Move over, moms -- bring on the Auntifa ;)

When I first heard about the "wall of moms" protecting demonstrators in Portland, Oregon (and getting tear-gassed for their trouble), my first thought was, "Good for them!" 

My second impulse was to roll my eyes. Because of course, "moms" are going to save the world, right?  

Does anyone else see the irony that a group of women demonstrating for democracy and great inclusion for people of colour, are doing so under a banner ("moms") that excludes a significant and growing segment of the female population (who are NOT moms and never will be, whether by choice or chance)?? 

So I was happy to see a tweet from writer Jill Filipovic at the top of my feed these morning,  expressing admiration . It's worth reading her entire thread, because she says it much better than I can.  Here's a screenshot of the first post in the thread: 

Among the points Filipovic makes: 

It’s premised on the idea that motherhood makes you more moral, more nurturing, more sensitive to suffering. And also that mothers are usually apolitical, and soft, and non-threatening (until they’re fierce mama bears). In other words, lots of sexist stereotypes to make this work.

She also says: 

It also suggests that women who aren’t mothers have less of a role in advocacy. It relies on the presumed respectability of (white) motherhood for legitimacy.

As you might imagine, she is getting a LOT of pushback in the comments. (Including from some other feminist writers -- who are mothers -- that I respect/admire, such as Jessica Valenti.) Some thoughtful points made, and a few childless & childfree people chiming in -- but still a lot of moms singing their own praises, some self-righteous indignation, and flat-out dismissal ("you're being too sensitive," "moms is just a label, everyone is welcome," etc.). 

My favourite response(s):  ;)  

Thoughts?