A highly rated contribution to the comments section for "Afghan Women Erased From Public Life in Five Years of Taliban Rule/Decrees restricting the rights of women and girls to study, work, travel and act independently now threaten to damage Afghanistan permanently, experts say" (NYT gift link).
August 14, 2026
"This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants for women in the US. Except maybe instead of burqas..."
"... they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked. And it's actually worse when I think about their plans for society as a whole with illiteracy, poisoned food, toxic 'health' care, etc. Separation of religion and state must happen to even attempt a free society. This is why this concept exists."
Posts
207 comments:
1 – 200 of 207 Newer› Newest»In their fevered, wet dreams, yeah that’s the plan. FFS.
These assholes can’t be real.
…if these women really cared about women instead of just voting Democrat the top rated comment should be ‘the Biden administration abandoned all women in Afghanistan. It’s actually worse when I think about their plans for society as a whole’…
""This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants for women in the US. Except maybe instead of burqas..."
"... they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked. And it's actually worse when I think about their plans for society as a whole with illiteracy, poisoned food, toxic 'health' care, etc. "
It amazes me that people actually believe this shit. How does that happen?
How does one become that delusional but still manage a day to day existence?
White left females are consumed with delusion.
They read a stupid book by Margret Atwood - and they think it's real. It's not real. What deluded idiocy.. insanity.
The reaction by white leftist females is to celebrate and murder their own children in the womb. These freaks are so consumed with hate and delusion - they take it out on their own children. Insane.
White left leaders giddily sign legislation to make Abortion hyper-legal - up until the day of birth. These freaks are OK with infanticide.
Is this the White fem-left's way of skipping past their gender confusion religion and child abuse?
Actually - The Islamic Lobby is in bed with the corrupt American and EU left.
They are hand in hand with their destruction.
Pride and igorance aggressively protect themselves. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
"... they want us in milk maid dresses, … and naked.”
Just think of the mental gymnastics that it took to write this sentence.
They've got to want to believe it. It must fill some inner need.
Breaking news! Most NYT comments are written by imbeciles. Film at 11.
These Hamas-huggers are blind to the fact that they would be forced into wearing full covering burquas -and forced obedience to Islamic male domination over them.
In the words of Islamic males everywhere - "there would be no homosexuals"
If you read the NYT on a regular basis - this is how stupid you become.
Heavy dresses AND naked?
I don't know what's worse--that today's Times reader is functionally illiterate or that left partisans think they can just make anything up and it's true if it fits their preferred narrative.
No wonder nobody can talk to these people.
I went to high school with a guy who became a Lutheran minister in Wisconsin later in life. My friend sends me the stuff the Rev posts on his Facebook page, just like this.
These people have no grasp on reality. None.
The woman who wrote that is the same type of person who issued yesterday's WNBA non-statement.
Unable to make a decision
Refuses to be accountable
Demands unearned respect
Despises you for noticing
Look at videos of Afghans in the 70s, then look at the YouTube of Brzezinski at the Khyber Pass in 1979 encouraging the jihadis to go in and take back their country, with arms, training, and money provided by us. Then read Brzezinski’s interview with the Nouvelle Observateur, where he explains why he did it, to provoke a Soviet invasion and give them “a Viet Nam.”
You can say a lot of things about the communist government in Afghanistan, but they treated women as equals of men, it’s communist orthodoxy.
How embarrassing.
The reality of a retro-Christian USA theocracy would perhaps resemble "Jesus Camp" (2006). Still, that's a huge stretch from old USA religious culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Camp
they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked
It must suck to be so stupid as to write or "like" that sentence.
"Naked milk maid dresses", could be a great punk rock band
"How can I make this about me?!?!"
We are the ones who release radical Islam on the world by refusing to let Islamic countries live in peace, due to their oil wealth. Google Project Ajax, where we overthrew the democratic government of Iran in 1953 to take control of their oil. A lot of secular Iranians look at the Islamic movement as what it took to get rid of the Shah, who ruled with brutality, torture, his secret police, SAVAK.
serious question...
does the Heritage Foundation RAPE female prisoners before executing them (so that they don't go to heaven or such)?
for that matter; does the Heritage Foundation execute MANY prisoners, at ALL?
Nuff said indeed.
Amazingly insane.
"A highly rated contribution".... uh huh.. sure. Rated by whom?
When will the 'project my behavior on my enemies' line be eclipsed by the 'cognitive dissonance' line? Their thinking hasn't had much coherency for quite some time, but I think it's getting worse.
milk maid dresses,... and naked
Am I the only one confused here?
Seems like one excludes the other.
Or am I missing something?
John Henry
No one’s home at the NYT, apparently. The crazies are out and about there.
Jaq - you sound like a garden variety leftist. "But you made us mad!... we get to harm you!"
Many Islamic nations want to live in peace Jaq. Most of them are sick of Iran's bullshit.
Jaq was born stupid and has gone downhill ever since:
" where we overthrew the democratic government of Iran in 1953 to take control of their oil. "
John Henry
This woman is begging to be ravished while wearing her milk maid costume, can’t somebody out there help her.
"... they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked.”
If it’s all the same to the AWFLs, I’d rather not see them naked. [Shuddering].
“ They've got to want to believe it. It must fill some inner need.
”
There is a reason they support unlimited illegal immigration.
Hamas slaughters Palestinians.
Iran's leaders kill their own people.
they want us in milk maid dresses, … and naked
Now imagine USSC Justices in BlackRobes and Naked
We're all born naked. The rest is drag. - RuPaul. CC, JSM
This is terrible news. Surely something must be done. Feminists must assemble as quickly as possible and book one way tickets to Kabul asap. The Taliban shan't prevail when faced with the fierceness of a undergrad sorority-clad tongue lashing! Wonderwomen of the world unite! Get 'em girls!
Oh...they're planning to be keyboard warriors attacking American dudes on Reddit? Nevermind, I guess.
"This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants" Just a version of whataboutism. But it is striking that the left cannot honestly confront Islamic oppression. Of course, there are reasons. Ideologically, as illustrated on this very thread, defending Islam can be used to beat up on the West. Politically, the left is counting on Muslims to help consolidate power, happening all over Europe and now in NYC and Michigan.
These days, it’s hard to tell real comments from bot-generated ones.
But if this is a real comment with genuine likes, it echoes Joe Rogan’s point that you are not your beliefs. People can invest so much of themselves in a set of beliefs that those beliefs become their identity. Then they resort to increasingly convoluted “pretzel logic” to defend that identity rather than reconsider the belief.
Why assume commenter is AWFL?
Could be wearing burqua and naked
They're naked UNDER the milk-maid dresses. Like Rita Rudner.
For Pete's sake set the fetish porn down and stop pretending it is about any kind of Christians.
You can tell the Heritage Foundation to pound sand. Not so the Taliban.
The milkmaid dresses could be sheer. Hmm…that’s actually an intriguing idea, now that I think of it. Not for everyone, though.
"Why assume commenter is AWFL?"
Maybe not even a woman. For some odd reason dudes in dresses love love love them some islam.
Easy to be trans in a burqa.
Th Heritage Foundation comes up with a lot of valid and common sense suggestions. (yes - mere suggestions - oh no!) Which of course scare the crap out of the corrupt left. (oh no!)
Sometimes they miss the mark.
IE: HF suggested banning porn. Now I like that idea in terms of the damage porn does - similar to gambling, and at home gaming. but proclaiming a BAN on it - is foolish because it's like telling drug addicts they all must go cold turkey. Scary and unpopular and infringement on freedom - and it dilutes what is usually a solid list of sound positive ideas.
If this NYT comment is “highly rated,” it illustrates that Times readers have crossed the lines between “stupid” and/or “ignorant” into “delusional”. For those of us still in contact with Democrats this is not a surprise. Part of the delusion, apparently, is that the Islamists in America with whom Democrats consort differ from those in Afghanistan.
When society rewards victims with status, people get jealous and compete to be be better victims. "Afghan women oppressed? That's nothing. Look at how poorly off I am."
dudes in dresses love love love them some islam...
Does Islamic fuck require facial or frontal identification?
The highlighted comment from "Millennial" did get a little pushback -
"@Millennial It is in fact very, very different, and trivializing the issue by forcing a false, hypothetical parallel helps no one. Collapsing every form of misogynistic oppression into one interchangeable phenomenon makes it much harder to confront any of them seriously."
Current score is 755 to 306 with Millennial in the lead.
There are some moronic comments at the NYT--each and every day.
This sounds like a typical Redditard.
New Michigan poll exposes all:
White:
🔴 Mike Rogers: 56% (+14)
🔵 Abdul El-Sayed: 42%
Non-White:
🔵 Abdul El-Sayed: 70% (+42)
🔴 Mike Rogers: 28%
Men:
🔴 Mike Rogers: 55% (+11)
🔵 Abdul El-Sayed: 44%
Women:
🔵 Abdul El-Sayed: 49% (+1)
🔴 Mike Rogers: 48%
White women, college degree:
🔵 El-Sayed: 60% (+23)
🔴 Rogers: 37%
Source: Fox News, 8/6-10
Life may be hard but those are some darn good-looking onions.
I saw those poll results this AM too, MikeD and think tgey explain this comment perfectly
SNL 2015
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/2088133335235141705/video/1?s=46
"Does Islamic fuck require facial or frontal identification?"
The goats cannot be reached for comment, but if they could, they'd say it's baaaaaaad.
"Collapsing every form of misogynistic oppression into one interchangeable phenomenon makes it much harder to confront any of them seriously."
Love this. It reveals the underlying priority is still tilting at windmills, not acknowledging they're premises are categorically wrong.
“We are the ones who release radical Islam on the world by refusing to let Islamic countries live in peace, due to their oil wealth. Google Project Ajax, where we overthrew the democratic government of Iran in 1953”
So, 73 years ago? Imagine my guilt….
If the Taliban and the IRGC prevail, the women in their respective countries will suffer. On the plus side, such a victory can be construed as a defeat for the patriarchs of this country. It's a steep price to pay, but the feminists here are willing to pay it........I can't recall any feminist group here showing any kind of support for our continued presence in Afghanistan or expressing hope that Trump over the IRGC.......Happy wife, happy life. The Taliban have succeeded in making the lives of thei women there miserable. The bet herer is that the women will find some way of reprisal. They will all have miserable lives. Perhaps they can find comfort in their religion.
They are on to us. Who leaked "Project 2029?"
Imagine if we had overthrown Chavez. It would have been worse than the overthrow of Alllende. Poor Venezuela would have collapsed into poverty and squalor and many of its most productive citizens would have had to migrate elsewhere. Thank God it didn't happen.........
A lot of activism basically comes down to being mad at parents or other authority figures. Baby boomers are as a generation often extremely angry at the religious and social aspects of society--and this kind of anger also continues in areas of the country that maintained social-religious homogeneity. It's not logic or free-thinking, it is a kind of juvenile lashing out at people who they can't directly confront anymore. Often they have good reasons for being angry but lack the emotional depth to not transfer their anger to broadly similar others. So everyone who has a hint of Christian conservative gets the brunt of their anger at their mean aunt or abusive sunday school teacher or the guy who yelled at them for dancing.
"How does one become that delusional but still manage a day to day existence?"
Maybe the antipsychotics work better without the alcohol.
Reality does not support the comment. Subject commenter is either monumentally ignorant (uninformed), monumentally stupid, or monumentally evil - or some portion of each.
Jaq (9:55am):
"You can say a lot of things about the communist government in Afghanistan, but they treated women as equals of men, it’s communist orthodoxy."
This is utterly, shamefully, contemptibly false. Here are the pertinent paragraphs from Wikipedia on the Saur revolution, the first quoted from Robert D. Kaplan's, 'Soldiers of God' (Taraki was the communist coup leader):
" The soldiers' knock on the door in the middle of the night, so common in many Arab and African countries, was little known in Afghanistan, where a central government simply lacked the power to enforce its will outside of Kabul. Taraki's coup changed all that. Between April 1978 and the Soviet invasion of December 1979, Afghan communists executed 27,000 political prisoners at the sprawling Pul-i-Charki prison six miles east of Kabul. Many of the victims were village mullahs and headmen who were obstructing the modernization and secularization of the intensely religious Afghan countryside. By Western standards, this was a salutary idea in the abstract. But it was carried out in such a violent way that it alarmed even the Soviets.
"Kaplan stated that it was the Saur Revolution and its harsh land reform program, rather than the December 1979 Soviet invasion 'as most people in the West suppose', that 'ignited' the mujahideen revolt against the Kabul authorities and prompted the refugee exodus to Pakistan. According to scholar Gilles Dorronsoro, it was the violence of the state rather than its reforms that caused the uprisings. The communists violently imposed PDPA policies across the villages of Afghanistan, perpetrating mass rapes of Afghan women, killing religious clerics and village chiefs, looting houses, stealing food supplies and torturing captives."
There's plenty more in the heavily-footnoted Wikipedia article. Note that 27,000 in a year and a half is at least ten times more than the Shah killed in his decades on the throne.
Messages from Bizarro World.
"It is, of course, all the fault of Trump. And the Mormons. And the Heritage Foundation. And those blonde chicks we don't like. Which is why life for women in the US is exactly like life for women in Afghanistan, with some cosmetic changes like the ability to publicly criticize the president in the NYT, wear thongs or whatever the hell you want in public, etc. Otherwise just like Afghanistan."
P.S. The 27,000 murdered in a year and three-quarters (I shouldn't have written a year and a half) were only those killed in the central prison in Kabul. Thousands more were murdered in the towns and countryside. And jaq is a Russian propagandist repeating anti-American talking points - almost as if he's being paid.
Wait, do they want us naked or in milkmaid dresses? Regardless, I would still rather wear a milkmaid dress than a burka. Milkmaid dresses are adorable. I've yet to hear any red-blooded American demand that women wear a specific outfit though.
Someday in the hopefully distant future, American prosperity and its empire will collapse. They all do, either from a combination of follies or more rarely from one big one. If there's anything left of objective analysis remaining once it's over those future analysts will gaze in amazement at a startling cultural dichotomy unprecedented in human history - That the wealthiest, most prosperous, most liberated and most opportunity-showered women in human history could have been so hateful, offended, spoiled and militant towards the society and culture that made them that way.
The ingratitude and malice of the educated white American female is appalling, and half makes me and lots of other dudes hope for a future where they're forced to wear hijabs, get beaten without repercussions and scolded by their sister wives.
Inshallah, they'll have it coming.
"So everyone who has a hint of Christian conservative gets the brunt of their anger at their mean aunt or abusive sunday school teacher or the guy who yelled at them for dancing."
I have been alive and living in these United States for 50 years. There are probably some people like that who may exist or may have existed at some point in such people's lives. A very tiny and uninfluential number. None in my case.
The idea that any significant number of people in this country have been seriously "oppressed" by Christian conservatives is frankly absurd. In this country you are mostly free to do whatever the hell you want. It may offend your parents and possibly jeopardize your inheritance, or maybe your job if you are obnoxious about doing whatever the hell you want, but you have the right not to do what the "Christian conservatives" tell you to do. It is called "freedom." Stop bitching and do what you want. You live in the freest, most liberal place in the history of the world.
I don't know how I wrote 50 years. 67 years it is.
Can these insane leftist females point to a single real life example of their imagined milk maid grievance?
AGAIN; True story:
After Trump won in 2016 - my good friend who runs her own small biz and has 2 employees (both females) one of the females burst thru the door crying (after Trump won) shouting that Trump was going to round up and kill all the gays. Yes really. Round up and kill all the gays.
(no hyperbole or exaggeration)
I guess he hasn't gotten around to that yet.
"they want us in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and naked."
I'm pretty sure you can't be simultaneously naked and in a milk maid dress at the same time, unless you happen to be inside of Erwin Schrödinger.'s box--which seems like a real edge case.
ALSO - this same female - deluded female I speak of above - she says she is terrified she will be arrested by ICE.
She is a legal US citizen.
This is what NPR and BS NOW and NYT do to the white left females brain.
I wonder how many degrees this woma...hmmm, whatever has?
There's a lot of variety in what gets sold as milkmaid dresses. Anything from sundresses to Regency gowns. The dresses seem to have more to do with romance novels and women's fantasies than with men's. Plastic surgery and "hideous heavy make-up" likewise may have more do with what women do to themselves than what men do to them. The Heritage Foundation does not want to put you into handmaid's costumes. That's another thing women do to themselves.
Entirely possible this comment was made by a paid shit-stirrer or a 17 year old. Either way, is it really worth all this?
Reusable, Available, Affordable, and Taxable (RAAT) under the religious left. Take a knee ladies and ladies-adjacent. Throw another baby on the barbie, maybe.
Are we talking about mango larvae face?
https://www.virginiafacialplasticsurgery.com/blog/the-mar-a-lago-face
NYeT brays a handmade tale? Afghan life, liberty, and the pursuit of 😊 was aborted with Democratic antics in indefinite incursions. No simulants required.
Somehow the USA went from women not voting and supposedly being "oppressed" to 2026 world of NYT's feminism. And we did it without a foreign army invading the USA and imposing their values on us.
Afghanistan can do the same thing. If they want. Maybe the Afghan women want to obey the religious rules of Islam. Or maybe enough of them don't and will nag their husbands into changing it. Its their country - their rules.
Afghan feminine gendered take a knee at Massa Brown... Taliban's Willie. Or are Taliban trans?
These drama queens ought to be dropped off in Peshawar for a year or two to find out for themselves just how foolish they sound.
The handmade tale was conceived by leftists, birthed by feminists, and transformed by homos in political congruence.
Women were actually given the vote, not because they were demanding it, but because the establishment thought women would support the status quo and they could play "Divide and Conquer" with middle and working class.
20 years before the 19th admendment, states like Utah Washington, and Wyoming gave the women the right to vote. It was supposed to encourage women "back east" to move out west. It didn't work. Women wanted to stay in their comfortable prisons then be free and fierce out west.
Is any other guy thinking of women wearing teenie, weenie, yellow polkadot bikinis? And the Roman empire, of course. 👌
ALP said, "Entirely possible this comment was made by a paid shit-stirrer or a 17 year old. Either way, is it really worth all this?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not the comments it's the upvotes, and even if so NYTers can't help themselves, they're consumed by irrational hate.
***
future analysts will gaze in amazement at a startling cultural dichotomy unprecedented in human history - That the wealthiest, most prosperous, most liberated and most opportunity-showered women in human history could have been so hateful, offended, spoiled and militant towards the society and culture that made them that way.
***
This bears repeating. My opinion of women and their judgment and their emotional stability has plummeted in the past decade. I'm not at the point of some of the black-pill folks who want to revoke the 19th Amendment, but I am astonished and disgusted at the disagreeable, ungrateful, in fact viciously hateful attitude of the most pampered women who have ever existed on the planet.
They seem not to realize that every single comfort and liberty they enjoy was provided and maintained for them by the efforts of men. If men as a group decided to prevent women from voting or driving or leaving the house without a burka, that's it! Boom, it would be done.
Her comment was intended to draw negative attention away from the community she likes, radical Islam, and place it on the group she despises, conservatives. The “likes” she’s receiving are just like minded leftists who want to help her achieve her goal.
Those forward-looking religious western men were ahead of the social curve with women, not in equitable, equivocal, but equal and complementary inclusion.
@RCO, When this country dies, it’s headstone might read:
Under this spot lies the USA
There’s really nothing more to say
It died in battle and resentment
Killed by the 19th Amendment
***
They read a stupid book by Margret Atwood - and they think it's real. It's not real.
***
But it IS real. In most of the Muslim world.
Atwood sheepishly admitted as much when asked what she based the book on.
This is the way you guys are going to win and save America by railing against the 19th amendment. You don’t want to save America, you want to play that fucking victim card as well.
The RAATs are waking from their woke state of mind, and rejecting the blue pill. The sims in their spaces, faces helped to mitigate progress in la la land. Excess criminal consensus, too.
Some day in the not too distant future, somebody’s gonna have a field day writing the story of our times. Some call it madness, but it’s just us.
Boo hoo, there’s nothing we can do.
You morons, Trump got 45% of the women’s vote in 2024. But sure fight a battle you know you can’t win so you can cry victimhood like every other fucking moron.
Damnit, they got us all figured out. Underneath my wife's milkmaid dress she's naked.
2 things I find
2 things I find idiotic and inexplicable in otherwise extremely capably and intelligent people:
1. Men complaining about the 29th amendment.
2. Jews complaining against Christianity.
Completely nutty behavior by otherwise fantastic people.
Vote with your fetus... uh, feet.
ha ha 19th amendment
"and half makes me and lots of other dudes hope for a future where they're forced to wear hijabs, get beaten without repercussions and scolded by their sister wives."
Forced? They seem to be agitating in favor of those things.
In Atwood's defense, when she wrote the book she probably didn't think the West would import the muslim patriarchy instead of creating a christian version.
Okay, which is it - in milkmaid dresses or naked? You can't have it both ways!
"there’s nothing we can do."
It's short-sighted to think men noticing won't turn into men doing something. We might be already, based on the hysterical reaction of the 55% of bints who didnt vote for Trump.
They're spray painting WWII monuments...we're definitely over the target.
When you get your worldview from a Hulu TV show, you end up sounding like a moron. Atwood's book was good and had its place, but they've turned it into a religious document. It is their religion. And they do want to make their beliefs a mandate of the State.
And if they don't get their way, they'll simply eliminate the Senate, expand the Supreme Court, and add more representatives from Blue territories and major urban centers.
I've tried to not see this everywhere I look, but white progressive women truly are the disease degrading Western Civilization. In every facet of our lives. And I cannot believe we've allowed this to get so out of hand. Such is the level of our politeness that we smiled at them even as we knew they were destroying our schools, our institutions, our kids minds.
There are productive arguments and stupid moronic arguments. But the fight is real.
And arguing the 19th amendment, for the sake if clarity, is a stupid moronic one.
First, as to the subject of the post: 🙄 Oh, please.
Second, as to the comments herein: neither my present husband of 34 years not my previous husband of 2 years actually liked me to wear makeup. The first guy called it "pagan face paint." The permanent guy says when I wear lipstick he thinks I don't look like myself. Both would have been fine with either milkmaid dress or no dress at all, at my option, but neither has ever pronounced on what I should or shouldn't wear*.
* Ok, technically the permanent guy did, early in our relationship, gingerly wade into those waters by telling me that a shirt I loved would look better on a friend of ours, a woman almost ten years older than we, six inches shorter and ten pounds or so heavier than I, with two children and an affinity for the Grateful Dead. I was seriously affronted, sulked for a while... and eventually had to admit he was right, and gave our friend the shirt.
“white progressive women truly are the disease degrading Western Civilization”
I hate to break it to you but they are all being funded by men in China and men in all the Arab countries that fund our universities.
natatomic said...
“ I've yet to hear any red-blooded American demand that women wear a specific outfit though.”
I did ask my wife to wear a French Maid outfit one time.
I read The Handmaid's Tale when I was young and dumb, and still I didn't think it was "good." The contrivance of it pulled me right out of the story. It was like reading Ayn Rand: the writer had an axe to grind and tried to do so via narrative, but it was so heavy-handed that, for me, it failed as a novel (although some of Rand's actual ideas have stayed with me and afforded me many a night of pondering, whereas what Atwood had to say was simultaneously glaringly obvious about the fundamentalist Muslim world and utterly irrelevant to the Christian one).
I haven't watched one minute of the TV show - what's the point? It's like watching the Starship Troopers* movie: the message is lost because the screenwriter and/or director decided, in one case, to do satire, and in the other, to do breathless bigoted futurecasting.
* Heinlein: another writer with (always) an axe to grind, but who wrote a much more engaging story even though sometimes (ok, often, especially in his later work) he took to lecturin'.
We aren't in this fix because of women voting. It hasn't helped but its not the key factor.
*"This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants for women in the US. Except maybe instead of burqas..."*
Good grief. Talk about messed in the head.
Live in fear, you fools. You deserve it.
The dumbest voting admentment gave 18 y/o's the vote. It should be 21 unless you're in the military. Nixon supported it, because the thought he win the youth vote. Which just shows how stupid Nixon was. He also thought he'd get the black vote if he pushed affirmative action. Nixon was amazed when he only got 30 percent of the black vote in 1960.
Nixon had supported the '57 civil rights bill, sending troops to little rock, etc. LBJ had voted segregationist until the late 50s, and JFK was wishy washy on the whole issue.
People used to talk about what a political genius Nixon was. In fact, he was only a genius at Republican Politics. In general elections he usually got lucky because the D's were so bad.
BTW, the greatest young figure who went to University campuses and argued facts with young men and women and changed the way young men AND thought about issues, that guy was unalived by a man.
young men AND women
Eva Marie at 2:50 p.m.
True enough, but that doesn't change the fact that AWFULs are their current attack vector.
Modern feminism wants men in milk maid dresses, heavy hideous makeup, plastic surgery and neutered, and they don't care if such men push women aside. It's suicidal stupidity.
Temujin nails it (yet again) at 2:43 p.m.
*This is the way you guys are going to win and save America by railing against the 19th amendment. You don’t want to save America, you want to play that fucking victim card as well.*
Instead of yelling at us, maybe you should take a look at WHY some people want to repeal the 19th. Starting with the subject of this thread.
“True enough, but that doesn't change the fact that AWFULs are their current attack vector.”
I agree. Look, women are people too. There’s a lucrative job writing bullshit academic papers attacking America, attacking men, women are greedy too and they’ll fulfill the assignment. And they’ll convince themselves they’re speaking truth to power. So these things need to be fought. But blathering on about the 19th amendment isn’t the way to do it.
Driving a wedge between men and women is the best way to weaken and destroy us.
“Instead of yelling at us, maybe you should take a look at WHY some people want to repeal the 19th. Starting with the subject of this thread.”
Here’s some more yelling: GET MORE MEN TO VOTE.
Men vote at lower rates than women. They need to be encouraged to vote. You’re a man - is the best way to encourage them to vote - to tell them all is lost because of the 18th amendment?
lol 19th amendment.
"I hate to break it to you but they are all being funded by men in China and men in all the Arab countries that fund our universities."
Yes, women are more susceptible to propaganda. That is proven science.
You keep lulzing about the 19th amendment Eva as though this is somehow a grand secret project of the white American male electorate. It's not. As someone said earlier American men are "too polite". That's not happening.
We will just sit back and watch though. Female voters are in control of their own destiny. And as the linked returns in Michigan suggest, they're completely at liberty to choose the form of their destructor.
Put a different way, if the majority of the female electorate keeps behaving the way they are, *the 19th Amendment will end*, it just might not be American white boys named Donald, Tim, and Sean that do it....Abdulrahman Mohammed El-Sayed's quite the mouthful when women are pleading with the destructor they chose to stop hitting them.
"White women, no college degree: Rogers 60 el Sayed 38
White women, college degree: Rogers 37 el Sayed 60"
I don't think it's women, per se, that are the problem.
""This is no different from what the Heritage Foundation wants for women in the US. Except maybe instead of burqas..."
Why it's right there in the Heritage Foundation's Charter: "We believe in the importance for America's moral foundation of keeping a strong pimp hand with the bitches, in keeping with the vision outlined by the Founding Fathers."
RSM: Encourage men to vote. Not as dramatic as railing against women but much more effective. But it’s too much fun playing the victim snd muttering, “Just wait and see what happens if you get your way!” under your breath.
Eva said:
"This is the way you guys are going to win and save America by railing against the 19th amendment. You don’t want to save America, you want to play that fucking victim card as well."
I know. and it plays right into the left's hands, too.
Perhaps we should ban certain idiot man-bois with bad ideas from voting.
NYT tells the truth about Islam (for once).
NYT readers, "This is no different from Christianity!"
Not enough middle aged men + understand civics.
O yeah, you’ll also be able to say, “We told you so.” Famous last words of losers everywhere.
We should be wary of wallowing in Diversity dogma. Women are not a bloc act. Neither are men. That said, diversity of individuals, minority of one. Principles matter.
NYT tries to wake up feminist world to the dangers of Islamic patriarchy.
NYT readers, "The Milk Maid costume is inside in the house! It's in my closet, as a matter of fact."
Now I'm thinking about dancing. A gay divorce, Ginger Rogers, and the Continental.
I don't know if Porn Hub has a Milk Maid costume category, but they ought to, amirite?
"I don't know if Porn Hub has a Milk Maid costume category, but they ought to, amirite?"
Of course they do.
Rule 34.
For this past primary these are the only statistics available for Michigan:
Early/absentee voters (partial data): As of July 30, 2026 (before Election Day), an L2 Data analysis of roughly 950,000 early or absentee ballots showed approximately 56.4% female and 43.5% male.
But those numbers probably hold for all ballots.
Encourage men to vote.
Eva, it might be unthinkable, but men - simple lunkheads that we are - can in fact do more than one thing at the same time.
“We will just sit back and watch though. Female voters are in control of their own destiny. And as the linked returns in Michigan suggest, they're completely at liberty to choose the form of their destructor.”
Here’s an idea: Howabout going to the polls and voting.
No, we are manly men and we will sit at home and huff and puff and play the victim, but we won’t go and vote.
Hegelian: "Why it's right there in the Heritage Foundation's Charter: "We believe in the importance for America's moral foundation of keeping a strong pimp hand with the bitches, in keeping with the vision outlined by the Founding Fathers.""
A party that dared to put that in its manifesto would get all the male votes and at least a quarter of the women's. The more AWFLs who scream about it on MSCOW, the more female votes they'd get. CC, JSM
Okay, the Roaring 20's happened right after women got the right to vote.
1920 Harding
1924 Coolidge
1928 Hoover
Meanwhile, when men were voting by ourselves, we put that fucker Woodrow Wilson in office, twice. And he took us into World War 1, blew up the Constitution, and the free speech clause, expanded racial segregation to D.C., invented the administrative state, and jailed political opponents.
Only men voting: Woodrow Wilson, plus we made alcohol illegal (18th amendment).
Men and women voting: Party time, flappers, Republicans rocking, roaring 20's baby.
Noticing isn't huffing and puffing, which is what many more than just me are doing. Why does it upset you so much? It clearly does. The noticing isn't going to stop. The men we're getting out to vote need to be informed about what's happening, and "it" is happening a lot.
Stay mad.
The one major theocracy in United states history.... gave women the vote 20 years before the rest of the country did. In fact, the US took away the rights of women to vote in Utah after they had that right.
So the whole leftist women screeching about Christian theocracy blah blah is totally off base with history and reality.
It”s not the noticing that upsets me. I agree that there is a real problem with especially well educated women and how they vote and their belief systems in general. But, these are really important issues that need persuasive arguments. So I don’t think playing the victim is persuasive or helpful.
Hassayamper: "If men as a group decided to prevent women from voting or driving or leaving the house without a burka, that's it! Boom, it would be done."
This gets said a lot. I think I quoted some podcaster on this a few months ago. While trying to look it up, it appears the first person to say it was Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
But as I thought about it some more, the reason this instant repeal doesn't happen is because womens' rights are defended by one group of men against the other men. Mostly male uniparty leaders, who see the advantage to them and theirs of making working class women compete with working class men.
Kind of like how minority rights were established by powerful white men, or immigrant rights established by powerful American citizen leaders.
My point? In all of these clashes - men v womyn, black v white, immigrants vs citizens - the real enemy is not the person on the other side of the 'v.' It's someone who benefits by setting that person against you. Figure out who that someone is and how they benefit, and attack that. CC, JSM
Vance, who was telling those Utah women how to vote? Were they running for office? Active in civil society? I'm kind of thinking that was a situation like we see with some other formerly-polygamous denominations in, say, Finsbury Park. CC, JSM
Also, you nitwits realize that if we strip women of the right to vote, we're literally following Afghanistan's example? Way to import Islamic jihad, numbnuts.
Women were given the tight to vote in Utah do they would vite against polygamy. They didn’t. So then the right to vote was taken away from them. Then when Utah became a state, women got the vote again.
so they would vote
My arguments are clearly persuasive. The people I know in real life say so. If the sardonic manner in which I point things out comes off as whining, then that's not a "me" problem. I use sarcasm, cynicism and sardonism to mock, take pleasure from, and reveal individual human and collective defects. I do this because showing blatant contradiction works, it's psychology 101, and it is well-known among experts of the English language and students of logic for making its targets furious.
I'm not sorry at all for mocking people who deserve to be mocked and satirizing those making themselves excellent subjects of satire. An unignorable cohort of American women are literally doing this every day, and I will continue to do mock an satirize them for doing the very real damage they're doing.
You may, of course, choose to ignore my comments and I'm happy to do the same, but I will not be tone-policed, thank you.
Whatever. The reason we are having a problem is not the 19th amendment but that men don’t vote. More women are registered to vote and then a greater percentage of women vote than men.
Also the cheating by Democrats.
There is evidence that suggest otherwise, as well as historical evidence within the depths of human history pre-dating the United States. The relationship of women to power is a very old topic, across multiple civilizations.
Always with respect, I disagree.
"The reason we are having a problem is not the 19th amendment but that men don’t vote."
Embrace the power of AND.
https://ilovehistory.utah.gov/1870-1896-womens-suffrage/
Women’s Suffrage: 1870-1896
Women in Utah were the first in the nation to exercise the right to vote. This happened in 1870–fifty years before the 19th Amendment secured voting rights for women.
The US Constitution before that... until 1868, when sex... gendered differences were introduced. Then again in 1920.
DemocRAATs
That kinda makes you like the women who reject facts and go with their feelings. The voting patterns are what they are. And even with more women voting the Democrats still need to resort to cheating.
No, no embracing the power of AND. Men need to vote in higher percentages than they are. Alienating a percentage of women with nonsense about the 19th amendment is the last thing conservatives need to do.
You can sense the moisture as she wrote that.
The reason the feds took away the right of Utah women to vote was that, contrary to all expectations, the women in Utah were eloquent and persuasive and did not do what the "elites" of the day expected them to do, which was to vote against the Church they belonged to. No, as a rule the women in Utah were not just biddable drones dutifully doing what their husbands wanted. Or doing what the Church told them to do, any more than the men did. Of course, Utah was voting Democrat back then. Probably because the Republican party had vowed to destroy Utah.... the whole "twin relics of barbarism" that included slavery also forced Utah into the Democrat ranks. And Utah was a Democrat state until about the 70s.
“Men are treated as the default form of humanity; women are treated as a category apart. That is why men’s bad acts are usually read as the acts of particular people, shaped by individual motives or ideologies, while women’s bad acts are so often read as evidence of something wrong with women as a sex. A man who commits violence prompts questions about violence, politics, extremism, or human nature. A woman who behaves badly prompts questions about women. Men are individuals; women are representatives.“
"Men vote at lower rates than women. They need to be encouraged to vote."
Not that that's a bad idea, but are you sure the message you're wanting to send is "Women need men to step up and fix what women are breaking"?
And I’m tired of it.
> all is lost because of the 18th...
You had me there for a moment LOL
Not that that's a bad idea, but are you sure the message you're wanting to send is "Women need men to step up and fix what women are breaking"?
Men need to vote in greater numbers. A huge percentage of women are conservative. I encourage them to vote. For whatever reason at this point in history a larger percentage of men are conservative. More of them should vote. I’m neither oro woman ir pro man. I am pro conservative because I think the conservative ideology helps both men and women.
I'm just pulling your chain, Eva. This isn't the first thread you've gone on this jihad. It's amusing.
"For whatever reason at this point in history a larger percentage of men are conservative."
We're smarter.
Most people shouldn't be voting. Married parents with 2 or more biological children, Honorably discharged/serving Veterans, people who write paychecks to employees.
Everyone else should shut the fuck up and find a way to contribute to the future of society.
Original Mike said...
"For whatever reason at this point in history a larger percentage of men are conservative."
We're smarter.
Snark aside it is biological.
Men compete to procreate by creating more wealth and attracting more mates.
Women are biologically limited in the number of offspring so high status females compete by limiting the procreation of low status women.
Voting patterns in the US and anywhere where there is universal suffrage voting patterns map directly to these biological imperatives.
The 5 stages of losing an argument:
1. Disbelief
2. Anger
3. More argument
4. Withdrawal
5. “I’m actually amused by this.”
I didn't know I was in an argument.
In fact, I'm sure I'm not.
Achilles, this is why I’m a conservative who believes in free markets. You can hold whatever personal beliefs you want. and I am free to earn a living according to my abilities and efforts, keep and spend my own money, and live my life the way I want to.
The best way to get men to vote is to add sexy thumbnail photos all through the ballot. If properly placed, men will read the entire thing, probably twice.
Eva Marie said...
The 5 stages of losing an argument:
1. Disbelief
2. Anger
3. More argument
4. Withdrawal
5. “I’m actually amused by this.”
LOL!
You are the best loser of arguments ever. Your complete inability to engage honestly just makes you a silly person on this subject. People aren't going to try to discuss anything with you on this until you grow up. They are just going to make jokes because you are way too emotional and silly.
Go read your posts on this thread. Actually read them. You are mean and rely on ad hominem and straw man fallacies.
Eva Marie said...
Achilles, this is why I’m a conservative who believes in free markets. You can hold whatever personal beliefs you want. and I am free to earn a living according to my abilities and efforts, keep and spend my own money, and live my life the way I want to.
Awesome. Good for you.
If you don't want to contribute to the future generations of society in a meaningful way you shouldn't vote. Selfish hedonistic people who are always thinking about themselves and their comfort shouldn't determine the future of the country.
So you’re at #5 with the LOL
Once voting depends on passing your test for “meaningful contribution,” it’s a permission granted by whoever has the power to define selfishness.
We all hear the arguments for why someone votes for one candidate or the other, and I'm sorry, but the reasons I hear from a lot of women are just senseless, trivial and non-serious. Men make plenty of bad choices too, but it seems to me it's more a matter of believing bad ideas or bad information, while women often vote for things like looks, personality (is he nice), or simply abortion, even when the person has no impact on abortion rights, they still choose based on their stance on the subject. It's more emotional, and thus easier played, and harder to change once felt.
it’s a permission slip
It’s not a democracy, it’s not a republic, and it’s not what the writers of the Constitution had in mind
Men have to take responsibility for Woodrow Wilson. Not us men here, but our granddads.
Eva Marie said...
Once voting depends on passing your test for “meaningful contribution,” it’s a permission granted by whoever has the power to define selfishness.
Yes.
All responsibilities between men and women are reciprocal except for 2. One that men have and one that women have.
Men who don't defend society and women who don't have children are selfish and should not be voting until they do.
Eva Marie said...
So you’re at #5 with the LOL
Your arguments are a joke. Get over it. You just cannot take responsibility for anything.
"Not us men here, but our granddads."
Even if they were in Scotland?
The only good thing Woodrow Wilson did was put that commie Eugene Debs in prison....
What do you want me to take responsibility for exactly?
It turns out it’s not the Jews’ fault, it’s mine.
Also, nine men wrote Roe v. Wade. It was not a woman's opinion. It was a man's opinion about pregnant women, and a "problem" that the unelected branch wanted to dictate a solution to. This would be a good example of "patriarchy," maybe, since it was an all-male opinion on a sexual topic. Except it's the opposite of patriarchy, since patriarchy is based on fatherhood. And Roe v. Wade is in a different universe from the good fathers that we all want and need.
It's an opinion about bad fathers, the ones who want to get rid of unwanted children. Okay? So while every Supreme Court opinion was written by nine men, up until Sandra Day O'Connor jointed the Court (1981), in Roe v. Wade, this dichotomy was particularly dangerous.
That feminists love this opinion is kind of insane. It did no favors to women.
The opinion actually said that there could be zero regulations on the abortion industry to protect the health of women in the first trimester. Think about that shit for a second.
The opinion actually said that first trimester abortions were to be "an abortion free of interference from the state."
So, let's suppose an abortion doctor was routinely killing women in his abortion clinic, because he was an unlicensed doctor, say. Or he didn't wash his hands. He had rats scurrying around in his illegal basement shop. Roe v. Wade apparently legalized all the "abortion mills" in all the places where abortion was illegal (most of the country).
"An abortion free of interference by the state."
The very first opinion the Supreme Court had to hear, two years after nine men wrote Roe v. Wade, was a tiny, embarrassing legal debacle called Connecticut v. Menillo
Across the USA, non-doctors were performing abortions on women, and many jurisdictions held they could not be punished. Because Roe v. Wade literally said "an abortion free of interference from the state."
The first woman on the Supreme Court, Sandra Day O'Connor, went after this part of Roe v. Wade with tooth and nail. Why? Because it held that women could not be protected by the state in an abortion clinic.
This was an insane, bigoted, anti-woman part of the opinion. Which a lot of feminists overlook, because they are in such a hurry to get rid of unwanted children.
Jack the Ripper killed five women. How many women died from the sloppiness of Roe v. Wade? I don't know. More than five, that's for sure.
More conservative men voting isn't going to solve the underlying problem as presented in this post:
There are millions of bat-shit crazy, left-wing women (AWFLs) who are dominating our culture with their insanity.
And for the record, I'm not in favor of repealing the 19th. If that were to happen, I would no longer have the opportunity to tell my wife she's doing it wrong.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.