The Impact of ‘A Day Without a Woman’
The successes and drawbacks of the nationwide strike against the economic inequality women face
By Emily Harms
The Progressive Teen Staff Writer
ON INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY, a protest dubbed “A Day Without A Woman” took place. Organized by the same people behind the Women’s March on Washington, this protest was widespread across the nation. Women who joined in missed work to take part in various protests located throughout the country. Those who could not take the day off showed support by wearing red and solely shopping at stores owned by women or minorities. The outward goal of the strike was to demonstrate the economic influence and importance of women.
Constituting 47% of the workforce, women dominate various career fields, including nursing, pharmacy, and accounting, and there are increasing numbers of female doctors, lawyers, and judges. Despite the significant role they play in the workplace and economy, women are paid 80% of what men make, and less so for women of color. Two-thirds of minimum wage workers are women, and a disproportionate percent are minorities.
IT SEEMED ON THE WHOLE THAT THERE WAS A SMALLER TURNOUT at “A Day Without a Woman” than at all of the Women’s Marches. The lower numbers are likely due to the fact that most women in low-paying jobs could not afford to miss a day of work.
This could be seen as problematic since those women need the most representation.
However, many of the women at the protests were there wholly to support those who could not attend, or — as a protester’s sign put it — “Striking for those who can’t.” One attendee stated, “I know that as a stay-at-home mom I have the time available to me to do this,” she said. “This is no skin off my back. I’m very well aware of that. That’s why it was important to me to be here as part of the visual for the people who are not able to be here today.”
The knowledge that most could not strike was well recognized in the speeches given at the protests. All of those striking knew they were there not to represent themselves, but those who couldn’t join them. Not only was the wage gap protested; the gag rule on abortion and the new healthcare bill were popular themes as well.
There were protests in cities across the nation: Portland, San Francisco, Pittsburgh, Ann Arbor, St. Petersburg, Raleigh, and New York. The main protest in New York drew national attention after 13 people, including various organizers of the protest, were arrested. They were taken into custody for “disorderly conduct” after attempting to form a “human wall” around Trump Hotel and released later that night. Even with the focus in New York, many international protests were also aligned with “A Day Without A Woman” and showed solidarity with its cause.
A NUMBER OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS WERE FORCED TO CLOSE due to the participation of female teachers. Most of these incidents were announced in advance, but in some cases — such as Prince George’s County Public Schools in Maryland — there were last minute announcements. The late notification left some parents in a rush to find childcare. “This last-minute decision does a disservice to anyone in a family where both parents work full-time,” commented a parent in a closed school district. Others had complaints about how the day off school hurt students as well as women who would have to take the day off — not to protest, but to take care of their children. They aimed their complaints at the Women’s March, but truly, they should be aimed at those who enforce and uphold the societal standards that discriminate against women, like the wage gap, unpaid maternity leave, and anti-abortion laws.
Schools were not the only empty buildings that day. Pictures of empty offices trended on Twitter and showed the impact of women in the workplace. Companies were at a standstill as a bulk of their employees striked. Some may have said that this was contradictory, as the point of the protest was to show representation of women in the workplace.
“A far more powerful movement than encouraging women to go to their everyday jobs where they face discrimination is to show what happens when they aren’t there and to demonstrate how vital women are to the economy.
A far more powerful movement than encouraging women to go to their everyday jobs where they face discrimination is to show what happens when they aren’t there and to demonstrate how vital women are to the economy. Because of this importance, women are more than deserving of equal pay and treatment. The whole point of the strike was not to just eliminate the problem by getting rid of women for a day; it was to make others realize that women are a necessary strength.
AS STRIKING WAS NOT THE ONLY WAY OF SHOWING SUPPORT, the number and impact of the protest is incalculable. Those who indirectly participated by wearing red and only buying from female or minority-owned businesses must be counted, too. Even though it seems this protest was small in comparison to the Women’s March on Washington, the organizers’ inward focus was not on numbers at all; it was to introduce a new type of protesting to women and to gain momentum in the ongoing resistance against Trump and inequality. For this purpose, the strike was a success. However, in order to achieve lasting results and a larger impression, there must be strikes all women — including those in lower paying jobs — can participate in.
There must be a diverse representation of women at the protests themselves to emphasize inclusivity. “A Day Without A Woman” was an effective step to advance the movement, but organizers must create broader-reaching events so that more women can join the fight to end inequality and achieve justice.
