Was women’s suffrage a net positive?

Women are emotional creatures. It is in their blood.

/pol/ is p cucked when it comes to white womyn though

Why wouldn't you say times 10. Using a percent over 100 is retarded.

Women are collectivists. Everything they think is based off the people they are surrounded by. They have no independent thought.

The only individualist woman was Ayn Rand, and she was a retard.

>women are emotional creatures
>women amplified by 1000% the use of emotion over logic in politics
>no citation/source for either claim
IntoTheTrashItGoes.png

See:

Attached: FuckingTrolls.jpg (405x628, 73K)

Did you come up with those thoughts all on your own? I don't think I've ever read anything like that especially not on Veeky Forums. No one here seems to think that way. So submersive and individualistic.

>what is literally every civilization ever
Read some fucking Aristotle brainlet

No. Not because women voting is a bad thing in the abstract, but because of who the suffragists were and the precedent they helped to set.

I know from experience. Every woman i've ever met didn't have a hobby outside bullshit like traveling the world or fashion like every other vapid bitch in the world.

>still no citation
>argument from incredulity
>argument from authority
>anecdotal evidence
Hmm, really makes me think.

>I know from experience
In my personal experience I can think up a number of women who have a number of hobbies outside what you listed. Of course that's anecdotal, but so is what you're saying.

Aristotle is the man who screwed over mathematics for centuries by screwing up the concept of infinity. He's not infallible.

Here's an article on meta-analyses.
psychologytoday.com/blog/sexual-personalities/201603/are-men-more-helpful-altruistic-or-chivalrous-women

Women more empathetic, means easier to manipulate for example in the migrant crisis:
>Most studies have found women are more empathetic than men (Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004; Eisenberg & Lenon, 1983; meta-analytic d = -0.27), though this depends somewhat on how empathy is measured (larger sex differences, d = -0.99, are found in self-reports).
Women respond more with emotions to those situations, while men think of the overall situation and the future considerations. Appeals to emotion are thus naturally more effective on women, as anecdotes will already tell you:
>There may be neurological differences in the ways men and women respond to empathic concerns (Christov-Moore et al., 2014; Schulte-Rüther et al., 2008; Soutschek et al., 2017). For instance, women appear to use more emotional brain areas, whereas men use more reflective brain areas, when engaging in empathy, emotion recognition, perspective taking, and affective responsiveness (Derntl et al., 2010).
>Across all cultures women value benevolence (e.g., being very giving, seeking to help others, providing for general welfare) more than men do (Schwartz & Rubel, 2005), with the largest sex differences emerging in more gender egalitarian cultures (Schwartz & Rubel-Lifschitz, 2009).
>When reasoning about morality, women have higher Care Reasoning morality (i.e., maintaining relationships, caring for others is morality), men have higher Justice Reasoning (justice and equal treatment is morality; see Jaffee & Hyde, 2000)

Emotional decisions and morality based on benevolence are not things you want from those holding political power.

>Women are more empathetic, which means they are easier to manipulate for example in the migrant crisis.
>while men think of the overall situation and the future considerations
Things that your sources don't say
>If you aren't empathic that means you must be logical
Hahahahaha

Things that your sources do say:
>"These findings do not offer strong support for the claim that the care orientation is used predominantly by women and that the justice orientation is used predominantly by men." - Jaffe & Hyde, 2000

Women are not collectivists. They are nesters. They tend to the home. Different thing.

There are women who will support their husbands and children to be aggressive and dominant in their fields of expertise. There are also women who will support the livelihood of the elderly and children over their husbands. In both cases they are tending towards the home; it depends on the personality.

Women in politics tend to be more masculine than feminine. They are uprooted from their feminine instincts. That is why they tend towards abstractions like the liberation of women or egalitarianism. Maybe this is also a tending towards the home and these women are in a sense homeless, now casting their personal sense of the home onto abstractions like society.

>Things that your sources don't say
What do you think this is?
> For instance, women appear to use more emotional brain areas, whereas men use more reflective brain areas, when engaging in empathy, emotion recognition, perspective taking, and affective responsiveness (Derntl et al., 2010).

>Things that your sources do say:
Why did you post the very ending of it but not the content? Are you being intentionally disingenious?
>The meta-analysis revealed small differences in the care orientation favoring females (d = -.28) and small differences in the justice orientation favoring males (d = .19). Together, the moderator variables accounted for 16% of the variance in the effect sizes for care reasoning and 17% of the variance in the effect sizes for justice reasoning.
So there is support, just not strong support. Also there is no contradiction to what I posted earlier
>When reasoning about morality, women have higher Care Reasoning morality
Which specifically states that women have HIGHER care reasoning morality, not that they PREDOMINANTLY use it.

Try again, or did you tire of making a fool out of yourself in one go?

Yes.

No.

Increased liberty is always a net positive.

>\R9k\ thead is full of incels argueing based on anecdotal evidence and emotions

Rly makes u think

>>arguing with holes
>>even worse arguing with holes when it's rather easy to buy whores off the internet
Nice try roastie.

My gf plays guitar and studies music theory in her free time, her 9-5 job is a technical writer. She follows some astronomy news constantly for some reason. Some women have hobbies, but most don't.

>SJW politics are more likely to get passed through with emotions over logic rhetoric

Politics by definition can’t be logical, it is entirely based on emotions

Wtf are you even trying to say lol

Attached: 1519333811742.jpg (420x420, 27K)

For Women: Yes
For Men: NO
For the development of western society: No

Not in the slightest.

>for women: yes
not even for women.
>have to work all day
>can’t have children
>miserable at 30

>>\R9k\ thead is full of incels argueing based on anecdotal evidence and emotions
This which was posted in this postIs an example of arguing with holes. That is, arguing by appealing to the lack of sexual experience of the other person or using the threat of cutting off access to sex as a means of intimidation in order to make the other person shut up. For various reasons, this is typically used against men by women on the internet, hence arguing with holes rather then arguing with poles.

The reason why I made this post herewas to show why this sort of argument doesn't work on the internet and why it is especially foolish to do so.

This which was posted in this postFixed. My sincerest apologies for any confusiton

>confusion
Fuck man, I'm all thumbs today.

Yes. Women are more empathetic than men, which means that the government itself becomes more empathetic when women are allowed to vote. Women's suffrage was an important factor in many critical victories for humans rights, such as the abolition of the death penalty in most industrialized nations, social security benefits, the establishment of a minimum wage, and the ending of child-labor.

Sorry Jordan, but just because you're a therapist, you obviously only see the bad outcomes of the clients that see you and ignore the people living happy lives doing what they want.

Britain would have been full blow Socialist if not for women. Labour would have won every single election from WW2 to the '90s if only men had been voting.

Who would have thought

Attached: 5a22a0e750bea46eb74b4ba05ea5a2e75d785c40e2b8cb6acb8ed87c24106778.png (427x674, 123K)

all of those things are bad tho

Absolutely.

Attached: women are garbage.jpg (675x586, 83K)

>muh vagina over everything else
this is why women shouldn't vote

Womens suffarage was a necessary evil.
In the times of truly industrial scale warfare, the extra labor was extremely important, and workers that have lower rights, usually are not as effective.
Giving them voting rights, gave them enough right to be content enough so we didn't have to deal with unrest issues.

>jobs are just as easy as voting for them!

>39% say abortion is most important
>51% of white women vote for a republican, trump, who has a fundamentalist christian as his VP
are white people really this stupid?

jneurosci.org/content/35/3/920

Google it next time.
Women experience much stronger emotional responses than men do.

Women are split 50/50 on abortion.

Most of the really strong pro-lifers are also women.

it is a place where bitches cannot decide between muh vagina or muh babies

You're an idiot. This is Veeky Forums, 99% of counter-arguments in a debate consist of just calling someone a faggot and moving on. How is calling someone a sour grapes virgin any different?

Not that user, but it's obviously meant as a figure of speech to basically mean
A fuck ton

>Some women have hobbies, but most don't.
Most men don't either.
>muh vidya!
>muh sports!
>muh, uh, porn!
It's pathetic.

>technical writer
I've never understood why people do this. If you're good with computers, why wouldn't you just be a programmer?

I don't think anyone outside of carl from ATHF would claim watching pornography is a hobby

Overall I'd say so. All we need to do is liberate the muslim women and we'll be golden.

Attached: 1479401081655.png (420x420, 68K)

I don't think most would, but it's still one of the most common actives among males. Let me remind you that the sex/porn industry is the third biggest in the world, and most consumers are males. Really makes you think.

>"I demand evidence!"
>evidence provided
>"Your evidence doesn't meet my standards"
Your type of people makes me sick, it's why I don't bother posting sources a lot of the time. Don't even look at it in detail just tell me "lalala you're still wrong".

Attached: south korea gdp.png (1508x929, 139K)

REE ROASTIES IM A NICE GUY SUCK MY DICK FOR FREE
no because universal suffrage was a mistake

....user...

Abandonment of single earner households and women entering the workforce caused a near social collapse and high unemployment rates.

To be fair, he's not wrong. The study doesn't answer his questions, you just make a non sequitur based on the data posted.

.... are you trolling, or do you legitimately believe that those are all unquestionably positive outcomes?

>muh vidya!
>muh sports!
This pathetic attempt at slamming most men would have worked better if you hadn't listed two things which are in fact legitimate hobbies. Granted that porn is just a masturbatory aid most of the time though.

You're the idiot for assuming that Veeky Forums should function like /b/ or /pol/, I don't conduct myself that way here unless I'm dealing with that creationist retard and I would like it if other people didn't.

If you're in your thirties, you'll observe two broad groups of women:

>Single women: "I work all the time, I can't find someone to settle down with, I'm getting too old and soon I can't have kids. What. Am. I DOING?"

>Women in relationships (possibly with kids): "we're both working, we can hardly afford childcare, I want to spend more time with my child. We can't afford a house, we can't afford another child. What. Am. I. DOING?"

"Nuclear" was the ideal family structure. Progressives destroyed it, a courtesy to hungry capitalists who salivated as America's labor pool grew fatter and landing a "breadwinner" job became increasingly more difficult.

Attached: 1519618521877.jpg (2100x634, 183K)

>porn
>a hobby

Are you in Junior High or just poorly adjusted?

That absolutely is not in anyway source indicating the women made politics more emotional

nice guys are white knights though........

if you dont like it then just fuck off to /r/askhistorians or some shit you fucking retarded piece of shit

>sports (watching)
>fucking video games
>legitimate hobbies
You are delusional.
Read a book, retard.

See

Oh wow, I am wounded to the quick, such an effective and cutting rebuttal that isn't all an example of your complete inability to respond to people you disagree with in a way that doesn't make you look like a complete douchebag and a tool all at once.

Seriously though, calling people stupid virgins lost effectiveness around 2010 or so. You might want to step up your insult game if you want to try and offend people.

I like to eat. And pee. I even sleep, on occasion.

I have so many hobbies.

>sports (watching)
You did not specify watching. That's your problem, not mine.
>>fucking videogames
Videogames with fucking in them tend to fall into the porn category as much as they do the videogame category and thus are in something of a fuzzy area.
>>legitimate hobbies
Yes, playing sports and playing videogames are in fact hobbies. You are not the arbiter of what is or isn't legitimate so any further input then this is merely your attempt to engage in baseless insults of people you don't like.
>>read a book, retard
Firstly, I have read multiple books. Secondly, lay off the ad-homs. Insults don't make you right, they just make you look like the bigger asshole.

Sounds like your average male to me. Congrats.

Yes, I did not specify watching, but it was obvious. Most males don't do sports, yet they do watch sports.
Video games are for man children. Any video games, including, but not exclusively, porn games.
Yes, those are hobbies, just like traveling and fashion, from which the user above dismissed them as not legitimate hobbies.
And I don't care being told I'm an asshole when replying to some incels who think most females don't have hobbies.

That's for your "watching porn is a hobby!" argument

>protip: it's not a very good one

>>Yes, I did not specify watching, but it was obvious.
No it wasn't actually.
>>Video games are for man children.
No they aren't.
>>traveling
A legit hobby.
>>fashion
Not really a hobby, more about social status signaling.
>>more bitching about man children
Find better insults, this one went stale a year or two ago.

God forbid we give political power to people who are overly emotional, or worse, elect them to high political office.

>fashion
>fashion goes as far as having many professions backing it up as an art form, from clothing, to makeup, to jewelry, and more
>not a real hobby
Yeah, you are delusional.

>Women are more empathetic than men
...

>one poll
>one election
>not accounting for the fickleness of polling and news cycles in temporarily changing opinion or prioritizing issues
>all of this somehow makes a poll universally applicable to women throughout history.

No you are. A hobby is something people tend to derive enjoyment from and most women do not really enjoy staying fashionable and keeping up with the latest trends. It costs too much money.

>most women do not really enjoy staying fashionable and keeping up with the latest trends
what the fuck am I reading
Also, fashion =/= trends

>Women are more empathetic than men
Pfffff hahahahaahh

Absolutely not.

Fuck off.

This was actually an issue in philosophy for a long time. It was reasoned that women were less intellecutally developed because they struggled to universalize moral principles. Exceptions were made for family or close friends - that is, people to whom they had strong emotional attachment.
This lead to the development of "feminist ethics" which rather than trying to assert that women were capable of impartial moral/ethical evaluation, asserted that standard feminine moral evaluation was equally valid.
As a moral relativist myself, I'm not really in a position to disagree, nor do I particularly care to. But philosophy has already observed, recorded, and debated differences in the moral/ethical decision making process of the average female.
However, humans are animals that are born loaded with cognitive biases, deficiences, and predisposition that leave us far, far from being disposed to rational, bayesian tabula rasas.
Men and women do think differently. It's not an enormous gap like /pol/locks love to assert, but there remain differences. Evolutionary biology has a lot of information on the subject.
I'd like to reiterate that this is not an attempt to justify the absolutely retarded statement that
>but women, naturally being emotional creatures, amplified that by 1000%
I'm just trying to offer a more reasonable perspective on human sexual dimorphism.
What's important to remember is that politics, especially politics involving public discourse, have always preyed primarily on the emotions. This was exceptionally true in athenian democracy (where the only eligible voters were 30 year old, land owning male citizens - meaning a few thousand people), and it will be true in ANY democracy. The Greeks worshipped at the altar of reason. Their statues are stonefaced because they were to be a model for the ideal citizen - perfectly rational, and utterly free of the poison that was passion. Yet in spite of their best efforts to stifle passion, they failed.

you mean to say, an emotional rethoric device of emphasis :r)

Democracy is an end in and of itself, user.

Men are from Mars and w*men are from Venus

X will certainly lead to y and then z is the outcome.
I hate you.

What are the 80s for 500, Alex.

Video games are gender neutral and have competitions.
Sports are gender neutral and have competitions.
Porn is gender neutral and they host awards like the Grammies.

>individualists
>not retards,

Yeah, right.

>most common actives among males.
No.

I like to hike and build things.
What if it? People like various things.