or Why Women’s Suffrage Has Been a Disaster
by Janet Bloomfield (aka JudgyBitch)
A few days ago I posted a video asking whether or not women should be allowed to vote. Today I want to answer that question for you, definitively, and give you my reason. Before I get into it, let’s tackle the issue of misogyny.
Is it misogyny to ask whether or not women should vote? It doesn’t mean I hate women. Does it mean that anyone who questions whether women should vote hates women? Well no! It doesn’t. We don’t think that 17 year olds should vote either, but that doesn’t mean that we hate 17 year olds.
It’s not even that passing the Rubicon of your 18th birthday somehow magically bestows you with a level of intelligence and maturity that you didn’t have when you were 17. That’s not why 17 year olds can’t vote. The voting age is the same as the draft age.
That’s why 18 year olds can vote, because they can be drafted. And if it’s going to be your blood that has to answer for your leader’s choices, you have a right to determine who those leaders are.
So asking if women should have the right to vote is a legitmate, interesting, provocative question.
My answer: No, women should not vote. I’ll give you three reasons. Let’s start with the biggest one first; the draft.
Eighteen year olds can vote because eighteen year olds can be drafted. Well, eighteen year old MEN only.
The military has recently thrown all military classifications open to women, and THAT was the reason that women were not subject to the draft. Selective service, the draft, is intended to fill combat roles, specifically. Selective service gives the military bodies to load on landing craft to land them at Omaha, to land them at Utah, to land them on Iwo Jima, at the Chosin Resevoir, down the Ho Chi Minh trail.
It’s for combat positions, because women couldn’t take combat positions so there was no point in drafting them.
Now a lot of commentors at my blog, and the other video said something along the line that there are a lot of non-combat positions that women could be drafted into, so there’s no reason that women have to be in combat. Well when it comes to the vote, yes there is. If women are drafted into non-combat roles, then nothing has changed! It’s still not their blood that’s being spilled. If it’s not you on the line, then you don’t get a say.
Now, let’s just assume that women are drafted for combat positions. Let’s assume that the whole non-combat thing is a non-starter and we’re going to draft women into combat positions. Well you can’t. As long as women can vote, they’re not going to vote to put themselves in harm’s way.
If a situation arises in which the drafted is reinstated, the first thing that women will do is to start voting for exemptions…for themselves. Pregnant women would be first. Women will vote to exempt pregnant women, and then they’ll vote to exemption nursing mothers, and then mothers of multiple children; mothers of children under a certain age, single mothers. They’ll vote until all women are exempt from combat. So legally, technically, on paper, women will be subject to the draft into combat roles, but in effect, they will vote for exemption to moot that. So what if commentators say “hey, they can just have requirements like requiring they have implantable birth control devices, or after a certain amount of time has passed they get deployed anyway, well, women won’t vote for those. You can’t pass any of those attempts to create a fair draft. Women won’t vote for them. It’s the paradox of women voting and having the vote linked to the draft. Women won’t vote to draft themselves. They’ll make sure that they’re completely exempt. So we’re right back where we started. It’s not women’s blood. It’s not women’s bodies. They don’t get a say. They don’t get to decide that other people should go an die.
My second reason women shouldn’t vote: spending. I’m referring to this paper. Very interesting. Did women’s suffrage change the size and scope of government? I’ll put a link to this paper at the bottom so you can look at it yourself. This is the chart that I find most interesting. It has a line down the middle showing the point in time when women’s suffrage was passed. This [ascending line] is government expenditures; you can see what happens to them as soon as women vote.
Now, a lot or researchers say perhaps we’re looking at a case of spurious co-relation. Perhaps something else happened to cause government expenditures to explode at the exact same time as women’s suffrage.
There’s a number of different theories. There’s a theory about unbalanced spending…Bullmal,[sp.?] Bullmal’s theory is that wage increases will also exceed productivity gains; you’re always gonna be playing catch-up. This causes the cost of any goods or services to go up.
There’s other theories that people were just starting to recognize that government services were a social good. Some other theories talk about “ratcheting effects”. There’s other theories that talk about the fact that politicians were becoming more entrepreneurial, -they’re treating this more as a business, and they’re arguing for increases in their own salaries and the cost of their administration… all of those things. Lots of good theories. They fall apart though, when you realize that government spending, look here [she holds up the graph] has not always been growing!
If this is a matter of wages always exceeding productivity, then how do you explain the four year decline right after World War I and government expenditures? 1920 hits and bam! -spending takes off, and it takes four years for women to vote to reach previous peak levels of spending. It takes eleven years to double per capita government expenditures.
What are they spending the money on? Well that’s pretty interesting; the first two big issues following suffrage; Number 1: Alimony. Women voted for alimony laws that applied only to women, and they voted for, in effect, alimony to be for life. Meaning that any man that married a woman was legally required to support her for the rest of her life no matter what the circumstances of marital break-down.
The second thing that women voted for: prohibition. It’ kind of almost a joke, isn’t it? You give women some power and the first two things women do is take aways a guys money, and then they take away his beer. (!) It’s a historical fact, -that is what women voted for. It’s what women continue to vote for. Women believe themselves to be social arbiters of what constitutes good manners and civil society. Women believe themselves to be entitled to men’s money. And they’ll vote… to continue… to take it!
They vote to fleece men. It’s sort of a crude way to put it; it’s true though.
We are not facing a presidential candidate who is seriously making tuition “free”. That’s a nice word, aye? How many things do women want for free? They want free health care. They want free tuition. They want free birth control. They want free abortions. They want free tampons,… THESE THINGS ARE NOT FREE. Someone pays for them. -That’s men. Men pay for those things.
Men contribute far more to tax revenues than women do.
Eventually, we’re gonna run out of money [yeah, like 20 trillion dollars ago] -the money won’t be there anymore.
Now recall that women can’t be drafted. Where do you think women will vote to get the money for the services they care about? Do you think they’re going to strip the Dept. of Education? Are they going to strip social services? Are they going to strip health care? No. They are going to strip the Department of Defense. They are going to strip money out of the military, all while insisting that men meet their obligation to be drafted. They’ll gut the military while releaving men of none of the responsibility for providing the nation’s security.
It actually happened in Switzerland. Switzerland put to a public vote, or a parliamentary vote, whether or not the Dept. of Defense should be defunded and women almost voted that through. They called the Dept. of Defense “toys for boys”. pause…. This is what happens when you let women vote.
They consume resources at nothing near the rate at which they contribute to those resources. They consume men’s money…rapaciously… -there’s no end in sight. And when the money runs out, they are going to strip it out of the military, -because the draft does not, and cannot apply to them. That’s my second reason why women shouldn’t vote.
My third reason: Immigration. Women have this overwhelming need to be seen as “nice”. They want to be nice. They want people to like them. The want the world to be a friendly place with cup cakes and unicorns where everyone loves each other.
That’s wonderful for family life. But it’s an absolute disaster for national governance. You can see what follows from women wanting to be “nice”… in Europe right now! There’s a demographic Time Bomb ticking in Europe.
You have ethnic Europeans refusing to have children, -not even close to having a replacement birth rate welcoming in radical immigrants with birth rates four, five, six times greater. It’s done in Europe. Except it can’t be done.
The European nuclear arsenal cannot be turned over to radical Islam. That is a death sentence for the world. It Can’t Happen.
We call that: women can’t be drafted. They will not vote for that. Who’s going to deal with the issue on the ground in Europe? Who will be the people who will have to armor-up and go and deal with this problem “nicely” that women have created? It’s going to be men!
Women aren’t going to vote for themselves to be made responsible for this. They will not vote to be held responsible for the problem they created.
It always comes back to that first issue, to the draft; to blood consequences. It would be lovely to live in a world where people didn’t go to war, people didn’t fight and try to kill each other for ridiculous reasons. We don’t get to live in the world that we like, that we imagine. We have to live in the world that exists.
The world that exists is filled with dangers. Lots of them. -Dangers that women are inviting onto our own soil, -all the while demanding more, and more, and more “free” stuff for themselves.
This chart of government spending, it doesn’t decline. We’re talking about only twenty years after suffrage here. This chart just continues to go up…and EXPLODE! That’s the world women have voted for.
Women have had the vote for 100 years. Effectively what they’ve voted for is to destroy the great liberal civilization that men have built for us.
We can’t allow that to happen. We can’t afford that.
Saying that women shouldn’t vote isn’t misogyny; it’s self-defense.
Women, no women, should vote.
transcribed from a video commentary by Janet Bloomfield (aka JudgyBitch)