TIME does a sexism to stay relevant

DanteLivra · 2019-08-27T10:22:24+00:00

Gender shouldn't be taken into consideration period.

Just prove that you know what you are doing and you'll have my vote ffs.

Mr_Shad0w · 2019-08-27T14:28:23+00:00

If you're looking for proof that feminism is about gynocentrism / supremacy and not equality, there you go. If it was really about "We're all human, men and women are equally capable of running for public office." then big media outlets would be promoting that angle.

This is about promoting an "Anyone But Him" agenda.

2019-08-27T13:05:14+00:00

Vote for a man because he's a man. The internet breaks.

1LegendaryWombat · 2019-08-27T14:29:47+00:00

Nevada: stronger laws ensuring equal pay for women, tougher penalties for domestic violence, better protection for sexual-assault survivors, more money for family-planning services, an end to a requirement that forced doctors to ask women their marital status before performing an abortion and an increased minimum wage.

Only one of those is truly equal, one is a maybe, and everything else is woman focussed.

If women politicians only do shit for women, why would i vote for them?

Imagine, in Washington and in state legislatures across the country, women being represented by people who innately understand their experiences because they have lived them

Okay...and as a man, do they understand my lived experiences? No? Weird.

Just pick whomever is the best, i don't care whats between their legs or their political affiliation, just do the fucking job right.

The only way to get there is to vote more women into office–and not only that, but women of color; LGBTQ women; immigrant women; women with young kids; women with no kids; women from different economic, religious and ethnic backgrounds.

Oh fuck off. How many male athiest politicians are there in america, how about Buddhists? Muslims? Hindus? People from poor backgrounds? Nobody should care if they're gay, or black or have kids or not, it doesn't make a difference where it matters.

EduBA · 2019-08-27T10:24:44+00:00

political scientists Jeffrey Lazarus and Amy Steigerwalt found that women in Congress are generally more effective than their male colleagues

As May showed in the UK?

Ody_ssey · 2019-08-27T10:33:09+00:00

By June, with the help of the state’s Democratic governor, there were stronger laws ensuring equal pay for women, tougher penalties for domestic violence, better protection for sexual-assault survivors, more money for family-planning services, an end to a requirement that forced doctors to ask women their marital status before performing an abortion and an increased minimum wage.

So they did everything to put women at advantage just for existing. This is why women should not be elected. They are too biased with men.

Spain and Finland are current example of anti-male laws and male disposability.

2019-08-27T11:35:55+00:00

It says: - vote for women in the primaries because everyone has similar ideologies but the difference is they are women - a study by female political found that congresswomen are more effective than male congressmen and are more likely to sign legislative that helps their voters. - women are more likely to run for office for good reasons. “Men run for office to be something, women run for office to do something.” - having women running in the primaries has already changed the course of the elections. The women talked about the equal rights amendment, abortion, and wage gap, FORCING THE MEN TO DO SO AS WELL. [apparently men don’t talk about gender issues onstage, even though they always do].

McFeely_Smackup · 2019-08-27T15:47:09+00:00

Imagine, in Washington and in state legislatures across the country, women being represented by people who innately understand their experiences because they have lived them

it's funny how often you'll unironically hear this opinion parroted. "We need to elect women, because only women understand women's issues"...which clearly and unambiguously tells us these people think those women WON'T be able to understand Men's issues.

I'd rather vote for a candidate that at least pretends to think they understand issues facing all of the population, rather than the one claiming "I fully grasp the needs of half the population".

2019-08-27T20:02:29+00:00

The entire point of elections is so we can examine each candidate, see what he/she has to offer, and vote according to our values. The entire point of terms is so we can examine what each candidate did during his/her term and vote according to their performance.

Every serious candidate has a website which outlines his/her personal views. If you want to know what a candidate plans to do for women, minorities, LGBT people, or any other social group, that information is readily available. Voting for women because they are more likely to increase social programs/throw more money at other women is mind bogglingly stupid. It's I'mWithHer all over again.

mgtow-zen · 2019-08-27T18:49:49+00:00

I thought Nevada was a reasonably good state to live in, with libertarian-ish values.

Looks like Nevada is about to become a sucky place to live, too. I was seriously planning on moving there, too.

Blutarg · 2019-08-27T12:25:05+00:00

What language is this post title written in?

Title	TIME does a sexism to stay relevant
Author	biscuitgravy
Upvotes	146
Comments	25
Date	August 27, 2019 8:26 AM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cw1hfa/time_does_a_sexism_to_stay_relevant/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/time-does-a-sexism-to-stay-relevant.870459 https://theredarchive.com/post/870459

Comments