"There Was a War on Women, and the Women Won"

ErasmusMRA · 2012-11-08T16:30:54+00:00

Women -- the only group of people who can be victims and heroes at the same time.

Manatee7474 · 2012-11-08T16:51:29+00:00

No, there was a war waged by feminists and politicians against men -

sadly most men don't even realize they were at war, let alone that they lost it...

IHaveALargePenis · 2012-11-08T17:35:25+00:00

So what exactly has changed? Three extra women in the senate and no more crying about abortions from the republicans? That's what the whole war on women was?

ThePigman · 2012-11-09T01:23:33+00:00

If America has a war on women, it has a full-blown holocaust on men.

mayonesa · 2012-11-09T14:12:48+00:00

There was never a war on women.

There was a war for a society where the genders were not in conflict.

Stupidity won, as it always does in popularity contests.

Equa1 · 2012-11-08T16:41:45+00:00

So women are the majority of voters - how much of this can be attributed to birth rate of each gender and how much can be attributed to the 100's of thousands of men who've died in wars and in their careers over the past century? You know.. Building and defending this country.

Edit - so I did some research...

Gender imbalance may arise as a consequence of various factors ranging from natural factors and war casualties to intentional gender control and deliberate gendercide.

Like most sexual species, the sex ratio is approximately 1:1. In humans the secondary sex ratio (i.e., at birth) is commonly assumed to be 105 boys to 100 girls, an assumption that is a subject of debate in the scientific community. The sex ratio for the entire world population is 101 males to 100 females.[1]

Source -http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio

buster2209 · 2012-11-08T17:37:36+00:00

Let them have it. The SS US Government hit the iceberg a long time ago and is now sinking fast...

TheGDBatman · 2012-11-09T02:44:40+00:00

I guess if women did it all by themselves, all the men who voted for Obama can just stay home next time. After all, the women won...

memymineown · 2012-11-08T18:26:07+00:00

There's no doubt about it: The big winners of last night's election were women. And not just because we're the majority of voters and most politicians crawl over each other to appeal to us. Last night, when Tammy Baldwin won her race in Wisconsin, it meant a record number of women would be going on to serve in the Senate come January. Other new female faces joining the Senate are Deb Fischer, Mazie Hirono, Elizabeth Warren, and likely Heidi Heitkamp, though right now it looks like her victory in North Dakota might have to wait until after a recount. All of the new women, except for Nebraska's Fischer, are Democrats. If Heitkamp wins in North Dakota, it will bring the number of women in the Senate from 17 (with two female Republicans retiring) to 20. In the past 15 years, this number has more than doubled.

Reaction to the Republican war on women played a critical role in getting to this all-time high. Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri was expected to lose handily to Rep. Todd Akin, but at least in some part because of his ridiculous remarks about rape and abortion, he lost a state that Romney had in a lock. James Wolcott summed up the entire situation pithily on Twitter:

Memo to Republicans: Try running fewer rape philosophers next time. — James Wolcott (@JamesWolcott) November 7, 2012

Elizabeth Warren's defeat of Republican incumbent Scott Brown of Massachusetts is less of a surprise. No matter how far she fell behind in the polls in the early days, I personally found it implausible that the state would re-elect a glib head of hair like Brown when they had such a popular Democrat to vote for instead. Still, Warren campaigned heavily against the war on women in order to secure her win. Brown, not one of his party's crazies, campaigned as a pro-choice candidate, aware that being opposed to legal abortion would hurt him in Massachusetts, but his spotty record on reproductive rights came back to haunt him. Warren singled out his support of the Blunt Amendment, which was a last ditch attempt by Republicans to try to limit insurance coverage for contraception. She also attacked him for not supporting the Paycheck Fairness Act, which was intended to help women achieve pay equity. Warren will be the first female Senator from Massachusetts.

Overall, the election showed an electorate tilting left in the culture wars, with gay marriage finally winning at the ballot box, a restriction on abortion funding going down in flames in Florida, and a president who is routinely characterized by his opposition as a "socialist" and a "radical" winning the election anyway. In this more socially moderate-to-liberal environment, Democrats do better, and since Democrats run more women, women do better.

The result is a big win for all women, not just the female candidates. As Lauren Sandler reported at the Cut earlier this week, female leaders on the Hill tend to fight harder on issues that female voters care about, such as health care and education. The influx of women will likely tug the Senate's Democratic majority to the left, with Warren and Baldwin taking the lead as passionate advocates for progressive policies.

typhonblue · 2012-11-09T00:15:05+00:00

Wow. So easily bamboozled by a dog and pony show.

I wonder if she still gets freaked out by the "I got your nose!" trick.

handlebar_eyebrows · 2012-11-09T05:58:28+00:00

So I'm new here, but I have an honest question-- Why is there so much concern here with voters who seek to promote issues that pertain women (women's reproductive health, equal pay) by electing candidates who say they will do so through legislation? I understand that there are many men's issues that are not receiving near the same amount of attention by the population at large, and as a woman I empathize with the cause and support the MR movement. But I do not understand why the support of men's rights must include such a condemnation of those who seek to further issues that pertain almost exclusively (please correct me if I'm wrong) to women. I honestly just want to be able to understand the motivation behind the negative views of these issues. Is it the imbalance of attention to the expansion/advancement of rights of both genders? And why is the election of more women to the senate and house an issue? I hope I'm not stepping on any toes here. I'm just genuinely curious and would appreciate any feedback!

pureweevil · 2012-11-08T16:24:00+00:00

Fantastic result.

facetothe9th · 2012-11-08T17:57:37+00:00

At the end of the day most women I know felt like their rights were threatened this election. Frankly, they're correct. The comments that came out of the right (legitimate rape, binders full of women) were blatantly misogynistic.

The comments shitting on women here threaten our legitimacy. We strengthen ourselves as a community by promoting real equality, standing against falsehoods directed against us, and yes, acknowledging places where women suffer actual discrimination. I'm not saying we advocate, because there's a large apparatus already in place to do just that, but we should have respect for the concerns of women, if for no other reason than to understand their motivation.

Title	"There Was a War on Women, and the Women Won"
Author	AnthonyZarat
Upvotes	17
Comments	38
Date	November 8, 2012 4:16 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/12v19d/there_was_a_war_on_women_and_the_women_won/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/there-was-a-war-on-women-and-the-women-won.1009672 https://theredarchive.com/post/1009672

Comments