Why Are Single Women So Attracted to the Party of Victimhood?


Locutus
#1
via sda:

Countless polls that unmarried women consistently support Barack Obama much more than they do Mitt Romney. An obvious question is: Why?

The NY Times' conservative columnist, Ross Douthat, goes into great detail to provide a pseudo-psychological explanation that these women - even though they endlessly profess to be independent feminists - are really nothing more than hapless princesses who view Obama as their rescuing knight in shining armour.
... tomorrow’s feminists may look back on his campaign’s pitch to women and see a different theme emerge: a weirdly paternalistic form of social liberalism, in which women are forever single girls and the president is their father, lover, fiancé and paladin all rolled into one. ... the idea of Obama as a kind of knight protector for America’s Julias and Lenas and Sandras, waging a lonely counteroffensive in the war on women, has basically become the White House’s concluding pitch not only to his base, but to female undecided voters as well.


President Obama in Shining Armor - NYTimes.com

 
eh1eh
+5
#2
Right wing pundits are the ultimate authority on everything to do with women. Especially their human rights.
This is stupid. Do you subscribe to this or are you just blindly posting sh1t?
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
+6
#3
What a statement. Women are going to support politicians who think quite frankly.
Women will support politicians who support education and social services that will
benefit their children. It is not about being victims, its about asserting their place in
the society. If one is of the privileged they don't think about simple things like,
equality and an even chance for economic opportunity.
Then again, I am not a victim and I still support strong educational opportunities,
medicare, pensions and a whole lot of other programs that are part of a modern
society. There is money to pay for them that is not the problem. The real problem
is people who are unwilling to understand priorities and how to spend the money
available on the most important programs. Instead we have self interest and that
of a few of their friends, we have companies that don't want to pay their fair share of
the burden of society but they want special privileges and tax concessions in order
for them to do the right thing. Last but not least we have ordinary consumers who
insist on having everything right now without saving money and charging almost all
the frills until they devalue the currency and pay even more for the things they don't
need.
If you look at that picture we have a whole society from their prospective wanting to
be victims of something so they are. Why would you single out women for being
victims? Big business in my opinion are the biggest whiners with the most money
and they pretend they are victims all the time.
Sounds to me like some serious Republican talking points if you ask me.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+7
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

via sda:

Countless polls that unmarried women consistently support Barack Obama much more than they do Mitt Romney. An obvious question is: Why?

The NY Times' conservative columnist, Ross Douthat, goes into great detail to provide a pseudo-psychological explanation that these women - even though they endlessly profess to be independent feminists - are really nothing more than hapless princesses who view Obama as their rescuing knight in shining armour.

So unmarried woman = feminist....gotcha! Perhaps the reason that these woman support the Democrats is because the Republican pundits make Republicans look so goddamn stupid.
 
Corduroy
+10 / -1
#5  Top Rated Post
Maybe it's because sexist douchebags like Ross Douthat, Mitt Romney and other Republicans treat women with such condescension. Maybe it's because they talk about 'legitimate rape' and God's plan for rape, and try to restrict our rights to control our bodies. Maybe it's how they don't support equal pay. Maybe it's how they want to defund organizations that specifically treat female medical needs. Maybe it's because Mitt Romney said during the debate that he supports women's rights because he let women who worked for him leave work early to cook dinner. Maybe it's because the Republican idea of appealing to women is having Ann Romney announce that she loves women. Maybe it's the assumption that women who want contraception are ****s, or that women who aren't married are feminists, or that they see Barack Obama in specifically paternalistic ways and they all secretly want a man to save them and tell them what to do.

In the past few months Republican candidates have repeatedly made their opinions of rape known. When they go on about legitimate rape, trying to redefine "forcible rape" and comment that some women are "easy rapes" they are scoffing at the idea that sexually assaulted women could actually be victims in that assault. Why? Because conservative men don't believe that women have ownership of their own sexuality. Their wives, their daughters, and ultimately all women in society are sexually subordinate to men. Why would women be attracted to the "party of victimhood"? Well, the Republican party is very clearly coming out against the idea that sexually vicitimized women are actually victims. Do they really need it spelled out for them?
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+4
#6
Perhaps the Republicans should look at their party and platforms- That would fall under why is this election not a cakewalk for them.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+3
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Perhaps the Republicans should look at their party and platforms- That would fall under why is this election not a cakewalk for them.

Yup, given the absolutely horrendous job Obama has done, winning this election would be a cakewalk for any party that had anything resembling a good idea. The Republicans have nothing to offer and that is why their supporters spend so much time attacking Obama.
 
TenPenny
+7 / -1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Corduroy View Post

Their wives, their daughters, and ultimately all women in society are sexually subordinate to men.

Oddly enough, exactly what they think is wrong with those evil guys with turbans.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+4
#9
But what about the strong, independent, intelligent republican women like Sarah Pali....wait....never mind...
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPenny View Post

Oddly enough, exactly what they think is wrong with those evil guys with turbans.

Not a reasonable comparison. It should have had a color tint.
 
Kreskin
+2
#11
What a lamebrain article.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by Kreskin View Post

What a lamebrain article.

And this is?

But that conceit is probably wrong. The gap between men and women on issues like abortion is overstated, and the female preference for Democrats predates Roe v. Wade. In a recent blog post, Christina Wolbrecht of the University of Notre Dame calls the gender gap “a recurrent, if not consistent, feature of presidential elections throughout the postwar era,” which probably dates to Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential campaign.

Not coincidentally, that was a year when Republican economic rhetoric took on a particularly individualistic cast. If there’s a deep driver of the gender gap, it’s usually views about spending and the role of government. Men are more likely to be libertarian, women are more likely to be communitarian, and this creates what Wolbrecht calls a natural “divergence in preferences for social welfare policies.”
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
+3
#13
Maybe women are smarter?
 
gopher
No Party Affiliation
+4
#14
''party of victimhood"


It is the right wing which claims to be the victims of reverse discrimination, quotas, unfair tax burden, judicial activism, and other forms of illusory victimization. Are you saying their claims have no basis - that it is only women and others like them who play the victim card??
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+2
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by gopher View Post

''party of victimhood"


It is the right wing which claims to be the victims of reverse discrimination, quotas, unfair tax burden, judicial activism, and other forms of illusory victimization. Are you saying their claims have no basis - that it is only women and others like them who play the victim card??

When it comes down to it US Political discussion is hateful, corruption and vote tampering is truly sad for such a country.
 
petros
+1
#16
Which way are the hackey mams voting?
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
+2
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

via sda:

Countless polls that unmarried women consistently support Barack Obama much more than they do Mitt Romney. An obvious question is: Why?


Beats me! Intelligence, class?
 
petros
+1
#18
Would you **** Romney?

How many guys on here drool over the hackey mam even though she is dumb as a stump?
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+2
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Which way are the hackey mams voting?

I heard they are voting for a quick settlement and a 70 game season!
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Would you **** Romney?

How many guys on here drool over the hackey mam even though she is dumb as a stump?

Not in the literal sense!
 
petros
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Not in the literal sense!

Thank goodness!
 
damngrumpy
No Party Affiliation
+2
#22
Has it occurred to some people the reason they are voting for Obama is because he is
about middle America and programs like medicare, the Republicans are about Wall
Street and the money.
I suddenly realized the women who are Feminists are to blame I was right the first time
these are Republican talking points and nothing more. Oh one other note, you are right
the Republicans don't have much to offer.
 
petros
+5
#23
Sadly, neither have much to offer.
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+3
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Sadly, neither have much to offer.

They have lots to offer....lots of debt that our great-great grandchildren will have to try to pay off.
 
Praxius
Free Thinker
+3 / -1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

via sda:

Countless polls that unmarried women consistently support Barack Obama much more than they do Mitt Romney. An obvious question is: Why?

There's an obvious answer to that obvious question.... Republicans would love nothing more than to strip them of whatever rights they finally got after centuries in a male dominated world, and to force their Christian beliefs upon them in such areas as abortion, among many other areas.

I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't eventually try to strip them of their right to vote or even work and just toss them back into the kitchen where they think they belong, in between popping out those babies "God Planned" for them.

Quote:

The NY Times' conservative columnist, Ross Douthat, goes into great detail to provide a pseudo-psychological explanation that these women - even though they endlessly profess to be independent feminists - are really nothing more than hapless princesses who view Obama as their rescuing knight in shining armour.

Rescued from what?

Rape-Supporting Republicans?

Yeah, I'd kind of think of him like that too.

(Hey, two can play this extreme argument game)

Quote:

... tomorrow’s feminists may look back on his campaign’s pitch to women and see a different theme emerge: a weirdly paternalistic form of social liberalism, in which women are forever single girls and the president is their father, lover, fiancé and paladin all rolled into one. ... the idea of Obama as a kind of knight protector for America’s Julias and Lenas and Sandras, waging a lonely counteroffensive in the war on women, has basically become the White House’s concluding pitch not only to his base, but to female undecided voters as well.


President Obama in Shining Armor - NYTimes.com

Oh well that convinced me... if I lived in the US, I'd automatically jump to voting for Republicans just based on the above logical conclusions..... that's so profound.

.... Moving on....
 
Locutus
+1
#26
Don't go away mad.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpy View Post

Has it occurred to some people the reason they are voting for Obama is because he is
about middle America and programs like medicare, the Republicans are about Wall Street and the money.

Who's gonna pay for it?

Lemme guess, tax the evil and wealthy corps more heavily, right?

... And you wonder why these companies move to China.

Sheesh
 
Colpy
Conservative
#28
Lena Dunham: Your First Time PARODY - YouTube
 
petros
#29
****ing Mormosexuals and women's rights? You're kidding right?
 
PoliticalNick
Free Thinker
+2
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morgan View Post

Who's gonna pay for it?

Lemme guess, tax the evil and wealthy corps more heavily, right?

... And you wonder why these companies move to China.

Sheesh

You have a problem with universal healthcare for all people?

The govt has more than enough money to pay for medicare and education (including free tuition to state & community colleges) but they choose to spend on other things like illegal wars and the military industrial complex or giving it to all their buddies on wall st.