[Smokin' Joe]

While certainly, not all unmarried women are depending on Government for a handout, the proportion of people who do depend on government for a handout is composed largely of unmarried women. Why? Because unmarried women can more easily qualify for aid than unmarried men. Social biases contend that women are natrually better parents than men, thus have custody of the dependent children which allows them access to federal programs at a ratr greater than that of married women.

I do not think the 'solution' is to ban anyone from voting based on melanin or their chromosones, but the thought that much of the culturally destructive self interest displayed at the polls might be circumvented by recalling at one time the criteria for voting included the words "...and a property owner". That status was generally held by those who were responsible, had some business or other acumen which would give them the means to preserve that.

I think some of the points being awkwardly made here decry the false feminism which claims independence, but which actually replaces the patriarchical family with one which has the State as its de facto head, not those women (and I have had the priveledge of knowing a few) who can pull their own weight and should be compensated in the workplace for what they do, married or not.

I have found that universally the latter are conservative in their outlook and politics, and a joy to know.

[Nepeta]

I wouldn't have a problem with voting limited to property owners, or perhaps to property owners and veterans of the military.

Unmarried women without children are in the same position as unmarried men in most cases in terms of assistance, public or private.