Posted on 08/01/2019 6:59:07 AM PDT by relictele
Preamble/disclaimer: FR is an oasis of strong, sovereign women who often have a better grip on principles and facts and history than the males do. There are many of them and I'm grateful for their presence/contributions and the example they set. And then there are the sensible female media figures, politicians and (all too rare) prominent figures in business and entertainment.
That said...
Feminist dogma states that women are intelligent, rational beings unswayed by emotional appeals.
In fact, feminist dogma has largely been converted wholesale into law and corporate policy. Anyone suggesting that women are too easily swayed by emotional appeals is subject to anything from tongue-clucking and finger-wagging to formal discipline up to and including being sacked.
But politics seems to be ring-fenced from such enforcement. Those 'intelligent, rational beings' will judge and/or choose their candidate based partially or even primarily on emotional appeals. They are, unfortunately, all too frequently taken in by fatuous criteria such as 'cares about me and my family.' It's one of those evergreen - if largely meaningless - poll questions that fascinates the media who, 240 years into the republic's lifespan, still refuse to travel to the interior of America and instead sit on their hindquarters reading tea leaves.
These are politicians. Their job is to amass votes, full stop, and to do it in as efficient a manner possible by any means possible. Invoking schools, children, health care, etc. is not an expression of the candidate's actual intentions, thoughts or abilities but is merely a cheap sales gimmick. Government is a horrible, expensive and usually incompetent provider and caretaker and will inevitably take more than it gives. Nothing will benefit a woman (or any person) or a family more than individual liberty and economic independence but these seem to go out the window during campaigns.
Media, pollsters and the candidates themselves spend months discussing so-called swing voters and the women's vote with the women's vote in particular hinging on such trifles as tweets, slogans, quotes taken out of context, tear-jerker stories and those ridiculous over-the-top scary TV ads. Some women have openly stated they vote based on the candidate's spouse (John Edwards anyone?).
If feminists and women in general want to be regarded as logical and sensible at all times they can start by ignoring saccharine, cynical appeals to emotion. It really is frustrating and tiresome to watch elections, especially local and Congressional races decided by flimsy, specious topics and even more frustrating and tiresome to deal with more of the same from office holders.
Ask any person about who is more “in touch” with their emotions, and people will say “women.” Well, then they are also the most likely to be swayed by emotional appeals. It is that simple.
Emotions are a result of value judgments, which are a product of ideas. Emotions are not tools of cognition and are not guides to action.
Women, in short, have become snowflakes. My own wife doesn’t fall for this propaganda. She is not so gullible. In general, they WANT something to be true, so they glom onto people who say it CAN BE. No wonder Communists have prevailed all over the world.
BTW, my own brother has this kooky mindset as well. I am talking generalities here. One can also generalize about people under 30, who are dumb as rocks, incapable of critical thinking.
The females on this site are emotional based on facts and reason.
The females on the other side are emotional because they contrive facts...
They seek emotional consensus.
There is no rational thought or consideration
I’ve met several of those and am related to one. I can barely speak to them, as a couple have practically started freaking out.
Women voters, especially suburban women, will vote for the Democrat nominee in 2020 in larger numbers than was seen in 2016. This will be the only demographic that shifts toward the Left. It could be the difference in suburban Congressional Districts and in several states. It represents the biggest threat to the reelection of Mr. Trump.
These suburban women voters will vote against their own financial, security, and well being interests and they will be dooming their children and grandchildren to a gloomy future. A rational choice, or an emotional one?
Women who don’t have a man in their lives in my opinion are more likely to be liberal. My wife and her whole family were conservative before I met them. A lot of women vote their feelings. In the real world feelings don’t pay for all the liberal ideas.
Within the next few years, a statement like that will be cause for incarceration if not execution.
I think we see evidence of that by the election results. Trump carried the votes of married women. Hillary got a strong majority of the votes of single women.
And this was one of Hillary’s excuses for her loss, that women’s husbands told them to vote for Trump, that they couldn’t vote for “the girl”, as if this were an election for middle school class president.
Great post. Thanks. When times are tenuous, most will go with the “strong horse” / collective. Individuals are surprisingly weak and usually outnumbered especially without core values. Fight, flight or fold? Where’s your burkha?/s
“Women for Trump” MAY help many to think in a more rational manner.
My wife doesn't vote with me, she doesn't sleep with me.
IOW, I would not choose a liberal woman as a wife. Too many issues to a long term marriage to add dealing daily with a liberal wife.
Oh, and We just celebrated our 36th anniversary last week, even though she is in an assisted care facility.
.
.
This vanity posted in News, rather than general/chat...kinda works against the premise...that’s how I feel...
.
.
That’s second wave feminism. First wave was the suffragettes trying to get the vote, own or inherit property, and have a legal right to chlid custody if divorced.
Second wave was the Gloria Steinem stuff from the 60s.
Third wave is what we have now, with the precious snowflakes of #MeToo being offended at the very idea that men exist.
Well said. Recalling the run up to the 2016 presidential election, I saw a local newscast on the boob tube and they interviewed two women at a loss soccer match where Marco Rubio’s kids were playing with dad in attendance. They asked the women what they thought of Rubio and all they could say was that he was “cute.”
Thanks for the correction. Anyway, you got the idea. Normally it would be amusing watching the whole thing collapse unto itself with the trans people, but since they rejected rationality, they can just continue make it up as they go along anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.