Why shouldn't women vote?

Question

women are emotional creatures

Answer 1

Because they only vote for other c*nts.

Like, John Cerry, Bull or Hillaryous Clinton, Ted Cennedy, Nancy Calosi, and Jimmy Carter!

All of them have proven to be TRAITOROUS to our nation and have significantly weakened us for the FALL!

Real men could significantly smell these c*nts out as RUINOUS to our nation and no good SOBS! Ohhh, but not the c*nt loving women who vote by "looks".

Even Ann Coulter do not believe women should vote.

Women SKEW the results for the bad c*nts to run, er RUIN our nation!!!!

Answer 2

The whole idea of women being emotional and men being logical is from Aristotle and his table of opposites. There is nothing factual about it as this was a theory that has long been disproven. Dualism doesn't exist as far as gender attributes other then the obvious physical ones.

Philosopher Val Plumwood argues in Feminism and the Mastery of Nature that a logical thought process inherent in the dualistic relationship is necessary to justify exploitation and oppression of the other. The formation process of these ideologies is apparent within the five characteristics of dualisms. They are:

(1) Backgrounding—The master denies the essentialness of and dependency on the other. (2) Radical Exclusion/ Hyperseparation—All differences between the groups are made to have positive and negative connotations. Continuities between the master and the other are denied. (3) Incorporation—The master creates the norm, and the other is seen as substandard. The other cannot be independently identified, but is dependent on the master for its specification. (4) Instrumentalism—The other is objectified and made an instrument or resource to the master. The other must set aside its own welfare to serve the master. (5) Homogenization/Stereotyping—This is necessary within each of the two groups to reinforce and naturalize the differences between the groups.

Answer 3

I believe both sexes are equally flawed in this department. The women I've known had their irrational outbursts, but In fairness, I never knew a man that didn't have a few of his own. I never had to bail either of my wives out of jail because she got in a bar fight with some jerk over whether or not you can drown oysters in stagnant salt water. And one of mine did, have to bail me out, I mean.

I was right about the oysters, by the way. Fat lotta good that did.
Women might get sulky and vindictive, while men tend to fly off the handle. Been my experience that we're pretty much equally irrational when circumstances and pressures override the "better angels of our nature."

Maybe none of us should vote.

"If voting could change anything, it would be illegal."

----Noam Chomsky

Seriously. We need to try to get past this sexual us-against-them rhetorical folderol, and realize that we all face a common enemy, that being the people we're stuck with voting for, that would gladly and are actively working to reduce all but the monied elite they belong to and answer to, to serfdom.

And we only make their job easier by getting bogged down in squabbling amongst ourselves. Same with the so-called two-party system in the U.S. During the terms of the last ten presidents, shifts in congress from one party's control to that or another, what is it that has been consistent? Government has gotten bigger, more intrusive, less accountable, less responsible and downright scarily manipulative of a squabbling and sadly uninformed trained-ape populace.

Elections are media circuses and clowns make political book by causing such patent absurdities as sentences for peddling drugs to now in many states exceed those for aggravated assault. What we need to pay attention to, and try to root out are the spiky realities smothered in the marshmallow rhetoric of family values, face that we haven't gone to war to defend our freedom in 50 years but that it hasn't hurt the sale of little plastic flags. That people care more about which actress is balling which jock than they do about an utterly bankrupt social security system and a ten gillion dollar debt. That it is US against them - and by US, I mean men AND women - not them against them.

We need to get rid of the lot of them. There's nothing to choose between 'em - Not Hillary, Not Bush, not whichever hack takes New Hampshire in the next go-round. They're all bought and paid for long before they take any office of any importance.

Of course women should vote. But they should wake up. Think for themselves, just like men should. We're all behaving like cattle being prodded into a feedlot. But women don't seem any dumber than men in this area.

Sex ain't the issue. Stupidity and gullibility are. And those are two areas where I think we really HAVE achieved true equality.

Answer 4

huh? sorry, but its not as if voting is an impulse thing where our emotions rule us. voting is generally a process that takes the voter a fair amount of research and information to come to a decision - or it should anyway. its not as if we get to the ballot box and start crying - and then pick someone else than what we had decided earlier.

i think the people who shouldn't vote, are those that go "thats who my dad voted for, so thats who i vote for", like many men AND women do.

Answer 5

Women should vote just as men vote ,thats a bit strange to ask isnt it?They are citizens and not some alien species.

Answer 6

Baba Yaga, you've posted that comment with a slight fluctuation at the introduction at least 5 times now. You appear to be familiar with statistics, so I'll point out a few things.

1) In the actual article posted (you should link to that instead; maybe people would give more credence to your opinion:

http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

), there were quite a few studies cited and analyzed. A large number of those studies had differences ranging between 0.3 and 0.7, some higher or lower. Those are STANDARD DEVIATIONS; a standard deviation of 1 is a roughly 34% difference, and even a deviation of 0.3 is close to a 12% difference. Those were standard deviations in the total sample size of all studies, so I would say differences like that are pretty significant.

2) Look at what variables were measured. A lot of the small difference were garbage studies, like these:

Attribution of Success to Ability, Attribution of Success to Luck, Mathematics Anxiety, Happiness... one has to ask oneself, are these studies significant to the question of gender differences and potentials, and can they accurately be measured?

3) I noticed that the progressive matrices, or g, if you know about it (it's supposedly a measure of general intelligence, something that applies to the majority of IQ tests and the like) was 0.02 in 6-14 year olds, 0.16 in 15 to 19 year olds, and 0.3 in ADULTS. (11% of the men scoring higher than women in an intelligence test is somewhat significant if you ask me.) I understand that that is one study, but there are lots of examples in that PDF that show significant differences. Furthermore, look at the emotion side of that study (neuroticism, extraversion, and the like)... you see large differences there too. (0.51, 0.32 for standard deviations is pretty impressive for organisms that are supposed to be so similar)

I could go on and on, but my whole point is this; don't just cite one study, even if it is a huge study that analyzes a lot, as a be all and end all. From what I can tell, Simpson's Paradox is at least somewhat at work here. (I'm sure you're familiar with it.)

I posted this in Arjuna's closed comment; might as well post it here:

"Baba Yaga, could you please knock off the ad hominem remarks? People will really respect you a lot more if you can argue in a calm and civil way. Even if a poster acts like an asshole, you can emerge the better... er... woman if you conduct yourself in a dignified manner. I haven't seen much of that recently."

Keep it in mind.

Ok, I'll answer the actual question from my own opinion, but first I'll quote Laura:

"i think we should,
but we are very sensitive,
and most politicians are men,
so some of our opinions could be biased."

That about summarizes it; women (like it or not Baba Yaga, from what the studies ACTUALLY said when looking at them as an individual group) are more tied to more emotional (as society deems emotional) concerns than men. Plain and simple. Not ALL women, but enough to raise questions and concerns.

Damn, that took a while. Sorry for the long reply.

Answer 7

They should. Men are emotional creatures too.

Answer 8

So men are not emotional? What causes men to freak out and attack during sports events, pretty emotional to me!

Answer 9

Why should it matter you sexist! Don't take it personally but you are why women stay away from real cool jobs like soccer players. Watch out cause women are going to take over the world. Ha Ha Ha! Lol But i still hate your question! Why shouldn't men vote? Huh!

Answer 10

Because they have menstrual periods and go crazy once each month. All you men know that. We didn't get the vote until 1928.

Answer 11

What? You want to give them the vote? The next thing you'll know they'll start wanting to drive! They might even think they don't have to cook and clean anymore!