/b/ has shown me that there are a surprising amount of sissys/trannies with a fetish for political BDSM of "strong conservative man pounds lib holes."
And that's just the ones with the self awareness and lack of shame to admit to it, which means its probably magnitudes more common and unannounced or unnoticed.
So this entire Orange Man Bad thing could be sexual fetishes manifesting.
It's not completely off. Fundamentally, I suspect it has to do with insecure man-children who don't have strong father figures and are effectively fetishizing an emotional disconnect, are sexually abused children actually attempting to re-enact some kind of abuse as a form of normalcy bias in their own sexual development, or are older women who have no authoritative male partner in their lives and are grasping at violence/authoritarianism/tyranny as a substitute.
That last part is particularly a problem because the political swings of women between women who are married and women who are unmarried tend to swing wildly to the right when married, then back to the left when unmarried, and that trend continues regardless of the number of marriages.
That last part is particularly a problem because the political swings of women between women who are married and women who are unmarried tend to swing wildly to the right when married, then back to the left when unmarried
Thats because women dont make their own political decisions and always differ to authority, if there is a conservative male figure in the home (father / husband) women will swing Right... when living alone women default to seeing Feminism their authority and so swing Left
I think you're being too reductionist. They don't defer to authority, they are looking for a provider. Notice, I didn't say "when the husband was conservative". It was "married at all".
When women are married, man = provider. This necessitates strong masculine values and policies that would promote an individual man's success. Which aligns with many conservative, or even libertarian values. When the woman is unmarried, provider = state/society. This necessitates a strong governmental protection racket which preferentially treats women generally, in the hopes that some specific women (the women voters) will benefit.
/b/ has shown me that there are a surprising amount of sissys/trannies with a fetish for political BDSM of "strong conservative man pounds lib holes."
And that's just the ones with the self awareness and lack of shame to admit to it, which means its probably magnitudes more common and unannounced or unnoticed.
So this entire Orange Man Bad thing could be sexual fetishes manifesting.
It's not completely off. Fundamentally, I suspect it has to do with insecure man-children who don't have strong father figures and are effectively fetishizing an emotional disconnect, are sexually abused children actually attempting to re-enact some kind of abuse as a form of normalcy bias in their own sexual development, or are older women who have no authoritative male partner in their lives and are grasping at violence/authoritarianism/tyranny as a substitute.
That last part is particularly a problem because the political swings of women between women who are married and women who are unmarried tend to swing wildly to the right when married, then back to the left when unmarried, and that trend continues regardless of the number of marriages.
Thats because women dont make their own political decisions and always differ to authority, if there is a conservative male figure in the home (father / husband) women will swing Right... when living alone women default to seeing Feminism their authority and so swing Left
I think you're being too reductionist. They don't defer to authority, they are looking for a provider. Notice, I didn't say "when the husband was conservative". It was "married at all".
When women are married, man = provider. This necessitates strong masculine values and policies that would promote an individual man's success. Which aligns with many conservative, or even libertarian values. When the woman is unmarried, provider = state/society. This necessitates a strong governmental protection racket which preferentially treats women generally, in the hopes that some specific women (the women voters) will benefit.
So women are pieces of shit politically got it.