Looking back at history, the cuckization of men started when we decided to give women the right to vote. Men's rights have been slowly eroded over the course of the last century, and the perfect structure of men being the head of the household was slowly eliminated.
Just seems like it was a profoundly bad idea to give women right to vote, since they're driven by sparks and tingles instead of pragmatism/rationality.
Women can't even be trusted with a mobile phone/internet access these days, and I will forever doubt what made our predecessors support the universal suffrage movement.
Silly_birb_returns 11mo ago
I will tell you a joke, the women's right to vote is unconstitutional because the president Woodrow Wilson in 1918 was already sick and his incapacity was only made public in 1920, so the one ruling as a president in 1918-1921 was his wife. Women got their right to vote in 1919 ... not a coincidence...
So technically it would be unconstitutional since Wilson's wife was not voted into the position of president of the US or vice-president. But nobody will tell you the truth.
_Imperator_Augustus_ 1y ago
It was the worst mistake of the last century.
NeoSpartan 1y ago
Obviously not.
Women are widely known for their exceptional decision making abilities.
Problematic_Browser 1 1y ago
Low information voters come in all genders.
The solution isn't to limit who can vote, the solution is to educate the electorate and offer them better choices.
Remember, to someone, you are the kind of person that "shouldn't be allowed to vote".
Intrepid_Place53900 1 1y ago
Yes, they vote with their feelings, not logic.
got to say, in today's environment , men are not much better.
Vermillion-Rx Admin 1y ago
Yes.
Einsamer 1y ago
Yeah, it definitely was. I'd say, women can start voting once they actually do put their lifes on the line like men have to do during war etc (so..... never). Authority must come with responsibility. Until then, it would be best to have only a specific group of men vote, but this is too hard to do and too easy to manipulate, so just allowing all men to vote is a decent solution.
Fact is, men in the western world made their cultures superior through technology (weapons) and organization. This allowed the current situation to happen. However, now that women vote and have political influence, the society gets weak and can't defend itself against attacks (war) and also uncontrolled immigration anymore. Therefore, the culture will be taken over and eventually change into one that controls women. It's just a matter of decades.
Classical example of "strong men make easy times, easy times make weak men, weak men make hard times, hard times make strong men"
mattyanon Admin 1y ago
The fundamental problem is that men are more protective towards women than the reverse.
This leads to ever increased women's rights......... women complain and men listen........ men complain and noone cares.
I don't know what the solution is, but not giving 50% of the adult population the vote is not it.
Einsamer 1y ago
Let me ask a question: if there would be an average intelligent and non-corrupted, integer, fair person deciding who should vote and who shouldn't, would that not be better? This person would kick anyone out who is definitely less intelligent than they are.
The problem is, such a person does not exist and can never exist. However, I would argue that women are on average (not in every case) less suited to vote than men, due to their inherent strong in-group bias and their lack of testosterone (which makes people more fair). They are too emotional and easy to influence.
For the same reason we don't let kids vote, even though some minors might be more competent at voting than women.
mattyanon Admin 1y ago
This sort of thinking always leads directly to a dictatorship.
True. But not giving them the vote can't be the answer either.
No vote for stupid people sounds great...... but in practice it doesn't work and leads to even bigger abuses of power.
MrSupreme 1y ago
Men are equally enthralled by charismatic politicians, it's all in the feels wether it comes from women or men, they only care about that vote and support. Politics is shit and democracy is a joke.
First-light 1 1y ago
Yes it was a mistake. Women tend to be loyal first to themselves, then to their children. Women are known for making impulsive emotional judgements and they will do unpleasant stuff return for what they want -from blowing men to get favours or money to voting for nonsensical lefty parties so they can get extra rights above and beyond men, every time they elect a new lefty.
Democracy doesn't really work when the candidate just sells part of his electorate out to buy the votes of a louder more selfish part. One could argue it works very well like that but only to keep an elite in a job. It does not serve the interests of the people as a whole to do what they left is doing and has done.
Our forefathers who gave women the vote did so without realising it would remodel society and break the family, rendering women a fraction as valuable as they once were, while giving them overall les life satisfaction.
nicknack 1y ago
It was also a mistake to let men under 25 vote, and people who don’t own property.
Einsamer 1y ago
Actually, that depends. You are right for the men nowadays. But a few 100 years ago, men of age 16 were mentally ready to vote similar to nowadays men of age 25.
Typo-MAGAshiv Endorsed Contributor 1y ago
Yes.
[deleted] 1y ago
[--removed--]
whytehorse2021 1y ago
No. It's a fundamental element of the US constitution that there shall be no taxation without representation. The governed have a right to have a say in how they're goverened. Where we fucked up is we allowed a tyranny of the majority wherein women are the majority of voters. An easy solution would be a male/female caucus that must agree before a law can be passed.
lurkerhasarisen 1 1y ago
There was a famous study in New Zealand a few years ago that showed that the average woman was a massive net drain on the public treasury, while the average man was a net contributor (unless he lived well beyond the average life expectancy).
So while women pay taxes just like men do, they contribute less in taxes than they consume in public services… and it’s not even close. For men it’s the other way around. I’m not sure that it’s fair to consider such people to be in the same “taxpayer” category as people (men, basically) who pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits.
Granted, the study was from NZ, but I can’t imagine that other western nations are much different.
Also, women don’t have military obligations like men do. Even in countries with universal service, men do jobs that are difficult / dangerous.
I fail to see why anyone who has no skin in the game in the form of blood or treasure should have a say in selecting the government that has the power to declare war and levy taxes.
whytehorse2021 1y ago
I think it depends on how you break things down. My neighbors have 6 kids in public school. The wife doesn't work. She doesn't pay taxes. The two single guys across the street have no kids, they work and pay taxes.
Wintergreen Didn't Read Sidebar (confirmed) 1y ago
Yes, it was a bad idea. Women don’t seem to really have any convictions at all. I knew a girl who was raised catholic and said she’d raise her kids catholic but always bitched about confession. She said she believed in God but was “more spiritual”. One time we were asking each other questions from some website and I added one of my own, “Do you believe in Heaven?”, and she said it’s not like what Christians believe where you’re reunited with your family. She said she believes in Nirvana or something, but couldn’t even name one fucking song of theirs.