Repeal women's suffrage

[Navaronia]

He wants to

Yeah cuz dictatorships like Eritrea where there are no elections are so much better.

I believe that removing woman's birthright to vote is wrong.

[Ostroeuropa]

Yeah, no.

Unfortunately a number of narratives about women currently gaining some steam in some sections of society ascribe traits of the feminist movement to women in general. The phrase "Feminism is merely the organized expression of womens nature" is sometimes thrown around.
If you accept it as true, it does become a matter of deciding whether to endure civilization decline or deal with women somehow by removing or limiting their ability to affect society.

If you go and read the red pill and MGTOW stuff on women eventually you understand where proposals like this come from. It makes sense, if you accept certain premises.
The problem is that those premises are largely unproven, or based on generalization. Appeals to biology are sometimes made, but in likewise asserted and unproven ways.

I posted a while back a link to a series of posts on "Female solipsism." which is pretty eye opening if you want to know the modern philosophy behind the removal of womens rights. This proposal comes down to the idea that women aren't capable of having the vote because they will only use it in childish and selfish ways that benefit them and other women, while men vote based on what is good for a nation and the tribe as a whole. (often with evolutionary psychology explaining why this is the case in their opinion.)

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei= ... +solipsism

For a bunch of stuff.

It also underpins the idea that women aren't truly capable of rational thought, and thus can't be trusted with decisions.

The issue comes from the fact that female solipsism is either outright denied and called sexist to talk about, or called an inherent biological function. Nobody seems to be suggesting that maybe we're raising women to have certain toxic traits.

[San Lumen]

And you also have no idea what dictatorship entails. Go live in Uzbekistan, Eritrea, Turkmenistan ,Tajikistan, Belarus or North Korea and get back to me on how wonderful dictatorships are.

I'm more partial to Russia, actually.

He wants to

True.

Russia huh where political opponents are jailed and elections are rigged and LGBT people have no rights, the media doesn't have freedom of the press among other things.

[San Lumen]

Yeah cuz dictatorships like Eritrea where there are no elections are so much better.

I believe that removing woman's birthright to vote is wrong.

I dont disagree with you. I was being sarcastic.

[Imperial Union of America]

Let's ignore the morality for a second and focus on practicality.

This would require a system of control beyond that formerly in place. The alternative is, eventually, women would fight for the right to vote in various ways. The resources this would require would be substantial, both in material and in manhours.
Can you demonstrate that the cost of womens allegedly poor voting decisions is higher in terms of material and manhours to deal with, than would be the cost of surveillance, control, and segregation necessary?

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

[Imperial Union of America]

I'm more partial to Russia, actually.



True.

Russia huh where political opponents are jailed and elections are rigged and LGBT people have no rights, the media doesn't have freedom of the press among other things.

More or less.

[Wiepolskie]

Are you serious? You likely live in democratic country where you can freely choose your leaders and think your one vote is trivial and doesn't matter. I suggest you look at dictatorships like Eritrea which has no elections and one of the worst human rights records and no freedom of the press. Or Belarus, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan( where elections have no real choice and you have to get permission from the government to move somewhere else) or North Korea and then tell me how wonderful they are. Or better yet live there and get back to me on how great they are.

Most those countries are shit. Think more in the line of Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany or Russia.

Russia isn't Fascist or officially a dictatorship.

I'm partial to Russia as well, although probably for vastly different reasons.

[Warg the Immortal]

What if OP women were the ones who wanted Trump and men would have to lose their right to vote to get him in.

Would you be okay with being underneath the boot? This isn't a politics thing. Well it's obviously an attention thing but other than that.

Then i'd totally support removing male suffrage in that case.

So basically, anyone who doesn't agree with you, doesn't get to vote? How narrow minded, guess the American school system really is shit to put out people like you.

[San Lumen]

Russia huh where political opponents are jailed and elections are rigged and LGBT people have no rights, the media doesn't have freedom of the press among other things.

More or less.

so that's what you want in America? How lovely! Why dont you go move to Moscow?

[Galloism]

Let's ignore the morality for a second and focus on practicality.

This would require a system of control beyond that formerly in place. The alternative is, eventually, women would fight for the right to vote in various ways. The resources this would require would be substantial, both in material and in manhours.
Can you demonstrate that the cost of womens allegedly poor voting decisions is higher in terms of material and manhours to deal with, than would be the cost of surveillance, control, and segregation necessary?

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

A weird world where "dick inspector" becomes an actual job title.

[Alvecia]

Yeah, no.

Unfortunately a number of narratives about women currently gaining some steam in some sections of society ascribe traits of the feminist movement to women in general. The phrase "Feminism is merely the organized expression of womens nature" is sometimes thrown around.
If you accept it as true, it does become a matter of deciding whether to endure civilization decline or deal with women somehow by removing or limiting their ability to affect society.

If you go and read the red pill and MGTOW stuff on women eventually you understand where proposals like this come from. It makes sense, if you accept certain premises.
The problem is that those premises are largely unproven, or based on generalization. Appeals to biology are sometimes made, but in likewise asserted and unproven ways.

I posted a while back a link to a series of posts on "Female solipsism." which is pretty eye opening if you want to know the modern philosophy behind the removal of womens rights. This proposal comes down to the idea that women aren't capable of having the vote because they will only use it in childish and selfish ways that benefit them and other women, while men vote based on what is good for a nation and the tribe as a whole.

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei= ... +solipsism

For a bunch of stuff.

It also underpins the idea that women aren't truly capable of rational thought, and thus can't be trusted with decisions.

The issue comes from the fact that female solipsism is either outright denied and called sexist to talk about, or called an inherent biological function. Nobody seems to be suggesting that maybe we're raising women to have certain toxic traits.

All kind of irrelevant. How good a person is at voting has no bearing on their right to.

[Navaronia]

I believe that removing woman's birthright to vote is wrong.

I dont disagree with you. I was being sarcastic.

Just making sure.

[Usniya]

Let's ignore the morality for a second and focus on practicality.

This would require a system of control beyond that formerly in place. The alternative is, eventually, women would fight for the right to vote in various ways. The resources this would require would be substantial, both in material and in manhours.
Can you demonstrate that the cost of womens allegedly poor voting decisions is higher in terms of material and manhours to deal with, than would be the cost of surveillance, control, and segregation necessary?

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

And what kind of economical calculations could prove that your ideal system is better than the current one in any fathomable way?

[Ostroeuropa]

Unfortunately a number of narratives about women currently gaining some steam in some sections of society ascribe traits of the feminist movement to women in general. The phrase "Feminism is merely the organized expression of womens nature" is sometimes thrown around.
If you accept it as true, it does become a matter of deciding whether to endure civilization decline or deal with women somehow by removing or limiting their ability to affect society.

If you go and read the red pill and MGTOW stuff on women eventually you understand where proposals like this come from. It makes sense, if you accept certain premises.
The problem is that those premises are largely unproven, or based on generalization. Appeals to biology are sometimes made, but in likewise asserted and unproven ways.

I posted a while back a link to a series of posts on "Female solipsism." which is pretty eye opening if you want to know the modern philosophy behind the removal of womens rights. This proposal comes down to the idea that women aren't capable of having the vote because they will only use it in childish and selfish ways that benefit them and other women, while men vote based on what is good for a nation and the tribe as a whole.

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei= ... +solipsism

For a bunch of stuff.

It also underpins the idea that women aren't truly capable of rational thought, and thus can't be trusted with decisions.

The issue comes from the fact that female solipsism is either outright denied and called sexist to talk about, or called an inherent biological function. Nobody seems to be suggesting that maybe we're raising women to have certain toxic traits.

All kind of irrelevant. How good a person is at voting has no bearing on their right to.

If a right isn't conducive to a healthy, safe, and productive society, why have it?

I'd also argue it's relevant because rather than just saying "No." and "It's their right", it's an actual discussion on why someone would support this, the problems with their argument, etc.

[Imperial Union of America]

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

And what kind of economical calculations could prove that your ideal system is better than the current one in any fathomable way?

By showing it's cheaper just to have men vote than women? It would also put more business-friendly regimes in office?

[Prusselanden]

Please treat your fellow human beings based on their character and virtue rather than birthright. We should be compassionate and tolerant to all no matter race or gender or sexuality. Because it doesn't really matter in the end as there will always be exceptions to every group.

[Balkenreich]

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

A weird world where "dick inspector" becomes an actual job title.

Its a dirty job.

the boob inspectors have it better.

[Prusselanden]

A weird world where "dick inspector" becomes an actual job title.

Its a dirty job.

the boob inspectors have it better.

OMG yes.

[San Lumen]

And what kind of economical calculations could prove that your ideal system is better than the current one in any fathomable way?

By showing it's cheaper just to have men vote than women? It would also put more business-friendly regimes in office?

Could it maybe be that women will be reason Donald Trump doesn't get elected is why you dont want them to vote? Plus you also said everything i needed to know when you said Russia is how you'd like the US to be.

[Alvecia]

All kind of irrelevant. How good a person is at voting has no bearing on their right to.

If a right isn't conducive to a healthy, safe, and productive society, why have it?

I'd also argue it's relevant because rather than just saying "No." and "It's their right", it's an actual discussion on why someone would support this, the problems with their argument, etc.

I'm gonna back out before I say something I regret.

[Vassenor]

The fact is that rhetoric like this is why we still need feminism.

[Imperial Union of America]

By showing it's cheaper just to have men vote than women? It would also put more business-friendly regimes in office?

Could it maybe be that women will be reason Donald Trump doesn't get elected is why you dont want them to vote? Plus you also said everything i needed to know when you said Russia is how you'd like the US to be.

I didn't say i wanted it to be like russia, but i do want it to be MORE like russia. Similar tactics and willingness to use Imperial power to obtain resources and lifestyle to our own people at the expense of other nations.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Are you trying to make someone die from a fit of laughter?

Because you just might soon enough.

[The Blaatschapen]

Can i prove it? No, it's hypothetical. and in any case, it would require huge economic calculations that i'm in no way capable of providing in a reliable manner.

Just don't provide voting cards to people with vaginas, problem solved.

A weird world where "dick inspector" becomes an actual job title.

It's hard work.

They make long days.

And at the end of it, they usually take a stiff drink.

[Galloism]

The fact is that rhetoric like this is why we still need feminism.

There's no real movement to remove women's suffrage. It's irrelevant reactionary bullshit that everyone is going to point at, mock, and move on.