The "Woman's" March

Seeing the pictures people have posted on the 'woman's' march (I put 'woman' in quotes because this march does not (thankfully) represent all women, or hopefully hardly a minority) and have chosen not to post the images which are some of the ugliest, darkest that I have ever seen. I just wonder why all the secular puritans so enraged over 's-hole' haven't decried---shall we say?---the unladylike language---from these holy crusaders for such a just cause as making sure they are safe from a president who wishes to curtail their demanding freedom to have the little non-persons in the womb removed and then discarded like any disposable. Of course I saw some of the slogans they were proclaiming on their pink hats (how I've come to dislike the color pink) and on other parts of their autonomous bodies that I do believe a woman of the streets in another more Victorian era would have blushed the darkest shade of pink at such disclosure. I don't know about you, but I do find it a bit strange that I don't seem to hear even an offended peep by the secularly righteous---those who so wish to keep our ears from anything untoward and profane. So. Why are they so silent? Maybe they have suddenly changed their mind about bad words? Or perhaps they just feel it the natural fruit of the feminist frustration with all us chauvinistic misogynists who really have such old fashioned notions of a woman's mystery, or of the precious value of the life she may carry in the most hidden sanctuary of her being, or of the beauty of authentic femininity over against the ugly aggression of a woman who undergoes the metamorphosis of anti-motherhood and seeks to march for a dark master and against her own nature. All I can do is hope, hope that maybe the ugliness just becomes so ugly that it wakes up many from the enchantment of their most toxic faith.