Women's Suffrage

Was it a mistake?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/i_L5YH9Qlr4
youtube.com/watch?v=jEUXxLlVKLw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

yes

Yes. Women aren't any happier since they could vote.

youtu.be/i_L5YH9Qlr4

Is the sky blue?

yes, it's been horrible for women and now everyone is miserable.

I would suffrage those boobies.

It was the biggest mistake ever. One from which our race may never recover.

Milk please

M O M M Y
I
L
K

It wasn't a mistake, times have changed. Technology allows women to be just as capable as men, and, therefore, women should be allowed to participate in society and politics just as freely as men do. See this post: , for example, it implies that women and men have the same exact needs (family) which is totally untrue. The entire argument is based on faulty assumptions. Women were abused by society and completely neglected for centuries, and if family was the most important principle, then shouldn't women be given the vote when husbands were absent? This, in reality, never took place as reactionists are liars, and they only wish to control the individual through unfair, corrupt, abuse of power. Reactionists are so sick in the mind that they wish to disallow public participation in politics by taking away the power to vote from even other men, most of whom they see as unfit or from a low birth.

...

Universal suffrage is a recipe for destruction.

Voting rights - defensible on the basis "one marriage, one vote".
Right to work - totally wrong. It ignores historical accuracy ( for example up to 18-19th century, depending on a country most people were essentially slaves to the land owner ), environmental constraints ( if you need to bear 5-7 children then you have very little time to work ) and technical possilibities.

Women 'right to work' is merely allowing women to enter the formal 'employer-employee' relationship, which they were entering semi-legally anyways. Women, except for the highest social strata, always worked throughout.

Democracy is tyranny of the majority. The Founders of our Republic knew this and kept the power of the government limited with 3 branches, 1.5 of which were unelected(the Judiciary and the Senate). This was to make changes very difficult and prevent the kinds of short sighted decisions that ignorant, reactive, easily scared and manipulated people would make if given full democratic control of government. Otherwise what is to stop the bottom 51% from voting to get the government to collectivize the assets of the top 49%?

Everyone needs a healthy and happy family to be a part of. We are not rootless atomized individuals. We are defined in relation to those around us and the most secure and foundational relationships are between kin. To fight against that is to fight against life itself. It makes you a degenerate and people with your ideologies can never win in the long term because your philosophy is generational suicide. You simply won’t persist into the next generation.

Meanwhile patriarchal communities like the Mormons and Muslims are still making 8+ offspring and their kids and grandkids will inherit the earth. You’ll get to watch MSNBC alone and childless in your nursing home, in between beatings from your Somalian caretaker, and see as Sweden becomes a part of the European Caliphate, and the Western US secedes and forms a theocratic Mormon State. All because you thought it would be a good thing to give women and degenerates more rights and they used those rights to destroy their society.

aren't a bunch of studies showing that womens happiness has consistently gone down over the past few decades?

You vastly underestimate degenerative effect of high GDP and low gini index. Once women in Saudi Arabia get an option to support themselves on their own, and a war of sorts swoops away 50% of bachelors ( as it happend before each wave of female emancipation ) then there is going to be feminism there as well.

The problem isn't allowing women to vote. It was the idea that women in general could be happy within a political and workenvironment. You can let women vote if they have a strong social role which they are both aware of and proud of. But with feminism we didn't only throw out the idea that women shouldnt vote, we threw out the idea that women should be women. Read up on mediveval philosophy. There was a reason they told "noble lies" and generally didn't communicate a lot of things to the general population. They knew what would happen if they did. The average human is too dumb to handle certain knowledge. Enlightened women know they want children and a man to provide for them. But only the fewest can accept that without being forced into it. The question we have to ask is not wether women should vote. It is wether we want to make better women, which dont vote even though they can, or keep women retarded childrenand simply exclude them.

I am not certain the former is possible, so probably the answer might be yes. Women shouldnt be able to vote. But the idealist within myself hasnt quite lost hope that eugneics might crop up again and lead us to a more glorious future for all.

Yes

Everyone needs a healthy, happy family, but rarely does a person get a healthy, happy family. I would bet that most people do not or did not have such a thing to begin with. History is littered with dynasties that rose and fell from greed within families. Kin and kith do not always share the same interests, nor do they always act synchronously. History is also littered with husbands who were "little" tyrants.

Humanity grew out of tribal organisation a long time ago. Most empires, or even for that matter, most religions, were institutions that resemble closer to modern day society than towards a tribal idea of yours.

>patriarchal communities like the Mormons and Muslims are still making 8+ offspring and their kids and grandkids will inherit the earth.
Things are changing, and soon women won't need to spend time carrying children. Genetic engineering will eventually create a sexless homo sapien sapien who does not rely on sex to procreate.

Like I've said, times are changin', and these groups, you've mentioned, will try to remain unaltered only to be out competed by a greater specimen.

>I am not certain the former is possible

It is. Women, just like everyone, aren't dumb and follow what they see as the best effort/profit path in life. If you work in a natural dependancy of women towards men, then they will naturally seek companionship of men.

For starters - make divorces really hard to obtain and/or assume that once people parted ways, they share responsibilities equally and there is _always_ ZERO money flow between them.

When 'equal' people split, they are treated as 'equal' thus one cannot be dependant on another.

Moreover, introduce pensions dependant on number of children brought to adulthood and generally, incentivise people to stay together and raise children.

Women seek a provider, men seek to provide. Women are one of the main reasons we have the nanny state. Some women chose to replace the role of men and the family with the state. It's fucking cancerous to a healthy society.

Secondly, in my experience, women are more socially konniving than men. Men will give each other shit but generally will work towards a mutual goal. Women turn coat as soon as it seems beneficial to them. Also cancerous behavior, especially that person is in a position of power. I could go on but basically women set up a society where they get to eat their cake and have it too.

Look at divorce and custody law. That's a prime example of women jumping on board with an idea because it inherently benefits them. Many didn't even think about how it could impact future generations. Or at least I would assume they didn't if they were anything like the women of today.

>hurr durr muh dark ages

You must have misunderstood me then. I am not saying it is impossible to make women good mates. I am saying it might be impossible to make them into good people. What you are proposing is just another arbitrary system of values and idea which, ultimately, forces women and men to behave one way or another. I am not saying this is wrong. This is an entirely reasonable and perfectly okay stance to have. But to be free. To be able to do whatever you want. And to still figure out what it is that you really want, to transcend instant gratification, is hard enough for most men. I am not entirely sure if women, given this freedom, are, on a large scale, capable of acting this way. Or even inherently able to do so. As I said, I am a firm believer in eugenics, we should incentivice the best of us to reproduce at unbelievable levels (women already have no problem with injecting prime cum into themselves, so why not also control which women get to have prime cum), and let the rest wither away at whichever rate they themselves choose to. Read up on genetic drift in the middle ages. The alternate hypothesis has a nice vid on this to get into the whole thing. Basically europes best reproduced at higher rates than lower classes for long times during the middle ages, making the genetic drift move towards higher intelligence individuals.

Universal suffrage is a mistake not just womens suffrage. Extending the voting franchise has done nothing to reign in wealth and power.

> times have changed

Nothing is new under the sun, friend.
Rebel against god = Wrath of God.

Idgaf, sauce me.

They definitely like it when I make them suffer a bit. Especially choking. They love that shit for some reason.

Rebel against what? By definition, you cannot rebel against natural law (God?). Things are always changing and have always been changing, in flux we live and die.

...

TIDDIES ARE WRONG AND YOU SHOULD FEEL WRONG

He's right on a lot of points but misses one gleaming factor that I think played more of a role than women entering the work force.
>Absolute and complete loss of manufacturing base
>Outsourcing and importing

>Technology allows women to be just as capable as men

Can technology make women less emotional, smarter and less prone to adopt liberalism? No? They don't deserve to vote then

Society didn't neglect women, not as much men I would say. Who died in war to keep society and women alive? Women have thanked us by tearing apart our society and voting for parties which promote welfare and immigration while destroying families and killing our birthrates in the process.

Western women are pure cancer right now and any healthy human being should be at least mildly disgusted by them

no one should want women suffering

Feminist do.

Of course it was not a mistake

Monarchy is just the natural conclusion to patriarchy. Both the most natural and fitting to mankind.

Once one is abolished, so goes the other.

Tits or gtfo

Yup!!!

What kind of question is this? Ofcourse it was a catastrophically stupid mistake.

Yes.

what the fuck? you guys are such faggots... enough with the mgtow shit. get gronk in your life.

Possibly the worst mistake ever made in all of human history. And that is saying a LOT.

Nigga women have always worked. Prostitution is the world's oldest profession.

Only the high class women had the choice of never working. The rest either helped out with the family business, whores themselves out, or did some other work.

>this is still a question to some people
This is why things got this bad to begin with.

Yes, but the real mistake was extending suffrage to all white males.

>Reminds me of qt3.14 from highschool
Hnnngh.

Woemen are blameless and you're all shitlords. Lul.

WTF YOU THINK BITCH
Man I wish I had a bitch here right now I'd slap her just for that

seriously. it's always the mans fault. train your bitch!

youtube.com/watch?v=jEUXxLlVKLw

...

I think anytime you give half the population special rights and privileges you're just asking for trouble.

Women did not earn the right to vote by paying the ultimate sacrifice in defending their country. MEN GAVE IT TO THEM. Even today, women complain about how they are not equally represented in STEMs, yet they makeup 62% of all college graduates. They complain about the wage gap, even though they work fewer hours, and spend 75% of the household income. It's like women are biologically designed to complain about everything, and men are designed to give them whatever they want.

Yes it was a mistake. Women are not adults, they are somewhere in between an adult (men) and child. Giving them a voice was utter foolishness.

women raised in the feminist spectrum look for excuses to avoid work or responsibility while looking for welfare. It's all combined with the marxist communist agenda.

Entitlement and Grandiosity. They suffer alright, from a severe mental illness.

Someone save that shark he's being smashed by those fat sacks she calls breast.

>Obama
>Moderate Left

How's life with 24 chromosomes?

There are feminine jobs and masculine jobs. You'd be emasculated and bored to death doing knitting. I agree on the suffrage tho. 1 family = 1 vote.

To also secure a strong family structure, alimony laws should be abolished as well as state welfare that makes single motherhood a viable option for women. Hell, make divorce ILLEGAL like in the Philippines.

>Democracy
Ever

...

women have found out we will cave in to them to stop hearing them bitch endlessly, because we lose in the courts if you tell them to just shut the hell up already! then you are abusive. from who else would you put up with this nonsense? we are whipped and don't need 2 b. like the he said we gave it to them we did it to ourselves. they didn't earn these special rights. they still aren't in frontline combat. they start dying in combat equal to men then they have earned it.

1 post by this ID

Yes, but Russia is fixing it. They have decriminalized domestic violence against roasties. They are quickly becoming a stronger and stronger nation while the west spirals into degeneracy.

Funny how prenups aren't enforced. coughwomeninfluencecough. Once again I want to eat my cake and have it too.

Good, the Saudis get to suffer