about ANYTHING. I’m not there. I didn’t attend or contribute or organize it. Even if I had, what’s the harm in giving 1/50th of the time to a male ally with an excellent track record of supporting women? He’s a token. He’ll learn how it feels, right? He gets about 1/500th if the total programming.

One male voice out of scores of speakers and thousands of participants is not “leaving women behind.”

We’re all in this horror show together and we all want better for everyone — and that includes the many women and men that want to hear people like Bernie Sanders speak.

This divisiveness that Bernie and Hillary people keep pushing? Arbitrarily and capriciously? It’s doing way more to empower people like Dotard Donald and his crew of fundamentalists than anything Clinton or Sanders EVER said about each other on the camps trail.

Why can’t we just support each other? Serious question. The fucking Republicans have us tearing each other’s throats out over two candidates that agree with each other 95% of the time. This is crazy at this point, and our seemingly always total inability to get over shit, at this point, is just sort of depressing.

[Demsrule86]

101. A woman who happens to be a Bernie supporter invited him... and supposedly Nina Turner was

involved. I have seen ads for the conference with her pictured...but I don't know if that is true. What is true... is Tamika and other leaders invited Sen. Sanders to give a speech on opening night at a woman's convention...no doubt the usual stump speech! She admitted she knew it would be unpopular and waited until refunds were unavailable to announce it. Those who want to hear from Sen. Sanders, and as you know I am not one;I don't like his post-election stance on women's rights, can attend one of his rallies, but we do not need to do listen to him at what is supposed to be a Women's convention. Not everyone is a fan. I respect Sen. Sanders work in the Senate...but I would not attend any of his rallies...and resented being tricked into it...glad it is over. We truly need to unite and beat the GOP in 18 and 20. I hope this mess makes Sen. Sanders think long and hard about running in 2020, he has less support than in 16 and will not win the nomination in 20... but will sow controversy and division should he make the attempt. We don't need that in 20 where we must win to save the courts and any hope of a progressive agenda.

[Nevernose]

133. I still really like Sanders

But him running again in 2020 would be an unmitigated disaster, on that much we can agree.

We have so many young, talented Democrats waiting their turn. I remember when an unknown guy with a funny name from Illinois was brought to Nevada to campaign for Democrats here in 2004. Half the crowd thought O’Bama was going to be Irish.

I can’t wait to kick some GOP butt in 2018.

[Demsrule86]

144. I agree. I used to like Sen. Sanders. At the time, I did not care who won. But

I voted for Sanders in Ohio...now after the stuff he has said about Democrats, Mello...all the stuff... I just don't care for him. We need new blood. I want a younger candidate...let's move into the future.

[Demsrule86]

100. He is not the right person for a Woman's conference. But whatever.

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/10/13/16469216/bernie-sanders-womens-conference-speech

[susanna]

91. TRUTH. Thank you, sheshe2. n/t

[ehrnst]

117. +1000 (nt)

[treestar]

141. [phone]

[Curmudgeoness]

60. I just want to support your post.

You are right. And it isn't "everyone" who is opposed to your comment, it is only "everyone who is posting in this thread."

[stevenleser]

74. Except, no one has moved the goalposts. Everyone who objected before is now happy.

So you can be in favor of that persons comment all you want, its factually wrong.

[Curmudgeoness]

132. Goal posts are constantly being moved.

It used to be that men who support women were not villains. I used to be that black women who put together a women's conference were not called liars. Pretty soon, there will only be a few women who are "acceptable" to some of the people here. It is divisive, just like the comment said.

[peggysue2]

5. Good for Them

Listening to women in regards to a Women's Convention. You would've thought this was a no-brainer. But I'm sure the correction/clarification is appreciated by . . . the women involved and those expecting to attend.

The blowback from this snafu must have been significant.

[Demsrule86]

18. I posted a petition...thousands of women had already signed it...

when I saw it.

[Me.]

49. A Good Faith Effort

turned out to be a truly good faith effort

[Demsrule86]

98. Thank you...I had doubts about posting it. I want to be fair.

[stevenleser]

6. Makes much more sense. nt

[yardwork]

8. Good decision.

[NastyRiffraff]

12. I'm glad to see this

I don't care if Sanders has a small role in the convention; speaking at a panel discussion about resistance is fine. I don't like him, but that's okay too.

[Demsrule86]

20. I love men...and don't want to exclude them as friends,husbands, lovers and participants.

But the opening speaker should be a woman at a woman's convention.

[cwydro]

32. This.

+ 1000

[Demsrule86]

39. Thank you.

[pnwmom]

19. So they're going to pretend they never announced him as the opening speaker

OR the headliner?

[Demsrule86]

22. So it seems.

I heard there was significant backlash...I am not on any committees or anything but some of the girls I work with at election time are and there was some real pushback...some were even talking about holding an alternative convention at the same time...I would have gone to that.

[Demsrule86]

26. I got a call from another organizer who said they were making protest signs...that by God they were

going and intended to disrupt the Sanders speech...holy shit! Glad it is over...we really do need to unite and beat the living shit out of the GOP in 18 and beyond.

[JI7]

30. And did it after deadline for refunds.

[Iggo]

36. Exactly.

[betsuni]

67. Seriously, was he going to be a speaker or headliner or wasn't he?

Why did they say he was if he wasn't -- they could've cleared this up immediately. If he was, they're being dishonest: disorganizers, not organizers.

[Jim Lane]

70. Do you have backup for "pretend"?

I haven't paid much attention to this brouhaha, but in a quick search just now I found several tweets from Convention organizer Tamika D. Mallory. I'm not fluent in Twitter so I'll just give you the URL that was in my browser window:

Link to tweet

Here's the gist of what she said in several tweets back on October 12:
* Weeks ago, the organizers announced Maxine Waters as the headliner;
* "Maybe folks should ask why mainstream media didn't give a black woman the same attention when she was announced as a headliner & speaker?";
* A USA Today article referred to Bernie as "a headliner", as to which Mallory wrote, "notice that everything else I said is in actual quotes except this part. This was a paraphrase of the question and answer."

My tentative conclusion is that Mallory never said "a headliner" let alone "the headliner". Similarly, the information that Bernie would be a speaker on the opening day was transmuted into "they...announced him as the opening speaker," as you put it.

Based on my limited research, it's at least possible that the organizers planned a pre-eminent role for Bernie, but then, facing backlash, made the "decision" (so widely lauded in this thread) to downgrade him. On the evidence I have now, though, I'm going to go with Occam's Razor. There was a game of Telephone here, augmented by a couple of regrettable media tendencies: First, as Mallory implied, the media don't think a story about a black woman is as newsworthy; second, when Bernie's name popped up as one of the speakers, the corporate media saw a chance to generate a lot of clicks and sow dissent on the left by exaggerating his role.

Someone in the Twitter thread charges the organizers with failing to control the message. There may be some truth to that, but they presumably had a lot on their plates and (somewhat naively) didn't realize how this one attack on the event would get hyped.

[pnwmom]

79. Yeah, must be that all these women just misunderstood.

Look at the TITLE of the USA Today article that the Women's March tweeted.

Link to tweet

And look what the organizer said in response to a question about Bernie being the headliner. She didn't deny it.

Oct. 12

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756825001/

When Women's March co-founder Tamika Mallory was asked: "People are going to say, wait a minute, there’s a man as the headliner at the Women’s Convention, the first women’s convention in 40 years?" she replied:

"I would say that (U.S. Rep.) Maxine Waters is also coming to the conference, and we know she has been a very, very powerful voice in terms of all we’ve seen happening in terms of this administration, particularly, and she’ll be at the conference as well. And a lot of other people have been invited to the conference and we’re hoping to hear back from these folks. Thankfully, SenatorSanders has agreed to attend."

[Hassin Bin Sober]

82. Definitely a game of "Telphone" or "Operator"

Maxine Waters was always they keynote.

Most of the players didn't eve know she was speaking. One refused to believe she was even asked to speak prior to Sanders. No amount of links to contemporaneous news reports to the contrary would suffice.

Are we still accusing the organizers of lying about inviting Harris, HRC and Warren? Or are we good now?

Is this still a Putin funded event or are we good now?

[sheshe2]

85. Oooops

[betsuni]

86. "the media don't think a story about a black woman is as newsworthy"

Why would a woman headline speaker at a women's convention be big news? This is not surprising. When a man was announced as headline speaker at a women's convention, it was surprising and therefore newsworthy.

[Demsrule86]

107. Send me a link where they announce Maxine before Sen. Sanders...I have never found one...I

saw a link that thanks Maxine for allowing them to use her words in the title of the convention but nothing about speaking until after Sen. Sanders was announced. Also, to announce the speaker after the time for a refund had passed and then to make it a racial thing in their comments...does not show naivete on the part of organizers of the women's convention but cold calculation. I am glad women stood up and it was resolved. Now we have Democratic elected who are running for office speaking on opening night and that is a good thing. This is not about corporate media...women objected to having a man open a woman's convention.

[Jim Lane]

122. Tamika Mallory has stated it and no one has given me a link to the contrary.

This subthread is about the charge that the organizers are "pretend[ing] they never announced him as the opening speaker." No one has given me a link showing that the organizers did actually make such an announcement. Mallory has said that that report was the media garbling the facts.

I've provided information from someone with first-hand knowledge. My inclination is to believe her unless and until there's solid evidence to the contrary. If you disagree, fine, you go right on thinking that the organizer of the Women's Convention is lying to the public about what announcements they made.

[Demsrule86]

128. I am merely saying it was said after the fact...and their were many 'weasel' words after the

announcement. I am just glad it ended on a positive note.

[cwydro]

31. K and r. nt

[BlancheSplanchnik]

34. The sign of real wisdom is the ability to admit errors and change.

👏🏾👏🏾

[Iggo]

35. So now they're good women again?

Phew! Thank god!

[Demsrule86]

38. The jury is out...and I saw a big picture of Nina Turner on an online ad...I knew she was mixed up

in this.

[Glamrock]

41. That's great news!

9000 fucking teeth gnashing posts based on bullshit! AWESOME!

[sheshe2]

47. +1

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. "Moving along. Nothing to see here."

For finally coming to their senses, after some serious smackdowns!

[Purveyor]

50. "Old white guys" eh? Lol. nt

[GaryCnf]

51. Just making sure you all are good

now

[sheshe2]

72. Thanks, Gary.

We are good now. Our voices were heard, doesn't happen often for us. Amazing in 2017 our voice could be silenced. We are thrilled that the conference that was set up as the first in 40 years to honor women, motivate and empower women is doing just that.

[GaryCnf]

95. . . .

[all american girl]

108. +1000

What She said

[GaryCnf]

129. You know that

I have a personal interest in this story but I wanted to make sure you knew that I haven't and wouldn't have gotten directly involved in a decision that needed to be resolved between women - and I can pretty much guarantee that I wouldn't have been listened to if I had. Your post is spot on in every way and I am glad for all involved. Thank you!

[sheshe2]

137. Thank you Gary.

[George II]

52. As the expression goes..."the power of the purse". They were far behind schedule....

....in raising funds for the event. Faced with an angry constituency that was either not contributing, not signing up to attend (at $295 each) and some backing out even without getting a refund, the only thing left to do was rearrange the speakers.

Each and every woman who spoke up was simply "reclaiming my time"!

[Mediumsizedhand]

53. "reclaiming my time"! Poetic.

[UtahLib]

55. Right on, Reclaiming my Time!

[sheshe2]

57. I love this!!!

"reclaiming my time" Love it! That we did George, that we did, everyone of us that spoke up did just that.

Thank you Auntie...you reclaimed your time and so did we.

[George II]

59. "Nevertheless, She persisted"!

[sheshe2]

61. That she did...

And she ain't lion...

[George II]

64. She, that's what lions do!

[sheshe2]

66. ;)

[Demsrule86]

99. So true...it is going to be a hell of a Woman's conference.

[musette_sf]

58. K&R

[Gothmog]

62. I also received this e-mail

[Ferrets are Cool]

68. Dammit to hell...why are you disparaging "old white guys" as though we are ALL pieces of chit like

the OLD WHITE REPUGS. Give me a fucking break.

[George II]

75. Excuse me? Really? I'm an "old white guy" and I'm happy they made this statement.

[Tavarious Jackson]

81. Because they had their time in power. nt

[Purveyor]

84. And their votes don't matter anyway, remember?

[all american girl]

109. That's what you took from this?

Not everything is about old white dudes...sometimes it's about women. It's OK to have women speak to women about women...we don't need white dudes to tell us what to think.

[FSogol]

113. LOL, Not all old white guys....

[progressoid]

123. It's just one old white guy that gets a lot of people's hackles up.

His name begins with Bernie and ends with Sanders. If Jimmy Carter had been chosen to speak, we wouldn't be having this discussion.


I'm not really sure what it is about Bernie that gets people so upset.

[obamanut2012]

138. lulz

[R B Garr]

71. This is great news. It should send a clear message about

the divisiveness that speaker caused again.

[kcr]

94. The message was heard loud and clear. Good ending to this story.

[ProfessorPlum]

102. It looks to me like the initial statement

Was deliberately misreported and then hyped to create division between progressives, and that this annoucement represents no change on the part of the conference. So what was all the f*ing fuss about over a lie?

[yardwork]

110. Tamika Mallory had over a week to correct the record, if the problem was misreporting.

Instead, Mallory repeatedly tweeted that Bernie Sanders was the opening speaker, and that Maxine Waters was “also” speaking.

Debbie Stabenow is only just now asked to be the opening speaker, less than a week before the event.

There was no misreporting. The event’s organizers changed their plans because of the intense pushback. The criticism worked.

[ProfessorPlum]

120. OK, if that is the timeline, thank you

for clearing that up

[MrsCoffee]

103. This will put a kink in the attempts to troll women about this event.

The Russian (and even some domestic) troll farms have been great at using Bernie to divide groups.

Great to see women standing up and speaking out. I’m sick of the tone deafness in politics.

[all american girl]

111. WOW, who knew having an actual woman headline a woman's

event (and not a man) would make people get so upset. Women spoke up and were heard, if that upsets some, they may want to look at themselves and sort out why they are upset about women's voices.

[yardwork]

115. Its interesting isnt it?

A handful of men in this thread seem to be hysterical at the thought that a man is no longer the opening speaker at the Women’s Conference.

Most men and women posting here see this as a very positive correction by the organizers. But a couple of posters are beside themselves with disappointment and rage.

Very illustrative.

[betsuni]

116. +1

[all american girl]

118. Yep...some can't believe that women

would rather have a woman, and many let there voices be heard. It's sad really, makes me think some don't want to believe women when we state our opinions...like they know more they we do about ourselves.

[Demsrule86]

131. Not just a man...but a certain man...it is a cult of personality.

[IronLionZion]

119. Reminds me of Trump's meeting on women's health care

There are old white men trying to put women in their place. Bernie isn't one of them.

[liquid diamond]

124. Great news.

[Baitball Blogger]

126. Isn't that interesting that the criticism is directed to old white guys?

We have heard a lot about date rape, which is a heinous act in its own right. But, this is something different. This is old guys abusing their autocratic power over women. They should forfeit their positions and jobs over this.

On edit: In lieu of Bill Cosby's similar actions, maybe we should edit it to old powerful guys.

[NurseJackie]

127. Excellent! Glad to see this!

Victoria Brownworth @VABVOX

Looks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's 2017 not 1917!♀️
7:17 PM - Oct 17, 2017

50 Replies / 190 Retweets / 484

This is very good news.

[niyad]

135. the fact that it took so much backlash before the organizers did this is very telling.

such a problem should NEVER have come up.

[stevenleser]

136. So true. This was an obvious one to which anyone from any diversity group would have objected

if it was done to them.

[sheshe2]

140. True,

thank you, niyad.

[joshcryer]

150. They wanted to make it against Dems.

[amandasmile]

148. look good

[niyad]

151. welcome to du