Know what our Movement needs? More WOMEN!!

The irony is, at least here for me locally - the majority of the educated unsheepled peeps are women. There are five of us in particular that "get" it. Four remain in the GOP, one is chair of the libertarian party here.
 
mosquitobite said:
The irony is, at least here for me locally - the majority of the educated unsheepled peeps are women. There are five of us in particular that "get" it. Four remain in the GOP, one is chair of the libertarian party here.
Click to expand...
Married women don't count.
 
PaulConventionWV said:
Careful, lest ye attract the wrath of our local feminists.
Click to expand...
My god, it has already begun.

The guy you're quoting is right BTW. You're going to be seeing a lot about the biological basis of political beliefs in the coming years. In short, it's no coincidence that the libertarian movement is mostly white males.
 
fatjohn said:
Women spend less time thinking about politics so any movement will have less women.
I propose to cut the weight of their vote in half.

Also I find it appaling that the OP has something like ten reps per post because she has a cute picture.
Click to expand...



She was really great on TV. She did a lot for the movement back then. I remember she had a nice video with Judge.

I think this is it but I don't have my volume on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtHhJ86dbcU
 
Really though, the way to get women into the movement is to get young male libertarians out from behind books and computers and into social events. Start dating more, fellas! Women's political beliefs tend to be determined more by the people around them than by ideas and argumentation. When they're young and single that tends to be liberal college professors, feminist peers and the like; that's a huge reason why single women in their 20s are so liberal.

Once they fall in love with a guy though, they tend to gravitate more toward his point of view, and it's not because of his brilliant arguments, it's because women are so tribal by nature. Libertarian men, I implore you; you'll do more for to get women on the side of liberty by being a charming guy who can make her cum like a banshee than by being able to explain why socialism fails because of the lack of a rational pricing mechanism and the calculation problem.
 
In my neck of the woods, the liberty movement is largely female-driven, and we're not into "feminism" at all. I brought the core group together in 2007 and the women have made it grow. Anyone in this area who might read this thread would think y'all are way off base, because it's the men around here who are apathetic and apolitical. We keep prodding, but the men's inertia knows no bounds.
 
I can't tell you how amusing it is to see the same people who wonder "Why aren't there more female libertarians?" resorting to baseless insults, stereotypes and generally asinine behavior in their pursuit of the answer. Rarely are women treated as individuals; instead, they are often told they are "feelers" rather than "thinkers," that there's no hope for them because they "support the welfare state," and if women are really lucky, they will even see their differences of opinion chalked up to nebulous "biology." I mean, it's really a mystery why libertarians are so unsuccessful at attracting women when they use tactics such as these. Of course the general absence of women has nothing to do with the fact that libertarians fall all over themselves to make asses out of themselves, stereotype women and drive people off in general. Nope, must be some inherent quality of women. You want to know why more women aren't libertarians? It's simple - ask them (and treat their concerns seriously).

The liberty movement suffers from endemic problems; when it's not blatant sexism, it's libertarians telling women that their issues aren't really issues at all. There is a tendency to gloss over or downplay issues that don't directly relate to state oppression, when it's pretty clear that both state and social oppression are part of an interlocking system that hurts everyone, not just women. Hand-waving and saying "Freedom of association: not my problem" is a cop-out at best, because a society in which certain people gain advantages just because of the way the system is set up is not truly a free one. The problem isn't one of marketing, but rather the messages that many libertarians like to send in dialogues with women and pretty much any minority group.

ThePaleoLibertarian said:
More women in the movement is fine in and of itself, but people who want to synthesize libertarianism with feminism should be treated with suspicion at best
Click to expand...
I've found people who say this tend to be exceedingly intellectually lazy when it comes to actually trying to understand some feminist arguments. There are a lot of parallels between libertarian and feminist rhetoric. The cultural trope that women willingly submit to a benevolent male protector finds its counterpart in the idea that citizens willingly submit to a benevolent government. The idea that marital rape is not real is analogous to arguing that governmental tyranny is not real unless it comes at the hands of a dictatorship. Criticizing women for not leaving abusive relationships is similar to criticizing dissatisfied people for not leaving a tyrannical country. (It's always the abused, not the abuser, who has to leave - likewise, it's never the state that has to change.)

Libertarians base a great deal of their ideology on the claim that tacit consent to the state is not a real thing, but somehow feminist concerns about "tacit consent" to sex are not afforded the same consideration, even though the arguments are really the same. A lot of libertarians say that women voluntarily accept gender roles and therefore they are not oppressive, but they do not see the fact that a lot of people consent to governmental authority as a reason not to criticize the government.

Even Hayek and Mises, two giants of libertarian thought, make a lot of arguments that have feminist parallels. I think I've written way too much already, but I could go on at length about this topic. I just hope you've done research instead of simply slandering concepts that you don't seem to understand, because that would be disappointing (but predictable - this place isn't the best to have a serious discussion most of the time).
 
Last edited:
ThePaleoLibertarian said:
Once they fall in love with a guy though, they tend to gravitate more toward his point of view, and it's not because of his brilliant arguments, it's because women are so tribal by nature. Libertarian men, I implore you; you'll do more for to get women on the side of liberty by being a charming guy who can make her cum like a banshee than by being able to explain why socialism fails because of the lack of a rational pricing mechanism and the calculation problem.
Click to expand...

mlfw2021-132533167850.png
 
Rothbardian Girl said:
I can't tell you how amusing it is to see the same people who wonder "Why aren't there more female libertarians?" resorting to baseless insults, stereotypes and generally asinine behavior in their pursuit of the answer. Rarely are women treated as individuals; instead, they are often told they are "feelers" rather than "thinkers," that there's no hope for them because they "support the welfare state," and if women are really lucky, they will even see their differences of opinion chalked up to nebulous "biology." I mean, it's really a mystery why libertarians are so unsuccessful at attracting women when they use tactics such as these. Of course the general absence of women has nothing to do with the fact that libertarians fall all over themselves to make asses out of themselves, stereotype women and drive people off in general. Nope, must be some inherent quality of women. You want to know why more women aren't libertarians? It's simple - ask them (and treat their concerns seriously).

The liberty movement suffers from endemic problems; when it's not blatant sexism, it's libertarians telling women that their issues aren't really issues at all. There is a tendency to gloss over or downplay issues that don't directly relate to state oppression, when it's pretty clear that both state and social oppression are part of an interlocking system that hurts everyone, not just women. Hand-waving and saying "Freedom of association: not my problem" is a cop-out at best, because a society in which certain people gain advantages just because of the way the system is set up is not truly a free one. The problem isn't one of marketing, but rather the messages that many libertarians like to send in dialogues with women and pretty much any minority group.


I've found people who say this tend to be exceedingly intellectually lazy when it comes to actually trying to understand some feminist arguments. There are a lot of parallels between libertarian and feminist rhetoric. The cultural trope that women willingly submit to a benevolent male protector finds its counterpart in the idea that citizens willingly submit to a benevolent government. The idea that marital rape is not real is analogous to arguing that governmental tyranny is not real unless it comes at the hands of a dictatorship. Criticizing women for not leaving abusive relationships is similar to criticizing dissatisfied people for not leaving a tyrannical country. (It's always the abused, not the abuser, who has to leave - likewise, it's never the state that has to change.)

Libertarians base a great deal of their ideology on the claim that tacit consent to the state is not a real thing, but somehow feminist concerns about "tacit consent" to sex are not afforded the same consideration, even though the arguments are really the same. A lot of libertarians say that women voluntarily accept gender roles and therefore they are not oppressive, but they do not see the fact that a lot of people consent to governmental authority as a reason not to criticize the government.

Even Hayek and Mises, two giants of libertarian thought, make a lot of arguments that have feminist parallels. I think I've written way too much already, but I could go on at length about this topic. I just hope you've done research instead of simply slandering concepts that you don't seem to understand, because that would be disappointing (but predictable - this place isn't the best to have a serious discussion most of the time).
Click to expand...


I didn't believe it was biology, until about 2-3 years ago, when read a paper from harvard that analyzed what happened when women got the right to vote. In every state, and when finally at the federal level women got the right to vote, government spending increased and increased and never turned back. Before then government spending tending to rise, then get cut back.

So, that's why I believe women have a biological desire for "safety" and "security" beyond that of their male counterpart, and that manifests as women as group using the government to provide that to them.

Of course all women aren't like that, I know IRL one libertarian single woman, she's like 70 something. Just like men typically like sports more than women, I don't enjoy sports at all though, but still doesn't invalidate the general rule, which is in fact women "Generally" lean more left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
Charlie Kirk getting destroyed in debates
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
3K
Danke
Danke
Occam's Banana
Red-pilled: Nicole Shanahan on the "Great Reset" - and "Tech Mafia" wives as its "useful idiots"
Replies
3
Views
61
oyarde
O
ClaytonB
Female modesty: first step to ending toxic femininity
Replies
2
Views
44
ClaytonB
ClaytonB
J
US Special Forces Gaza Whistleblower Col. Anthony Aguilar Blows Up "100 Million Meals" Being Delivered, Huckabee
Replies
6
Views
60
unknown
unknown
mtr1979
Can women be pastors?
Replies
6
Views
304
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Back
Top