Right-Wing Plot To Prevent Women From Voting Advances

If things continue like this, one day the United States will be the Christian version of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

I say if a government is okay supporting and committing genocide live, why people think they are not going to do the same for its own people?

Plenty of women are just as happy removing their own rights as men are because of religious nonsense.

Also add in "that leopard would never eat my face!" too for good measure.

Fox News literally got up on air and told women maybe they shouldn't be voting since they leaned toward Biden last time and that was such a "disaster" compared to whatever the fuck this nightmare is.

Then they told a female host "good job you get a cookie now" or some shit when they suggested we should execute people for daring to defy Trump.

Made me sick to my stomach.

But of course, zero repercussions, zero pushback.

The election was completely compromised and so are all the numbers. Watching our country eat each other alive when we literally did NOT vote for this is the craziest experience of my life.

if you didn't know, Roe of Roe v Wade was against the ruling and spent her time advocating against it

They see themselves as being special and having a sense of power within the family-unit -- The Queen of the Castle if you will. But out in the real world they're not special and are treated just like any other person. Which goes hand in hand with religious indoctrination and the sense of moral superiority that comes with it. They're a good mom/wife after all. While those other, feminist women are just whores. Running around, spreading their legs for everyone and getting abortions every other week.

They're just brainwashed and protecting their ill-conceived position of "power".

You're going to have to defer to their men for permission for them to speak.

This article mentions that they are trying to disenfranchise people with the citizenship proof requirements, and it also mentions that they specifically want to disenfranchise women, but it doesn't draw a connection between the two. In order for those to be connected, women would have to have more difficulty in producing that proof than men (which may be the case, but the article doesn't show that).

To actually answer your question, though, at least from the conservative women I've talked to, they are fine with that. The conservative women I know are weak, and they essentially want to give up responsibility in exchange for freedoms. They actually want women to be second class citizens because it means that they don't have to worry about anything (but they do have to just do what they are told).

There are old, conservative women who spent their lives as housewives who feel threatened by working women, so they want to maintain/go back to the status quo of women staying in the home (ignoring the fact that working class women have always worked). On the other hand, there are young, conservative women who do work, who yearn for the pretend vision of white, upper-middle class 1950s, where they get to just stay home and do what they want all day.

TL; DR: They essentially want to be like children, worry-free in exchange for less freedom.

P.s., there are definitely plenty of conservative women too stupid or unwilling to admit to themselves that the conservative position is women as second class citizens, but I wanted to respond with the perspective I've heard from people who seemed to be more honest.

We should ignore them, since they're so proud about taking others voices and choices away.

"This is not what I voted for"

Father will vote in my interests.

This article is not wrong for not supporting its premise. It is wrong for giving this blow hard a platform. The longer we listen to what these pigs say the less time we have to talk about what is really going on.

He is most definitely misogynist, but that is not the worst of his his sins. He is the literal definition of wealth inequality and the primary reason we are at the crossroads we are.

He is an escapist that cares more about fantasy technologies than realities of policy that will solve our problems. Libertarians are just another astroturf for Neo Feudalism.

Back to the article, yeah it was severely lacking. It fails to even approach its title. I think it is a great place to start a conversation though. While I am not sure I can spin a direct attack on women's voting rights, there is something much worse going on.

Most gains from DEI were not minorities, but women. This assault on DEI is really a thinly veiled assault on women. This combined with braindead policies like not considering sex, gender, race in medical research makes it clear women stand the most to lose in all this.

There is also the psychological effect of putting a known and unrepentant sexual assaulter in the White House. I imagine keeping women disengaged is very important for the conservative movement and boy have they perfected turning women off.

Taking away fundamental reproductive rights of women and robbing their right of redress through manipulating the courts is just the start. Their current push for voter ID will likely disenfranchise millions of women, but I am not sure that is the smoking gun.

I think the more we look for that moment or sign that this administration is anti-women is the more we continue to ignore it has always been anti-women. That is the point or feature so to speak. The unspoken truth of man up and woman down.

You're right but in my opinion the media is massivley sugarcoating Thiel. His ties to white nationalists and repeated hinting about how we'd be so much better off without democracy would be treated as far more alarming if it were coming from a prominent Democrat.

Thiel has made it as a CEO because he's able to (barely) maintain a public persona that hides his true extremism. But it's so clearly there beneath the surface. Maybe he didn't quite outright say he was against women having the right to vote, but we can guess how he feels inside at this point.

Since journalism! Here is his take quoted directly

[On the failure of libertarian politics]

The decade that followed — the roaring 1920s — was so strong that historians have forgotten the depression that started it. The 1920s were the last decade in American history during which one could be genuinely optimistic about politics. Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron.

And his ""clarification"" of the obvious misogynism in the original.

It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will be taken away or that this would solve the political problems that vex us. While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better.

Emphasis mine. You're to telling me, that even in the beginning questioning the notion of womens suffrage isn't inherently misogynistic. And then follows that up with "nono we shouldn't disenfranchise, BUT I don't believe in democracy anyway" for his retort. I would love to live in your alternate reality where you can defend Thiel to begin with.. I thought MLs want to eat the rich.

It's a pretty safe bet that anything terrible you hear about Theil is probably true, except that it is probably even worse than you heard.

if white men couldn’t vote, we’d see a lot of advances I’d like – but I don’t want anyone disenfranchised.

hang on, hang on, let's not let perfect be the enemy of good here.

So weird seeing him in a suit.