WASHINGTON — The Women’s March on Washington a year ago aimed to start a movement of women from all walks of life who would continue their activism long after they had gone home.
In many ways, that goal has been realized.
In the wake of the march on Washington — and simultaneous marches in more than 600 towns and cities across the country — thousands of women threw themselves into activism for the first time in their lives, especially in red states where the events provided a rare chance to build a network of like-minded people.
In Texas, e-mails collected by the organizers of the Women’s March in Austin are being repurposed to promote candidates who support abortion rights. In Arkansas, Gwen Combs, the elementary schoolteacher who organized the Little Rock march, is now running for Congress.
Thousands of women in October attended a convention in Detroit training them on everything from lobbying elected officials to confronting white supremacy.
But as the movement evolves, different priorities and tactics have emerged among the women, nearly all of them unpaid and spread across the country.
Now, on the eve on the anniversary, a rift is emerging between two groups: Women’s March Inc., which organized the march on Washington and spent much of the year launching more social justice protests, and another organization of activists who planned sister marches last year and believe that winning elections should be the primary goal.
The split has raised questions about who can claim the mantle of the Women’s March — and the funding and media attention that goes with it.
The newer group, named March On, formed after some female activists in red states felt the protests being encouraged by New York-based Women’s March Inc. weren’t resonating in their communities.
“We can march and take to the streets and yell about all the stuff we want to change, but unless we’re getting people elected to office who are going to make those changes, we’re not really doing anything,’’ said Lindsey Kanaly, who organized the women’s march in Oklahoma City and is now a March On board member.
The group is now focused on helping liberal women in Republican-led districts organize before this year’s pivotal midterm elections.
Mindful of the optics of dividing the movement, March On founders describe the organization as a complement, not a competitor, to Women’s March Inc. Both groups have refrained from criticizing the other in public. But behind the scenes, there has been frustration.
Winnie Wong, a Women’s March Inc. volunteer and adviser, wrote recently in a public Facebook post that March On “seems like an ill-conceived attempt at organized co-option.’’
“Somebody got to tell the truth!’’ replied Tamika Mallory, a co-president of Women’s March Inc..
Bob Bland, also a co-president, said the new group is “welcome in the resistance.’’ But she noted that its creation had led to “a lot of confusion’’ among activists on the ground who didn’t realize that it was a separate entity.
“That’s why it is so important for new groups coming into this movement, like March On, to make sure they have distinct branding and messaging that is specific to them,’’ Bland said.
Of the four national co-chairwomen of the Washington march, three were women of color. But the group’s leadership had very little geographic diversity. Nearly all of the board members of Women’s March Inc. are from New York City.
