Should Europe's Women Retain The Vote?

Evil_white_oppressor · 7時間前

I don't think that even many men should be allowed to vote, let alone women.

RamblinRambo3 · 8時間前

More stuff like this. In depth submission with a lot of effort put into it.

Faliceer · 7時間前

Your entire argument relies on that crux of, "50% of Europe that could vote conservative."

It fails in that the appeals are based on the Marxist theory that women and men are equal when on a biological level they are not. There are competing goals and standards of success for men and women. It just happens that men want what is best for the continued existence of cultures where women will submit to emotion and quite often end up making horrible decisions because their reality is subject to emotional state whereas men live in a mostly objective reality.

Your refutations of this will always rely on saying, "not all...," or, "but some men..." when they don't represent A) the averages and B) the reality of the situation. They're fallacies that do us no good to discuss further.

Sure, women not voting for their own protection, safety, and continued existence is a problem now but when we say that we don't want women to vote we are saying in a purely hypothetical way that if we are looking out for ourselves and somehow have the means to enforce this it is ideal that women do not vote.

This is just the fact of the matter; a woman won't engage in a relationship unless it benefits her and because they're the caretakers of individuals instead of protectors of a tribe why would they care to? It's not saying that women are bad, it's saying they're different and the focus they have on their own people is not conducive to continued success and existence. That's all.

kpnoire · 7時間前

I'm not in favor of restricting womens right to vote. On the other hand, I'm in favor of restricting the right to vote to employed adults at 25 years and older.

I don't know anything about other countries age limit on voting, but there has been debate of lowering it to 16 years in Norway. I find that nothing but absurd. There are a few sharp young minds out there, but the presence of general and political knowledge is much too lacking for the majority of young people to take part in actual politics. Also, being unemployed/reliant on welfare for reasons not related to physical disabilities should disqualify people from voting. Welfare recipients who aren't physically disabled, are either mentally disabled, drug addicts or lazy. In other words, people unfit to make decisions based on solid values and morals. People unfortunate enough to temporarily find themselves out of a job, without a history of unemployment, wouldn't lose their right to vote of course.

Women are certainly prone to voting left, but don't forget that we are just starting to see the uncensored version of the invasion. Women are getting raped and molested left and right. Some of these women try to obscure reality and blame men in general for these crimes, but my bet is that the average woman are more than aware that the 'men' who are committing these crimes are mostly niggers and sand coons.

DSieger · 7時間前

People have totally wrong ideas. It's not that we need to address the issue of who votes because we don't like who they vote for, it's about the Democratic system in general. Government should be so small and limited that it only has administrative tasks to fulfil and is apolitical otherwise.

Such a government would be immune to outside influence, lobbyist, idiot votes or any other problem we have to deal with today.

The problem is the outreach of a government out of control. No Chancellor should have the chance to invite billions and plunge Europe into chaos. No one should be allowed to write laws for special interest groups. No one should even be allowed to take rights or freedom away from the people because of some issues that were caused by the system itself.

Pruswa · 7時間前

Everyone seems to forget that people don't own the right to vote because they are expected to vote for the good choices. That's not the concept of voting. If you think of it that way, then 99% of people, of any sex, shouldn't vote because most people are fucking retarded and not trustworthy enough to decide the future of the state.

Women own the right to vote because humans regardless of sex are free individuals who by birth own the right to decide their future. That's about it.

What is the point of defending Europe from Muslims if you retards are going to act like the Muslims yourselves? Are you this obsessed with skin color?

haezzer · 7時間前

Great post. The best part is the fact you would actually prefer if women still did stay at home but realise how such a stance is never going to win over the mass European population. We need to be pragmatic and flexible in our appeal to our fellow Europeans if we are to sway their minds, even if that means swallowing our pride on certain topics so as to tackle the larger ones. In my experience as many women as men agree with me on non-European immigrants, which is by far the most important issue.

uwotm8_wewlad · 8時間前

Men and women should be equal in all facets of the law

Odrevan · 6時間前

Short Answer: Silly question, women have just as much a right to vote as men in my opinion.

Long answer: I think there should be a test you must sit and pass to earn your vote, regardless of gender. You have to pass a driving test to be allowed to get into a car, turn her on, put her into gear and hit the motorway. You have to pass a test to earn your college degree, before you get credited for being competent in your field. Why not test people on their political knowledge before allowing them to make decisions that have the potential to change their country, and in turn, the world? I don't think the test should have biased questions, I think it should be searching for whether or not you actually follow politics, know domestic and international policies, have any form of economic sense etc etc. Don't pick on all women, that's misogynist, and quite frankly it's a joke people here are thinking like that, instead, allow everyone the opportunity to earn their vote. If the majority of college liberals, male and female, fail to pass the test and get stripped of their vote because it's clear they have no clue on policy and economics, well that's just a tragedy :P

SwedishCavalier · 3時間前

Yes.

This is Europe, not Saudi Arabia.

Get_Trumped · 4時間前

The base biological value a man brings to a relationship is resources/money. A woman, fertility. Government forcefully redistributes money, but not fertility. It would be dangerous if men were given the moral justification to vote on the forced redistribution of fertility. It's equally dangerous for women to have the moral justification to vote on the forced redistribution of money.

The conflict of interest is that voting allows you to get what you want with nearly no negative repercussions. Single moms and bleeding hearts get money redistributed without working to earn it (from an employer or from a male partner). Then they have little incentive to be good towards men - they can get a significant part of what a man offers without his consent. Same if men could vote to get sex, men would have little incentive to be good to women - they can get a significant part of what a woman offers without her consent.

The root cause though isn't women's voting habits, that's a symptom. The root cause is giving the moral justification to government workers to forcefully redistribute money and to forcefully inject foreign invaders.

A_for_Anonymous · 3時間前

I'm baffled to see so many posters here would not want women to vote. I thought sexism was something only muslim savages were big on.

I'm egalitatian and think men and women are intellectually equals, and equal worth as human beings, thus capable of making political decisions and entitled to do so. As an egalitarian, I'm not a feminist (feminism is about misandry at worst, and only caring about the issues of women at best), not misandrist, and not misogynist.

Of course I would want women to vote. I'd restrict voting rights by ability to sustain the country and understand what the fuck is going on, though, so I would make it so that only employed people 25 and over (i.e. not retired, not unemployed, not stay home men or women) can vote.

RamblinRambo3 · 8時間前

If it was up to me women should not be allowed to vote. And only men who've done military service or own land should be allowed to vote. If you have not sacrificed anything for your country or don't own land in the country your loyalties can be questioned. Even the Romans understood this.

With landowners if should only be the patriarch that has the right to vote without having done military service. But even for those they'd need a very valid reason not to serve.

redleftred · 5時間前

I didn't even know this was an issue. Of course women should keep the vote. Social issues like the state paying for fatherless kids has helped men a lot. Men can just sleep around and not worry about the consequences.

Lv100_BixNood · 5時間前

I don't think anyone should be able to vote. Most people are borderline retarded when it comes to political affairs and are easily brainwashed by the media, meaning that whoever controls the media basically controls the country, i.e. our situation nowadays. No thanks.

192873982 · 8時間前

Hard question, honestly.

I personally wan't women to have the right to vote.

BUT what if women are genetically programmed to make decisions that are not good for the nation? I mean the most successfull mating strategy for women is definitely not to be loyal to the tribe, but to be flexible instead, cooperating (and mating) with whoever is in power at the moment. That could theoretically have had the effect that women still follow that pattern, which would basically mean that their decisions in some questions suck, e.g. when it comes to migrants, since the tribe is not essential to women, because they can swap any time.

We could however resolve that issue easily by the following. All men and women can get trained in the army, but only citizens who do so get the right to vote. This would select out the ones who wouldn't risk their lives to defend their country, which means only the good men and women remained.

FrischeVollmilch · 7時間前

"Much attention has been paid recently to the question who women vote for. Traditionally, women tended to vote more than men for the centre−right (Duverger 1955; and Lipset 1960). By the 1980s this tendency had weakened or reversed in many West European countries. In the Netherlands, Denmark and Italy women had become more left-wing than men, and in other West European countries they have become less conservative than they were (Inglehart and Norris 1999). (2)

For 40 years in Western Europe women VOTED MORE CONSERVATIVE than men. What happened is that the conservative parties have failed to strike a cord with women, as historically even in Western Europe women were sympathetic to the right wing. This is not something that is permanent and women can once again vote for the right, history has proven this possible and possible for a LONG time.

I have two theories regarding that reversal

i) Feminism was extremely effective in brainwashing them. Either by actually changing how they think or by stopping them from forming a strong bond with a husband in their twenties. I think I have read somewhere that married women still vote majority conservative.

ii) The fucking pill. Massive hormone cocktail that changes everything

Women are too emotional to vote logically like men do...

That really is utter bullshit. Humans are 80% emotions 20% logic. It makes more sense to vote emotional. Especially for Humans below an IQ of 100 cause the information they can manage to understand will be less reliable than their gut feeling. If left alone the love for their people would override any logical propaganda.

toriko2 · 4時間前

I'll be honest. I heard from multiple women that their only reason to vote Hillary Clinton/Merkel/any other female president is that they are female. If I ask them why do they support them the reason is 80%+ they are female and it's time for a woman to rule this country for once/right now. I am not entirely sure how to discuss with them now? Would they vote for an insane woman over a man that is by knowledge/experience better just because of gender? Isn't that the opposite of feminism isn't that sexism? I am currently undecided upon this topic. In my opinion we are actually going in many placed backwards. Where actually women start to have more right than men which is bullshit. Why should a woman be one of a higher ups in a company just for being a woman? Even if the man is better for the job? Stuff like women's quota is absurd.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-women-quotas-idUKKBN0M214W20150306
The person best for the job and in the most interest of the company should get the job. Not based on gender. If most women are better for the job than men I am fine with having more women in there. But it should work both ways. There are reasons why men are on top of the companies. On average women are less good at leading and at enforcing rules/schedule. At some point they can pretty much randomly disappear for multiple years, because they got pregnant and afterwards maternity protection. The company invested in that woman in a leading role and pluff she is gone. Till she is back they had to get somebody new/or the market changed and she is incompetent by now. By no means I think women are inferior to men, however both genders have their strengths and weaknesses and trying to overplay them and enforcing stupid laws is bullshit. Yes woman get payed less than men on average, but if they sell themselves undervalued it's their on problem. On average they have less high jobs as well, because they lose years by getting children dropping out of college/quitting job for a while. Obviously you don't want them to be one of the most important parts of the company if they are more likely to be gone. As long as women make sexism out to be a big deal it will always be one even though it isn't anymore. Honestly we might end up in a world where men are less worth than women which is insane.

Lucy__Sky · 3時間前

In my opinion, only citizens in good standing (non-felons, etc) who are NET CONTRIBUTORS (pay more into the system than they are paid out in welfare etc), and have children within marriage should vote. Imagine the drastic change in policy if this was your voting demographic. No more welfare queens, deadbeat dads, ghetto baby mamas voting, etc. Everyone has proven investment by investing into the system financially AND investing into the future generation.

EssencialToLife · 1時間前

Women are stupid and only vote for the left

Woman benefit from the left more than men. A single woman has no problem raising kids because the state pays for it all. No work or beta hubby required. Blame feminism and blame welfare. The single mom welfare state is the reason womans votes did change to the left.

Women are too emotional to vote

Explain why 1% of woman vote for the AFD, but 20% of men. Because the photo of one drowning kid. Democracy doesent work with such feelz > reals idiots. Sweden and the germany will dissolve because of woman. Those woman will be raped and then DIE while uttering "i did nothing wrong".

.

I know this first hand because my mother was one of those left voting pro-immigrant idiots.

lop125 · 38分前

t. cuck or roastie

shotxxxx · 25分前

No.

And you're still a faggot, OP.

Thevatman · 16分前

Traditionally WOMEN USED TO VOTE MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN MEN!

Women voted conservative because that was the cultural zeitgeist at the time. They vote not for themselves but what they think society at large thinks is 'right'.

Kindyre · 6時間前

Honestly, I'm having trouble finding any consistency in your arguments. You keep going off on tangents that are completely unrelated to the point you claim to be talking about / arguing against.

The one common theme I see is that you openly acknowledge that women's voting habits have gone to shit (and taken all of us to hell with them), but fail to make the connection that this happened as a result of women being given the vote to begin with.

For 40 years in Western Europe women VOTED MORE CONSERVATIVE than men.

Yeah. Those were the women that were raised before women had the right to vote. They voted predominantly conservative themselves. Because that is what they knew; those were the values they were raised with.

But as soon the right to vote was given to them, policies began changing, society began changing, and consequently the girls (and boys!) that grew up in that new, changed society were also different. And, as a result, voted differently when they came of age. Meanwhile, the older generations gradually died out. And so you see the gradual shift to the left.

But it wasn't just the weight of votes that shifted to the left. The left itself changed in order to attract those votes. Further and further left it went. Until it became what it is today; something most of us here find absolutely abhorrent.

The right shifted left as well. Clearly not enough to keep majority... But then, would we have wanted it to? If it did, it wouldn't really be the right we're talking about anyway. If anything, those of us here want the right to shift back to the way it was before. Not pander more to the typical interests of typical modern women (which seems to be what you're arguing for).

TL;DR:

You cannot give children the right to vote and then act all surprised when politicians don clown suits, use taxes to fund weekly bouncy castle parties, and launch campaigns for free candy in school cafeterias.

And no amount of explaining to children that candy is bad for their teeth will get the politicians to stop campaigning for it. Because no amount of explaining will make the candy less sweet. And the politicians know perfectly well it will get them votes anyway.

Politcal_acount · 6時間前

I'm a monarchist, so I don't really think anyone but the Aristocracy should vote. However, if I were to choose who should vote, I would set it up as a traditional, patriarchal societies where there is only one vote per household. This is primarily because men and women are not equal, and should not be treated as such. In stable societies, men lead as that is what men are built to do. Men have evolved to lead, fight, and provide. Women have evolved to have and children, and maintain the home. Men are also more rational, and less likely to make decisions based on public opinion.

10113519 · 6時間前

I feel it's embarrassing that a lot of people here think women should not vote, or that women are too stupid to vote, or that women only vote on stupid shit.

No one cares what you "feel is embarrassing." Most people probably feel it's embarrassing to stand up for European civilization and ideals against globalism and cultural marxism; what difference does that make?

We are talking about 50% of Europe here, why the fuck don't you want them to vote AND potentially come over to the side of conservatives.

Why should we want them to vote? Since when has women's suffrage been a major part of rightist/conservative principles, exactly? The right to vote being granted to women was another blow to traditional societal structure and the stability of the family. You don't fight liberalism by defending the liberalism of yesteryear.

YouHaveCrusAIDS · 5時間前

Men go to war. Men get to vote.

Women don't go to war. Women get to vote.

That's equality by today's standards.

I don't think you should be able to vote AT ALL until you have served time (voluntarily) in the military. I also believe if you vote for war you must participate in it.

This is "fair" and would solve EVERY problem we have with voting today.

Betas would not vote. Only the strongest and bravest of women would vote.

It would ensure that only the people willing to give everything for their country could participate in its decision making.

Subscribe to /r/NorthAmerican, a free speech sub for North America!

Filters

Rules

Facts Wiki

Related subs

Moderator Guidelines

Transparency log

Blacklist

First lady of the sub

european