It is my personal view, and not an MRA view, that far too many of both sexes are permitted to vote.

I see no reason to deny an intelligent and morally sound woman a say in the Governance of a nation while allowing some dull thuggish bloke such an opportunity.

Similarly I see no reason to let some thick and erratic woman with an overblown sense of entitlement and a life spent whining whilst living off the efforts of others have her voice trumpeted to all and sundry, whilest an intelligent man with a lifetime's achievement that has benefited far more than just his immediate family, should be considered as equivalent or lesser.

Quote from le jacquelope

Fox News contributor laments ‘mistake’ of letting women vote

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a Fox News contributor, tea party activist and personal friend of Sean Hannity’s said in a sermon recently published to YouTube that America’s greatest mistake was allowing women the right to vote, adding that back in “the good old days, men knew that women are crazy and they knew how to deal with them.”

His fallacy is that he makes a claim as though that was the mistake that broke society. There isn't just one big thing is causing the self destruction of humanity, there are many small things. Individually, they are so small that far to many overlook them, but combined form a starving colony of termites.

Quote from le jacquelope

In the video, published to YouTube in March, Peterson explains that he believes women simply can’t handle “anything,” and that in his experience, “You walk up to them with a issue, they freak out right away. They go nuts. They get mad. They get upset, just like that. They have no patience because it’s not in their nature. They don’t have love. They don’t have love.”

This is also prevelant in many a modern man.

Normally those preachers are misandric. Actually, if this man is saying women can't handle anything he's saying men should do everything, basically. I wonder what women tend to vote in favor of.

Added after 7 minutes:

Quote from le jacquelope

Everyone here knows I have had a lot to say about the hypocrisy that women show and the absolute coat hanger abortion that feminism is, but this guy, I feel, goes way beyond the limits of rational behavior.

I know of a man who stabbed his grandmother 20 times and her last words to him was "Son, I love you" and that was the only reason he decided not to kill the rest of his family as she died a bloody death in his arms. I'm not saying that this preacher isn't going too far but there are real life examples that come to my mind when I think of going way beyond the limits of rational behavior.

This man was wrong to do what he did even though women voting, while not necessarily America's greatest mistake, may have negative consequences today. It isn't so bad that women have a voice but what is bad is the voice that women have.

Quote from Popadibs

Normally those preachers are misandric. Actually, if this man is saying women can't handle anything he's saying men should do everything, basically. I wonder what women tend to vote in favor of.

I hadn't thought of that flipside. Well said!

Actually, even if women vote for bad things we have to compare it to what men vote for. Men may be just as damaging as women are in the voting booths. As if voting matters as much as they make it out to...

Quote from Popadibs

It isn't so bad that women have a voice but what is bad is the voice that women have.

That's a very, very important distinction.

Quote from Popadibs

Actually, even if women vote for bad things we have to compare it to what men vote for. Men may be just as damaging as women are in the voting booths.

What of the men who don't vote, period?

I finally watched the videos.

The statement that this is referring to was taken out of context. Yes, my opinion has changed somewhat on this. In his sermon, he is saying what he believes is true and giving logical evidence to back it up. In the news cast, he is responding with reason and decency while she just throws a hissy fit. Each of us may disagree with something he says, but do we not agree that he is putting the blame in the right direction and with the right weapons? Yes, he does go a bit overboard, however we should not degrade another man who is against feminism and is not misogynistic.

There were many women who fought against female suffrage. Most of them weren't against women having a voice or for the subjugation of women or any of that feminist-inspired claptrap view of history. If you read the contemporary literature and transcriptions of their speeches, you will find that most of the anti-suffrage movement foresaw the demise of family and society. Many were aware that women already were political by influencing their man and giving women the vote would mean that women had both the influence on men and the direct vote. They almost seem like seers.

Anyone saying that giving women the vote was a mistake would have had plenty of females in agreement a century ago.

Anti-suffragism - Wikipedia
ANTI-SUFFRAGE ASSOCIATION
Anti-Suffrage Society (England)
Anti-Suffrage Women Fought Against the Vote

Why did these women oppose getting the right to vote? From a NAOW circular called “Household Hints“:

• Because 90 percent of women either do not want it or do not care.
• Because it means competition instead of co-operation.
• Because 80 percent of the women eligible to vote are married and can only double or annul their husbands votes.
• Because in some States, more voting women than voting men will put the Government under petticoat rule.
• Because it is unwise to risk the good we already have for the evil which may occur.

If the vote changed anything the state would not have allowed it..

This is jes another liberal hack piece....

Just look at the tie-ins...

"Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a Fox News contributor, tea party activist and personal friend of Sean Hannity’s said..."

TMOTS

My initial thinking on such matters as female suffrage, was always that women should be able to vote, as that's fairness. It's not an idea I'm against, now.............however, former-AM-member 'Bob', a man of rather strong views, made the point that, as long as women had the vote, politicians would continue to suck up to them. I can't totally disagree with him on that one.....

The right for women to vote now seems as American as “All you can eat buffets” and “Wal Mart.”

Try suggesting to a typical God fearing, flag waving, Republican and Tea Party conservative, that giving the vote to women was a “Bad idea,” and watch him recoil in horror like a vampire looking at a cross.

To even think of such a notion is anathema and un American, after all, our brave troops are fighting the evil Muslims in the Middle East to protect our right to vote.

And yet, for most of America’s history the vast majority of men, and women, were opposed to women’s suffrage.

So, were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln all secret women haters ? Or might they have had another reason to oppose female suffrage?


The 19th Century Argument Against Suffrage.
Most of the arguments against female suffrage have now gone down the memory hole.

School children are now taught that suffrage was inevitable and the people who opposed suffrage in the prior generations were simply backwards and ignorant.

Because it is obviously axiomatic that female suffrage is a good thing. To even debate the subject would be crazy. As such, historical writings against suffrage are ignored and buried.

However, extracted from the depths of time is an essay written by a woman who was opposed to suffrage. This essay detailed the logical reasons why female suffrage would harm America.
Thoughts on Female Suffrage.
By Madeline Dahlgren, 1871.

“We acknowledge no inferiority to men. We claim to have no less ability to perform the duty God has imposed upon us, than they (Men) have to perform those imposed upon them.

We believe that God has wisely and well adapted each sex to the proper performance of the duties of each. We believe our trusts to be as important and sacred as any that exist.

It is our fathers, brothers, husbands and sons who represent us at the ballot box. Our fathers and husbands love us. Our sons are what we make them.

We are content that they represent us in the corn field, the battle -field and the ballot box, and we them in the school room, at the fireside, and at the cradle; believing our representation, even at the ballot box, to be thus more full and impartial that it could possibly be were all women allowed to vote.”


Notice that it was assumed that men and women have different biological natures and, as such, God has given men and women different responsibilities.


The notion that sex is just a social construct would have been considered to be absurd. Also notice the frequent references to religion. Prior to the Cultural Marxist revolution (Cultural Marxism abhors Christianity) Christian ideals were appealed to in an unapologetic manner.


The basic argument against female suffrage was that women were represented by their husbands, fathers and sons at the ballot box.


The essay further argues that as mothers raised their sons (this was before mothers warehoused their children in daycare to pursue their corporate careers) women actually fundamentally shaped the character of men, and hence, the direction of America. As such, women had a powerful voice and they were represented.


Later in the essay, Dahlgren predicted that female suffrage would create competition between men and women which would create an antagonism.


Instead of a family standing in unity, suffrage would divide the house. Such division would create discord into the family and weaken the marriage tie. Dahlgren predicted that divorce would become common if women were given the vote.


Dahlgren writes:
“We hold that the new status will prove to be the worst kind of communism. The relations between the sexes, so carefully guarded by religion and by parents, by law and by society, will become common and therefore corrupt.

The family, the foundation of the State, will disappear. The mothers, sisters and daughters of our glorious past will exist no more and the female gender will vanish into epicene.”

“Epicene” = The woman will cease to be different from the male, both sexes will become alike.


As a contemporary of Marx, Dahlgren correctly identified that the push for female suffrage was Marxist in origin.


Fifty years later the Cultural Marxists implicitly agreed with Dahlgren that the best way to destroy Western Civilization (aka Christendom) was to undermine the family.


And the seeds that were planted in the 19th amendment paved the way for the spawning of what would be known as “Feminism.”


The people opposed to female suffrage proved to be right beyond their wildest predictions. As Google was celebrating the 19th amendment, a British newspaper detailed the boasting of a 26 year old woman who claims to have had sex with 5,000 different men.


If Madeline Dahlgren were alive today, I am sure she would have understood the connection between female suffrage in the West and the decline of civilization.


Single mothers, rampant divorce, abortion and falling birth rates are part of the cancer that is destroying what is left of Western Civilization.


But very few people (Even conservatives) fail to realize that the inception of this cancer can be found in the passage of the 19th amendment.


Source: The Spearhead.

Quote from RobYork

By Madeline Dahlgren, 1871.

“We acknowledge no inferiority to men. We claim to have no less ability to perform the duty God has imposed upon us, than they (Men) have to perform those imposed upon them.

We believe that God has wisely and well adapted each sex to the proper performance of the duties of each. We believe our trusts to be as important and sacred as any that exist.

It is our fathers, brothers, husbands and sons who represent us at the ballot box. Our fathers and husbands love us. Our sons are what we make them.

We are content that they represent us in the corn field, the battle -field and the ballot box, and we them in the school room, at the fireside, and at the cradle; believing our representation, even at the ballot box, to be thus more full and impartial that it could possibly be were all women allowed to vote.”

[...]

The essay further argues that as mothers raised their sons (this was before mothers warehoused their children in daycare to pursue their corporate careers) women actually fundamentally shaped the character of men, and hence, the direction of America. As such, women had a powerful voice and they were represented.

If anyone has a chance, I suggest reading the full post. It is very good, and very informative.