Posted on 11/13/2001 8:13:31 PM PST by FF578
What is wrong with Female Voters in the United States? If you take a look at elections since 1980, Female Voters vote increasingly liberal.
Let's take a look at the 2000 Election for example.
If you count Only the Male Vote. Bush would have won in a Landslide. Losing only the States of Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Massachuttes, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia.
If you count only the Female Vote, Gore Would have won in a Landslide, with Bush only winning the States of : Montana, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky and Indiana.
Why is this? What makes the Female American Voter so liberal? This is important because Women vote in larger numbers (7 Million More) Than men.
If they had sex on the stage, the tree would be the president now. The audience would probably have cheered them on. See, look how much he loves his wife.
In the following states "Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina.." Southern Wimmin voted for George...we nos whut we r doin' !!
As to the others, 'Go Phigure..'
Okay, I'll fan the flames here. One big reason men want to stay single is the legally enforceable, punitive aspects of the state-recognized, state-enforced marriage contract.
A government-legal marriage introduces a third party - the government/lawyer system - into the mix.
The marriage/divorce legal system has been described as a matriarchy -- the man, once legally married in the eyes of the state, is suddenly bound and obligated to serve the female. He must keep her happy, for she holds in her hand the power -- backed by the resources of government and law enforcement -- to, at a whim, deprive him of house, children, possessions and income for the current time and for decades to come. Therefore he must capitulate and cower, lest she bring to bear the power and weight of the government legal system against him.
This stands the traditional male/female relationship on its head. The man hates the servitude, the woman (wanting a warrior who will defend the tent and keep her safe while she is inside helpless downloading babies) despise the suddenly (after legally marrying) weak male.
So men flee and avoid the marriage contract. Women reject men who enter the contract and suddenly become servile, fearful and milquetoasty.
The winner in all this? The government of course. It grows geometrically.
Over the years a tiny bit of "balance" has been introduced into the marriage/divorce law system, but it still largely favors the female and punishes/deprives the male.
For more, see The Predatory Female, a tongue-in-cheek look at this.
Incidentally, noble men still legally marry in spite of all this. Noble women who legally marry reject the government/legal power at their disposal and submit to their men, so that the men need not fear them and can remain men. Still, even in that agreement, the man's manliness is based on the grant given him by the female, so she still has the power. I guess the noble man just has to take his chances and go with it. ;o)
I disagree; the number one thng standing between a woman and an abortionist is her free will. No one has a greater responsibilty to the child in the womb than that child's mother.
On a national level, I beleive the most workable solution would be a constitutional amendment that brings voting rights (male and female) into line with age requirements that are already embodied in the Constitution:
- Eligible to vote for president: Natural-born citizens age 35 and older;
- Eligible to vote for senator: Citizens age 30 and older;
- Eligible to vote for congressman: Citizens age 25 and older.
That's right, and with more unmarried women with children they look to the state for their support. When women have children without a husband, or the ex-husband refuses to pay child support, they want the taxpayers to look after them. There is little thought to protecting the future of the country for their children, but only thought for the current matters of housing, food and medical care, i.e., socialist support.
Well, KillerWabbit, I checked out the summary for the book. A portion of the summary is above. Another reason for the hooker versus many wives is that at least the hooker gets medical checkups, and that makes the hooker far safer than many of the "wives" of today. Adultery has become really rampant in our society.
You are fortunate to be able to defend yourself. Be sure to keep up on your martial arts. You can never tell when your skills might come in handy. Women can be vicious.
The same thing applies to many guys. And these people have been breeding.
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.