Don’t judge Women’s March by number of participants

Here we are, on the cusp of the third annual Women’s March.

And the movement that began with so much promise in 2017 is suffering from a schism. Conflicts have been fomented by a distrust of its original leadership because several of the women had to be forced to repudiate the anti-Semitic diatribes of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

It’s astounding that the words and presence of a long controversial man have been allowed to undermine one of the most empowering movements for women in recent decades.

A founder of the original movement, Teresa Shook, made this accusation against her co-founders in mid-November in a Facebook post: “In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs.”

Organizing committees in various cities have canceled events or gone to lengths to distance themselves from the questions surrounding four of the national cofounders. In cities like Chicago, others have stepped in to quickly organize marches for January 19, unwilling to let the day go by without some type of gathering.

I interviewed the Nation of Islam leader back in 1996 when he visited Kansas City. He was then much as he is now: a promoter of the self-empowerment of African-American communities, with a strong track record of how his Nation of Islam has worked toward that end.

But he was and is unrepentantly anti-Semitic, homophobic and divisive in his diatribes. The positive aspects of Farrakhan’s messaging should never be used to shield his glaring hatred of Jewish, transgender and LGBTQ people.

The fact that a few of the leaders of the national Women’s March had to be pressed into admitting that is inexcusable.

But there is another factor equally, if not more, responsible for why this year’s gatherings likely will not generate the outpouring of women in previous years: It’s just not news anymore that the president of the United States is a sexist, racist liar.

For many original participants, the catalyst to march in 2017 was their revulsion to Donald Trump’s election and his subsequent inauguration.

The gatherings of an estimated 470,000 people in Washington, and thousands more in cities across the nation and around the globe, were held the day after his inauguration.

Backlash to Trump was always going to be a momentary motivator. The pushback, the so-called resistance, had to shift to remain relevant.

If a fraction of the women who have gathered in recent years show up, it shouldn’t be seen as indicative of a waning interest in female activism, nor as a failure of this movement.

Other women have found their niche in any number of ways; political organizing, voter registration, volunteering, writing members of Congress and running for office.

Women’s successful candidacies in the midterm elections has already and will continue to fuel more activism. The need to come together for a oneday march simply isn’t the top priority for many.

The nature of movements, as the word itself implies, is that they shift, often evolving past their origins. Simply marching every year was never going to be a winning strategy, nor was it the original intention.