Marriage is one of the single largest factors in determining whether a woman is left or right. The statistic I saw once was:
Unmarried women: Staunch Left
Married women: Moderate Right
Divorced women: Moderate Left
2nd Marriage women: Lean Right
2nd Divorced women: Lean Left
3rd Married women: Right of Center
3rd Divorce women: Lean Left
4th Married women: Right of Center
I'm going to try and explain this in as short and simple a manner as I can:
This is the result of the state using hypergamy and dependency systems as a way of destroying the family, and fundamentally emasculating men. Women need men to protect and provide for them. When they are with a man, they can influence him, and they support governance that reinforces his ability to be a provider and protector (never full-throat libertarian independent, because that actually conflicts with the average woman's sensibility towards care). When they don't have a man, they turn to the state to take his place as protector and provider; and the state is only happy to provide.
The state (indeed all authoritarians) seek to cuck men of their women as a way of securing their own power and status. If the population of men under the rule of the authoritarian are independent, stoic, and self-providing; their utility for women is vastly more accessible outside the hypergamic harem of the authoritarian. Emasculating men keeps women coming back to the government, and women who feel vulnerable without a man seek the government's protection as a supplement.
Yeah, that does mean that the solution is marrying them. Don't think of it as 'chaining yourself down' or 'being captain save-a-hoe'. Think of it as "Taming The Shrew".
I think the politics of what is left and what is right have changed.
Am woman, and my politics have changed little since I first voted in 1972. I am anti-war, pro independence, pro human, pro individual civil liberties, pro hard work and the pursuit of happiness. I am staunch believer in the Golden Rule first and foremost, Do No Harm.
I was a lefty, but now I'm a rightey and my principles have changed very little over that time. It's the landscape around me that has altered.
Yeah, I’m somewhat similar (though male, and much younger).
My views on things haven’t necessarily changed. It’s just that the Overton window has shifted so much that, well, apparently maintaining those same beliefs makes me a “right wing bigot”…
Specifically believing that race-based reparations are unfair, that place names should remain in English, that drag queens should not read to children in public libraries, that there are only two genders, and that “personal pronouns” make you look like a fool…
None of this shit was particularly mainstream a decade/15 years ago. I didn’t support it then, and I certainly don’t now.
Yet all of my woke “friends”, naturally, pretend they do, and that they always have, for that matter…
It is rather odd how these "pronoun" things became an overnight success story along with having multiple fake genders.
In the four years between my high school and college graduation, it feels like the people and culture I knew disappeared and just got replaced by skinwalkers.
I think it comes down to a large section of the population not actually being people or even really sentient. They're just animals reacting to stimuli rather than actually possessing any capacity for cognition. They got bombarded by social media stimuli pushing all this weird shit and reacted to it accordingly. They never had any thoughts or positions of their own to begin with, no reasoned stances or conclusions that they had arrived at by thinking about things.
I don't disagree, but I think that what they've changed to is the result of what is happening here. Do No Harm is actually a good example of what I'm talking about.
That harm prioritization is much stronger in women than it is in men (on average), especially when men are prepared to self-harm in order to gain status as a result of thier focus on agency.
The Left focuses on harm reduction, sometimes exclusively to women, as the single most important aspect of all human life. Now, this doesn't mean that they actually do reduce harm; but the story they spin is almost entirely built around X is harm, thus X must be eliminated.
Good, strong, men can't appeal to harm reduction without a loss of status by being out-competed. So while men drift more rightward, women drift more leftward. I think this is why were seeing such extreme gender differences in politics. Particularly one study that said 45% of black men in 2019 said Trump was doing a good job, while only 2% of black women said that he was doing a good job. In black communities, they are dealing with a horrific spate of cultural Leftism, dependencies, and the collapse of marriage and family units. Men can't be independent of the state, get good paying jobs, and have upward socio-economic mobility that increases their status. Meanwhile black women are looking at them as nothing more than a hot commodity to pamper them.
The political right is giving men agency (thus giving them women protection through men), while the political left is giving women protection through the state.
I'm the one who posted this thread, I think women are screwing themselves by denying men the honor they deserve, and then turning to government to bail themselves out of their own muck.
I just wanted to highlight how someone who has remained steadfast to core beliefs was shifted from the left to the right just by changing political definitions. I didn't change much, the goalposts moved.
I can see the argument, but I don't think so. The key there is that the trend of being a married woman keeps shifting right no matter how many times they get married. A woman on her fourth marriage isn't exactly a good Mormon school girl.
You're thinking that politics is a representation of principle, and thus informs a persons decisions. I think you've got that backwards for the sweeping majority of people. Politics is a back-rationalization of people's current opinions and conditions.
Partly disagree. I think you're mostly right because young women are biologically more important than basically anyone else in continuing a species or society. However, it's too far to say that no one else enters the picture. Her direct family and friends largely do. She's still mostly at the top of that safety pyramid (potential exceptions for her children), but it's still a pyramid, not a point.
Imma just repost what I already wrote:
Marriage is one of the single largest factors in determining whether a woman is left or right. The statistic I saw once was:
I'm going to try and explain this in as short and simple a manner as I can:
This is the result of the state using hypergamy and dependency systems as a way of destroying the family, and fundamentally emasculating men. Women need men to protect and provide for them. When they are with a man, they can influence him, and they support governance that reinforces his ability to be a provider and protector (never full-throat libertarian independent, because that actually conflicts with the average woman's sensibility towards care). When they don't have a man, they turn to the state to take his place as protector and provider; and the state is only happy to provide.
The state (indeed all authoritarians) seek to cuck men of their women as a way of securing their own power and status. If the population of men under the rule of the authoritarian are independent, stoic, and self-providing; their utility for women is vastly more accessible outside the hypergamic harem of the authoritarian. Emasculating men keeps women coming back to the government, and women who feel vulnerable without a man seek the government's protection as a supplement.
Yeah, that does mean that the solution is marrying them. Don't think of it as 'chaining yourself down' or 'being captain save-a-hoe'. Think of it as "Taming The Shrew".
I think the politics of what is left and what is right have changed.
Am woman, and my politics have changed little since I first voted in 1972. I am anti-war, pro independence, pro human, pro individual civil liberties, pro hard work and the pursuit of happiness. I am staunch believer in the Golden Rule first and foremost, Do No Harm.
I was a lefty, but now I'm a rightey and my principles have changed very little over that time. It's the landscape around me that has altered.
Yeah, I’m somewhat similar (though male, and much younger).
My views on things haven’t necessarily changed. It’s just that the Overton window has shifted so much that, well, apparently maintaining those same beliefs makes me a “right wing bigot”…
Specifically believing that race-based reparations are unfair, that place names should remain in English, that drag queens should not read to children in public libraries, that there are only two genders, and that “personal pronouns” make you look like a fool…
None of this shit was particularly mainstream a decade/15 years ago. I didn’t support it then, and I certainly don’t now.
Yet all of my woke “friends”, naturally, pretend they do, and that they always have, for that matter…
It’s rather sad.
It is rather odd how these "pronoun" things became an overnight success story along with having multiple fake genders.
In the four years between my high school and college graduation, it feels like the people and culture I knew disappeared and just got replaced by skinwalkers.
I think it comes down to a large section of the population not actually being people or even really sentient. They're just animals reacting to stimuli rather than actually possessing any capacity for cognition. They got bombarded by social media stimuli pushing all this weird shit and reacted to it accordingly. They never had any thoughts or positions of their own to begin with, no reasoned stances or conclusions that they had arrived at by thinking about things.
I don't disagree, but I think that what they've changed to is the result of what is happening here. Do No Harm is actually a good example of what I'm talking about.
That harm prioritization is much stronger in women than it is in men (on average), especially when men are prepared to self-harm in order to gain status as a result of thier focus on agency.
The Left focuses on harm reduction, sometimes exclusively to women, as the single most important aspect of all human life. Now, this doesn't mean that they actually do reduce harm; but the story they spin is almost entirely built around X is harm, thus X must be eliminated.
Good, strong, men can't appeal to harm reduction without a loss of status by being out-competed. So while men drift more rightward, women drift more leftward. I think this is why were seeing such extreme gender differences in politics. Particularly one study that said 45% of black men in 2019 said Trump was doing a good job, while only 2% of black women said that he was doing a good job. In black communities, they are dealing with a horrific spate of cultural Leftism, dependencies, and the collapse of marriage and family units. Men can't be independent of the state, get good paying jobs, and have upward socio-economic mobility that increases their status. Meanwhile black women are looking at them as nothing more than a hot commodity to pamper them.
The political right is giving men agency (thus giving them women protection through men), while the political left is giving women protection through the state.
I'm the one who posted this thread, I think women are screwing themselves by denying men the honor they deserve, and then turning to government to bail themselves out of their own muck.
I just wanted to highlight how someone who has remained steadfast to core beliefs was shifted from the left to the right just by changing political definitions. I didn't change much, the goalposts moved.
Wet streets also cause rain.
You have reversed cause and effect. A right leaning woman is more likely to become and stay married, not marriage makes a woman right leaning.
I can see the argument, but I don't think so. The key there is that the trend of being a married woman keeps shifting right no matter how many times they get married. A woman on her fourth marriage isn't exactly a good Mormon school girl.
You're thinking that politics is a representation of principle, and thus informs a persons decisions. I think you've got that backwards for the sweeping majority of people. Politics is a back-rationalization of people's current opinions and conditions.
A woman's primary motivation is her own safety. Freedom, her own or someone else's, doesn't enter the picture.
Partly disagree. I think you're mostly right because young women are biologically more important than basically anyone else in continuing a species or society. However, it's too far to say that no one else enters the picture. Her direct family and friends largely do. She's still mostly at the top of that safety pyramid (potential exceptions for her children), but it's still a pyramid, not a point.