• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Women voting, bad idea?

Women voting, bad idea?

  • women voting is a terrible idea

    Votes: 13 14.3%

  • women voting is fine with me

    Votes: 78 85.7%
  • Total voters
    91
I think the lady in the OP is nuts. Of course women should vote. There are just as many guys who are idiots out there! I don't understand women like this and I'm glad I don't know any.
 
NitroHangover said:
Well this'll be a close poll :roll:

Of course women should have the right to vote. This is a non-question for anyone who's not... I dunno what. Really, really stupid.


To broaden the topic a little bit, though, I do find this particular brand of woman-on-women sexism kind of interesting, though. I see it all the time. Women, as individuals, will shout until they are blue in the face about how we need more women in the workplace and whatnot, and yet I constantly hear women complaining about how much they hate working with other women, lol. Always makes me chuckle.
Click to expand...

NitroHangover said:
*Waits for all the feminists to come out of the woodwork and decry this poster for being openly sexist, stereotyping and suggesting legal discrimination based on gender*







.....








*Hears nothing but crickets*
Click to expand...

NitroHangover said:
Ehhhh whatever, same difference. Just the fact that you brought it up out of nowhere and had all this retarded reasoning behind it suggests that you at least somewhat endorse the notion of it, at least.

Point is, the very basis of your ridiculous post is sexism and stereotyping, and the outcry would be deafening if someone made the same post about women.
Click to expand...

NitroHangover said:
Watch, THIS is what feminists will want to yell at him for. Not the outright, blatant sexism against men in the first post :roll:

You heard it here first. Callin' it.
Click to expand...

baited-hook.jpg
 
Jerry said:
...........
Click to expand...

Answering my question by literally restating the statement that brought on the question is not an answer.

So, in other words, you cannot explain how gun ownership is related to respecting individual liberties and boundaries.
 
NitroHangover said:
Ahhh, a typo. Ok, well I'm sure you probably just appeased the feminists, then.

Any chance you want to also take back some of the offensive things you said about men while you're at it? Daaaahhhh, who'm I kidding. Our feelings, and our standing in the tide of culture don't matter.
Click to expand...

Yes, feelings, like the feelings of women who have had to endure centuries of derogatory remarks.
 
Jerry said:
Only if they're married.

Otherwise single women tend to elevate the government as a surrogate for the economic security a spouse provides.

One should also be a gun owner and have served a term of service in the military before being allowed to vote, but that's for another thread.
Click to expand...

Complete and utter bullsh!t.

How dare you. Unbelievable ignorance.

Offensive on every level.
 
Fiddytree said:
You're going to be gravely disappointed when it happens. Politics will not be transcended.
Click to expand...

She might not do better or worse than a man, that is not what I meant. What is a matter of fact that it is very difficult for a woman to break through in politics and become a presidential candidate or a president.
 
Peter King said:
Yes, feelings, like the feelings of women who have had to endure centuries of derogatory remarks.
Click to expand...
I see. So it's time to take revenge for the sins of the past, now, on a generation of men who by and large fully support women's rights, by being openly sexist and degrading towards men in general? Is that what we're getting at here?
 
Jerry said:
Only if they're married.

Otherwise single women tend to elevate the government as a surrogate for the economic security a spouse provides.

One should also be a gun owner and have served a term of service in the military before being allowed to vote, but that's for another thread.
Click to expand...

I dont know about that mate! When I joined the army at 16 I had no clue about politics and didnt really begin to get interested until the end of my service. Most of the guys I served with could care less about politics and we spent most of our time talking about when we could next get drunk and women we wanted to ****. Serving in the military doesnt make you any more informed than the guy who works in an office 9-5, its not like we sat down and had long discussions about how a certain party would affect our tour etc. We just put our heads down and did whatever we were ordered too.
 
Peter King said:
She might not do better or worse than a man, that is not what I meant. What is a matter of fact that it is very difficult for a woman to break through in politics and become a presidential candidate or a president.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your original context specifically meant that, however, your additional reasoning needs to be mentioned. You argued that there was a qualitative difference with how a woman would engage in politics. There isn't much of one.

If anything it is the men who should be barred from voting. They are the really risky voters because they vote on sentiment, testosterone, good old boy feeling with the candidate, dislike of the other man/woman without really listening to their points of view and most importantly, they usually vote for other men even when there are better qualified women in the race too.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion, in a time of crisis usually it is cooler heads that prevail and IMHO, women do that better than men.
Click to expand...

I did not say that men should be barred from voting, but if it was the choice of either barring women from voting or men from voting, barring men from voting would be the smarter option for all the reasons I mentioned.
Click to expand...
 
And yet still not a peep to the guy from a feminist. Not ONE.
 
Higgins86 said:
I dont know about that mate! When I joined the army at 16 I had no clue about politics and didnt really begin to get interested until the end of my service. Most of the guys I served with could care less about politics and we spent most of our time talking about when we could next get drunk and women we wanted to ****. Serving in the military doesnt make you any more informed than the guy who works in an office 9-5, its not like we sat down and had long discussions about how a certain party would affect our tour etc. We just put our heads down and did whatever we were ordered too.
Click to expand...

Thank you for pointing out the insanely obvious.
 
Fiddytree said:
Do they need to respond to everything?
Click to expand...

This. I get tired of addressing people's notions that what set of genitals you have makes you identical to everyone else with those genitals. I haven't done it for women, or for men, because quite frankly I'd just go blue in the face before I'd get done dispelling all of it.
 
Misogyny coming from the Mississippi tea party -- what a shock.
 
Fiddytree said:
Do they need to respond to everything?
Click to expand...
No, but I'd think they'd want to respond if they actually stand for what they say they do. I'd think they'd very passionately want to respond to a man making unapologetic, blatantly sexist statements and actually building and presenting a case for why one gender might justifiably be denied the right to vote.

Isn't that exactly what the twit in the OP did? Isn't that exactly the type of thing feminists are supposed to be offended by and respond strongly against?
 
NitroHangover said:
No, but I'd think they'd want to respond if they actually stand for what they say they do. I'd think they'd very passionately want to respond to a man making unapologetic, blatantly sexist statements and actually building and presenting a case for why one gender might justifiably be denied the right to vote.

Isn't that exactly what the twit in the OP did? Isn't that exactly the type of thing feminists are supposed to be offended by and respond strongly against?
Click to expand...

Has it occurred to your blatant attempts at being inflammatory might be disinclining people to get involved with this?
 
NitroHangover said:
No, but I'd think they'd want to respond if they actually stand for what they say they do. I'd think they'd very passionately want to respond to a man making unapologetic, blatantly sexist statements and actually building and presenting a case for why one gender might justifiably be denied the right to vote.

Isn't that exactly what the twit in the OP did? Isn't that exactly the type of thing feminists are supposed to be offended by and respond strongly against?
Click to expand...


I've seen the same posters do what you ask in other threads, and I have abstained in those particular threads. In some threads I participate in one discourse that I did not in another thread, and do that on a whim. The same goes for others. Besides us two have responded at length. Maybe the other posters had similar thoughts to us and thought better of repeating them.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Has it occurred to your blatant attempts at being inflammatory might be disinclining people to get involved with this?
Click to expand...
No. None of that changes what the guy said. Does what he said not offend you as a feminist?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom