Women's March on Washington Protestors Say Science Is a Driving Force

Marchers worry that the president's rhetoric and nominee choices threaten research, the scientific method and reproductive rights

By Dina Fine Maron

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The day after businessman and reality-TV star Donald Trump was sworn into office as the 45th president of the United States, hundreds of thousandsof protestors descended on the nation’s capital allied loosely under the banner of marching for human rights. More than 200 similar marches had also been planned in cities across the country.

The Women’s March on Washington started near the Capitol and brought together a far-flung coalition of individuals and groups. Some of the protestors said they were here to stand in solidarity with efforts to protect the rights of women and their families. Others said they came to register their dismay about the Trump administration’s stance on certain scientific and medical issues—including climate change, reproductive rights and the future of research funding. Some researchers who joined the march said they were alarmed over what might happen to science in general with Trump at the helm.

Here is a sampling of photos and comments from protestors who said concerns about science brought them out:

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Brittany Knapp, 23, Queens, New York

“I can't fathom having a president that doesn't believe in science, facts and morals. I can't stay silent anymore.”

Betty Zara, 63, Bethesda, Maryland

“I'm here not just for science but for human rights. I am for our planet. I'm disturbed our president thinks global warming isn't a concern.”

Angela Smedley, 66, Silver Spring, Maryland

“I'm very concerned about climate change's effect on our planet and our future.”

Lane Burns, 40, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

“Our current regime ignores facts and truth and encourages others to go with their feelings instead of facts.”

Gina Ferrari, 24, Washington, DC

“I am a nurse and so I support healthcare and combating global warming!”

Lauren Ward, 27, Washington, DC

“I work for the Smithsonian and I want to make sure our science programs continue to be funded. I have a particular interest in climate change - it is a matter of facts not an agenda.”

Maddie O'Brien, 22, Washington, DC

“I am doing a fellowship at the National Institutes of Health in neuroscience. I am concerned that women in STEM will be discouraged under this buffoon of a president.”

Alex Bayer, 31, Cincinnati, Ohio

“I am lending my voice to everyone else here because we need to save the planet.”

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American