Why were women so obsessed with voting?

Why is society allowed to vote?

Conservatives are the people who support the status quo and the power of the state. When women vote they do this far more than men.

>inb4 conservatism meant the same set of policies at all times in history

Explain why it would be a mistake to let YOU vote?

>Women don't care about politics
>Why are Women obsessed with our political system??

If not bait then what is your angle? That women care but actually deep down don't care and are just looking for validation/attention?

when women cant get something they make a thing out of it till you get it for them

>Conservatives are the people who support the status quo and the power of the state. When women vote they do this far more than men
Except that's the exact opposite of true.

If people want to belong a country they should accept a countries decision unequivocally
Mine or any other members wish to vote is irrelevant

Then the term 'liberal' now means what 'conservative' meant fifty years ago. Someone who supports the status quo. Someone who believes that working smart is cheating the system. Someone who believes the state is on their side by default.

Under your definitions, minorities are all radically conservative, and Republicans are liberal.

I said progressive, not liberal. You should learn to read.

>why do people keep believing in something despite evidence to the contrary

Really shucked my corn

You believe you have spotted the major flaw in my argument - a typo?

Then your term 'progressive' means what 'conservative' meant fifty years ago.

>conservative means the opposite of "to conserve"
>liberalism means being against libre for the people
>these concepts are generally seen to be mutually exclusive to one another
American politics are a doozy on a fundamental level

That's the conservative argument. Obey the state or get out.

Liberals think a government should respond to the population, not that the population should belong to the government.

The State IS the will of the people.

Disobeying the State is an assault on the rest of us.

Except that's wrong. Women vote progressively which is against the status quo, but yes 50 years ago conservatives were by and large progressives of yesteryear. You seem to think that Conservatism is pro-state, but by your own argument, Conservatism depends on the status quo, which may or may not be pro-state. That's the fundamental flaw in your argument. Conservatives, depending on status quo, wish to retain or limit the current government power. Progressives wish to expand it. Women vote progressively. They are not conservative. They do not vote for the status quo unless the status quo is going to result in more progressivism. You've ultimately turned this into semantics, but the whole of your argument is flawed at a very basic level such that any number of polls would be a serious black eye on any attempt to claw your way out of the hole you dug.

>That's the conservative argument. Obey the state or get out.
No, it isn't.

> When he hasn't read 'The Calculus of Consent'

>The State IS the will of the people.
USA especially has so many hurdles between will of the people and actual government actions. You just vote some representatives in and hope they do what you like ideologically while not mismanaging anything.

Conservatism says it is pro-state. The status-quo is the state.

The statistics show that women vote more conservatively than men. They vote for a Democratic status quo or a Republican status quo, both of which are a vote for the status-quo.

Do you believe women are more likely to abstain for ideological reasons? To vote third-party?

>>That's the conservative argument. Obey the state or get out.
>No, it isn't.

They frame it as 'rule of law'. But it's obey the state or get out. Liberals frame it as the state being a servant of the people, not the master of the people.

t. unitary state

1776 best day of my life

>USA especially has so many hurdles between will of the people and actual government actions

You know nothing Jon Snow. The American government is actually incredibly user friendly and responsive.

Government working without the people is a bad meme sold by lobbyists to keep the plebs out

>Conservatism says it is pro-state
>The status quo is the state
Once again, you're super-imposing a status quo that may or may not be the case.

>The statistics show that women vote more conservatively than men
???
Women are far more likely to vote Democrat than Republican, no matter who is in office. EVERY poll shows this. Democrats are by and large the progressive choice, not a conservative one. Ever. You can quite literally never make the argument that the modern Democratic party is the conservative choice, even if they are the one in power. They are always the progressive choice. You fucked up badly with this one.

>They frame it as 'rule of law'. But it's obey the state or get out
>What the people I don't like say isn't what they mean but the people I like say what they mean and it totally doesn't mean something else
(You)

We're talking about real conservatism here, not the kindergarten level of politics done in the US.

It doesn't matter where you're talking about it. It's false. Women are progressive voters which is a complete anti-thesis to conservatism.

>Exchange for nothing.

In order to vote you have to register for the draft.
Its the main reason why men go to vote in the first place, because they wanted some political power if they were going to fight for their government.

so they can prohibit alcohol

Why are men so obsessed with voting?
Why not monarchy?

>anti-thesis

Women are not progressive at all. They are more right wing if anything.

In what universe

cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls

>White women
>Clinton 43%
>Trump 52%

where's your god now?

>moving the goalposts

>women are natural conservatives
>Except that's the exact opposite of true
>shows that women vote conservative

if there was any argument that came before I wasn't here for it.

Post the result for women voters and don't move the goalposts to white women. Go on. I dare you.

why should I?

just remove the non-whites and you can keep your naturally conservative women voters.

keep in mind that the non-white males were also progressivecucks

>it doesn't count because it counters my argument!
Fuck off

Ok ok you won the argument. Bravo Bravo
now

White women are natural conservatives.

Also categorically untrue and your single cherry picked election doesn't prove shit.

It's the most recent election, your beliefs have nothing to do with present day facts.

As if the average man votes rationally... LOL. The average man votes for whoever hits the emotional buttons that his surroundings implanted in him during his childhood.

They were at home chatting it up with other bitches all the time even over seas bitches and they knew their dumb husbands were walking us all into a trap if they didn't help somehow

>let's ignore 1/2 of the population

u b8ting m8?

>when you realise women were given rights to vote and work to increase power of corporations

Better question is why we gave in. Western society has gone straight down the shitter since 1920

people.fas.harvard.edu/~iversen/PDFfiles/LottKenny.pdf

This

>get the vote
>immediately support prohibition and wars

what the fuck was women's problem

but they did have a say through men.
to be honest, only head of households should be allowed to vote, be that females or males, it just happens that before all the heads of households were male.
Or to put it another way, every household should have one vote.

Here's a real depressive thing to really think user. Women are urged to work in poor countries with sweatshops and fa tories by corporations and companies not because of how empowering it is and the financial freedom but because they work less pay then men notably and take more work abuse.

Got this from a developing world women's rights blog.

>trying THIS hard to construct a scenario in which women would be much less likely to get a vote
So, what's the benefit of only households voting, besides introducing pointless strife into households, patronizing large parts of the population and incentivizing the breakup of households for more political power?

Why do autistic jobless NEETs support policies that directly contradict their own interests?

>Taxation without Representation

>Women are natural conservatives, they vote how they're told like conservatives do.
Looks like someone read Emma Goldman

>YOU GO GURRLLL empower yourself by working a 5 day week 7am to 6pm
>work on the weekends and answer emails with no overtime
>be a disposable cog in a gigantic corporate machine
>work so much you don't even have time to whore around like you used to
>realise you're now 31 and you're NEVER HAVING CHILDREN
>start taking prozac and eating ice cream from the bucket while watching netflix
>go to work early this Monday cause you have a lot on this week
wow at least women don't have to clean the kitchen anymore #empowered #innovating #girlpower

Have your ever met a woman? What else?

I don't think you ever met one.

>Honestly trying to argue that women don't do most things for attention/validation

Grab a bike and ride it user, it's probably a beautiful day outside. Go to the park, read a book, grab a beer, go to the docks and watch the ships come and go if you're fortunate enough to live by the sea. Who knows, you might actually meet a girl.

>m-muh virgin

Nice argument

You should have noticed I never implied you were a virgin and yet you seem terribly upset. What pains you so user?

Actually, you did.

>Might actually meet a girl

Implies that he hasn't yet.

Learn to English

Did you have an argument or...?

Not me tho.

Do you actually expect me to argue against a man who makes sweeping generalizations about 50% of the people on Earth?

>Honestly trying to argue that men don't do most things for attention/validation
>usually from women

If you want to be a reductionist shitstain you can simplify basically everything to the point of uselessness.

>haha man well yeah not all X are like that!

Thanks for the bump cucks

>making a strawman
>crying about cucks

not an argument.

Explain to me why your argument "all women want is attention/validation" is valid but the argument "all men want is attention/validation" is invalid.

What do you mean not you?

He responded to one person telling him that, if it's not you, why would you have responded?

>why would you respond to someone on a Burundian Shitposting Mudhouse

>people actually arguing for women's suffrage

The leftypol is strong ITT

not an argument

>/pol/acks are so retrograde the suffragettes look revolutionary to them

Jesus Christ mang

In the world beyond the internet you neckbeard

>Whig history

Disgusting d e s u desu

>that one holding her purse in front of her

Holy, what a qt

>women will literally never go back to wearing nothing but dresses

>that cut dress revealing her perfectly toned leg almost up to her waist

GOOD GOD

Obviously women who were married and provided for by their husbands had no desire to vote. But for spinsters or widows, they absolutely would want the ability to vote, because they essentially had to fend for themselves in society.

t. virgins

This

...

Hudge and Gudge told women they would be "liberated" if women willingly destroyed the family as the primary social unit.

t.globalist

These people literally look the same wtf. Fuck that era

Men
>labor in our factories, our fields
>fight in our wars

Women
>

At least not too long ago, women were not active participants in our country or than raising children (very important, don't get me wrong), but put simply they didn't have the sort of stake in affairs that men did.

Inferiority complex.

>You don't need a girlfriend user! All you need is some Super Male Vitality™ to make you feel like a REAL man!
>Order now for only $59.95!*

* This is the actual price of a single bottle of Super Male Vitality™.

>their effect on the west has been disastrous.

Citation very much needed.

the world we're living in

The one where crime is at historic lows?
The one where there hasn't been a war between major powers in decades?
The one with zero famine in the western world, and in much of the rest of earth for that matter?
The one with no lead in our paint/gasoline/pipes?
The one where children aren't forced to work 10 our days, 7 days a week with dangerous machinery?
The one where lynching isn't a community spectacle anymore?
The one with a 86.3% literacy rate, including backwater shitholes?
The one where smallpox has been eradicated along with a huge reduction in disease?
The one with strong and sturdy social service infrastructure (child protective service, EPA, etc)?
How about the one which provides you the immense luxury of internet access?

Don't have time to refute but, the one where the western world is literally ~50 years away from demographic replacement

Even ignoring the idea that whites will get entirely replaced is hysteria, can you provide proof that this is a direct result of women's suffrage?

If the state is minimal conservatives protect a minimal state.
If their opponents want a bigger state, then in this case conservatives are not the "pro big guv" ones.

The one where where some many people are so dead inside they are dependent on antidepressants? The one experiencing the largest opioid epidemic in history?

>The world is doing so well that my only problem is that I am bored.

>societal decay is not a problem if I ignore it