What Attracts Some Women to Conservatism?

Nov 2018
5,447
2,893
Rocky Mountains
It is about all women. You're suggesting that women - all women - should not be conservative; according to your way of thinking, there's something wrong with women, and it applies to all women, if any of them don't yield to your political persuasion. It's this condescending, air of superiority, "I'm doing this to help you, woman. Don't you want me to help you, you helpless woman? What's wrong with you, woman? Get back in your place, woman!" mentality that makes it male chauvinistism. You're essentially speaking down to women - all women - in a "don't be conservative, or else!" tone.
Firstly, I am not asserting or even suggesting that ALL women act, or should act, in certain ways; I am asking why "some" women act in certain ways.
Secondly, it is a general principle that people act in their perceived best self-interests, in whatever way that interest might be configured. I am asking about the thought process of certain women who do not seem to be acting in their own interest.
Thirdly, if you have some information that Republicans act in the interest of women as opposed to maintaining traditional obstacles and discrimination, present it. Otherwise, the Democratic-progressive-liberals generally own the issue of women's rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Nov 2018
5,447
2,893
Rocky Mountains
They're not analogies - the title doesn't say "why some women do not support conservatism".
....because I am not concerned with "why some women do not support conservatism" I am asking why some women do support conservatism.
The comparisons offered are correct, but if too complex for you, consider changing the syntax to your liking.
As, for example, "why do some African-Americans support eliminating Affirmative Action".

Are you suffering from such conservative guilt that you cannot discuss any issues without categorizing them as racist or sexist or ageist or homophobic?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Nov 2017
2,161
1,004
.
Firstly, I am not asserting or even suggesting that ALL women act, or should act, in certain ways; I am asking why "some" women act in certain ways.
You may have been trying to half-ass conceal such an assertion/suggestion with the use of the word "some" in the title, but your statements reveal it. Even in your "secondly" statement below, you're revealing your way of thinking, in that if women - and this applies to all women, not (just) some women - don't support your political policies, then they (all women, not just some women) are going against their own interests. Otherwise, you'd be expressing it in such a way to indicate that only some conservative women, not all conservative women, are acting against their own interest.

I'm only going based off of what you've actually written, not what you think you've been writing.

If you wrote one thing and meant to say something else, fine; if it's your intention to assert that there are some conservative women who are not acting against their interests, then assert it, or answer the following question: are there at least some women who are acting in their own interest, by being conservative? Yes, or no?

If your answer is yes, then you have been articulating your position very poorly.

If the answer is no, then you're conceding that it is about all women.

Secondly, it is a general principle that people act in their perceived best self-interests, in whatever way that interest might be configured. I am asking about the thought process of certain women who do not seem to be acting in their own interest.
Have you approached women (or at least conservative women) and asked them directly, why they hold their political positions, rather than just starting a thread on an online forum for speculation as though women (specifically, conservative women) can't speak for themselves? Spectators at a zoo speculate about why some animals display certain behavior traits; women aren't like animals in a zoo.

You seem to have this impression that conservative women do not act in their own interest; is it up to you, or each woman as an individual (as well as a woman), to decide what to do to act in their own interest? If it's up to them, then either you wouldn't be asking such a question, or (to be neutral) you'd be asking the exact same question about all other women who aren't conservative.

By singling out conservative women, and not being neutral, how's that any different from portraying conservative women as the ones who are misbehaving & needing to be disciplined, while the others aren't misbehaving & don't need to be disciplined? It's as though you think women need to be conditioned, or trained like dogs.

Thirdly, if you have some information that Republicans act in the interest of women as opposed to maintaining traditional obstacles and discrimination, present it. Otherwise, the Democratic-progressive-liberals generally own the issue of women's rights.
To me, the words "progressive" & "liberal" don't go with Democratic; the words "regressive" and "authoritarian" suit it better.

To you, the Democrats generally own the issue of women's right; to everyone else, it's probably not true. I'm "presenting" this because you told me to; I'm presenting this because this is a forum called Defending The Truth and that's what I'm interested - the Republicans supported womens' suffrage and the Democrats opposed it; see: Suffrage - Women in the GOP
 
  • Like
Reactions: BondJmsBond
Nov 2018
5,447
2,893
Rocky Mountains
You may have been trying to half-ass conceal such an assertion/suggestion with the use of the word "some" in the title, but your statements reveal it. Even in your "secondly" statement below, you're revealing your way of thinking, in that if women - and this applies to all women, not (just) some women - don't support your political policies, then they (all women, not just some women) are going against their own interests. Otherwise, you'd be expressing it in such a way to indicate that only some conservative women, not all conservative women, are acting against their own interest.

I'm only going based off of what you've actually written, not what you think you've been writing.

If you wrote one thing and meant to say something else, fine; if it's your intention to assert that there are some conservative women who are not acting against their interests, then assert it, or answer the following question: are there at least some women who are acting in their own interest, by being conservative? Yes, or no?

If your answer is yes, then you have been articulating your position very poorly.

If the answer is no, then you're conceding that it is about all women.


Have you approached women (or at least conservative women) and asked them directly, why they hold their political positions, rather than just starting a thread on an online forum for speculation as though women (specifically, conservative women) can't speak for themselves? Spectators at a zoo speculate about why some animals display certain behavior traits; women aren't like animals in a zoo.

You seem to have this impression that conservative women do not act in their own interest; is it up to you, or each woman as an individual (as well as a woman), to decide what to do to act in their own interest? If it's up to them, then either you wouldn't be asking such a question, or (to be neutral) you'd be asking the exact same question about all other women who aren't conservative.

By singling out conservative women, and not being neutral, how's that any different from portraying conservative women as the ones who are misbehaving & needing to be disciplined, while the others aren't misbehaving & don't need to be disciplined? It's as though you think women need to be conditioned, or trained like dogs.


To me, the words "progressive" & "liberal" don't go with Democratic; the words "regressive" and "authoritarian" suit it better.

To you, the Democrats generally own the issue of women's right; to everyone else, it's probably not true. I'm "presenting" this because you told me to; I'm presenting this because this is a forum called Defending The Truth and that's what I'm interested - the Republicans supported womens' suffrage and the Democrats opposed it; see: Suffrage - Women in the GOP
There is really no way to discuss the alternative reality that you seem to want to fabricate. Think what you will, because, as most conservatives you have fixed and unquestioned dogma that seems to drive your opinion.

I have assumed that women are as capable of variable, original and unique opinions about social issues. I am only inquiring about the thought process that leads some women to seemingly inexplicable opinions that do not promote reduction of discrimination, penalize sexist policies, or advance women's access to healthcare.

Perhaps you think differently and believe that somehow Republican-conservative-reactionary ideology promotes concern for women's rights in all areas including wage parity, professional education, employment, or access to reproduction services. I have raised this challenge repeatedly here but no one has demonstrated how conservative thinking promotes women's rights and diminishes prejudice or discrimination. I will go so far as to suggest that EVERY political effort to advance the rights of women are underwritten by Democrats. But, prove me wrong....if you can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Nov 2017
2,161
1,004
.
....because I am not concerned with "why some women do not support conservatism"
You're answering a question I didn't ask.

I am asking why some women do support conservatism.
The comparisons offered are correct, but if too complex for you, consider changing the syntax to your liking.
As, for example, "why do some African-Americans support eliminating Affirmative Action".
They're not analogies to the title.

Are you suffering from such conservative guilt that you cannot discuss any issues without categorizing them as racist or sexist or ageist or homophobic?
I'm a libertarian, not a conservative, so I don't have such a thing as "conservative guilt." There are some Republican or conservative positions that I oppose, just like there are some authoritarian & regressive or Democrat positions that I oppose.
 
Dec 2016
5,815
2,941
Canada
This is too far from the OP and your post contains too many unsubstantiated and counter-intuitive claims. Hunter-gather cultures require transient and temporary settlements, depend upon difficult to control external factors (fluctuations of the populations of game), and, even now, demonstrate many examples of gender-based distribution of work. So your claim that historically human populations where somehow more egalitarian just seems unlikely.
Is it any further from the OP than some of your posts .....#49? Or does it contain any more unsubstantiated claims than you toss out based purely on your own conjecture.

There are divergent theories on human evolution and behavior, and I have my side in the debate, which has been going on since the science of modern anthropology began with the writings of Lewis Henry Morgan almost two centuries ago. Social sciences may be open to conjecture, which we can see here with theorizing about "What Attracts Some Women to Conservatism." And I don't see a whole lot of effort made by anyone to offer much more than just personal opinions. Your OP about why Megyn Kelly is a rightwinger and would deny climate change and check all the boxes as a Republican, could easily be explained by where she landed in her career choices, and what would make the most money for her. Nothing complicated about that! But, what about most people? How long will all the people of all races, ethnicities and genders keep allowing powerful economic and media forces to brainwash them and keep them voting against their own economic interests, instead of being strung along by a variety of powerful interests who need support for their particular agendas....like weapons and warfare? How is it in the interests of conservative women to support deficit spending to support foreign wars any more than it's in the interests of liberal Democrats, who also don't likely have representatives who will take on the costs of empire?
 
Nov 2017
2,161
1,004
.
There is really no way to discuss the alternative reality that you seem to want to fabricate.
Maybe it's because there is no alternative reality that I'm trying to fabricate.

Think what you will, because, as most conservatives you have fixed and unquestioned dogma that seems to drive your opinion.
You're the one with an alternative reality & opinion; you've conjured up this false notion that I'm a conservative. Guess what, in case you can't seem to figure it out from my previous post, I'm not a conservative.

I have assumed that women are as capable of variable, original and unique opinions about social issues. I am only inquiring about the thought process that leads some women to seemingly inexplicable opinions that do not promote reduction of discrimination, penalize sexist policies, or advance women's access to healthcare.
If you really wanted to learn what's actually going on, then you'd speak directly with conservative women; when are you going to speak directly with conservative women to inquire?

Perhaps you think differently and believe that somehow Republican-conservative-reactionary ideology promotes concern for women's rights in all areas including wage parity, professional education, employment, or access to reproduction services.
Only libertarian ideology promotes real concern for women's along with everyone else's rights.

I have raised this challenge repeatedly here but no one has demonstrated how conservative thinking promotes women's rights and diminishes prejudice or discrimination. I will go so far as to suggest that EVERY political effort to advance the rights of women are underwritten by Democrats. But, prove me wrong....if you can.
I already did prove you wrong.
 
Nov 2018
5,447
2,893
Rocky Mountains
Maybe it's because there is no alternative reality that I'm trying to fabricate.


You're the one with an alternative reality & opinion; you've conjured up this false notion that I'm a conservative. Guess what, in case you can't seem to figure it out from my previous post, I'm not a conservative.


If you really wanted to learn what's actually going on, then you'd speak directly with conservative women; when are you going to speak directly with conservative women to inquire?


Only libertarian ideology promotes real concern for women's along with everyone else's rights.


I already did prove you wrong.
Ah... the libertarian fantasy that essentially promotes a form of nihilism for personal benefit that is really just conservatism infused with a generous helping of cupidity and anti-government anarchism.

You have only really demonstrated an inability to read a post and a tendency to trigger when you think that someone has challenged your sacred dogma and erroneous opinions. Alternatively, perhaps you like to avoid the difficult discussions by labeling everything as a form of prejudice.
I am tired of your silly posts as it is a waste of time dealing with entrenched bias that clouds a discussion rather than illuminating it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007
Dec 2015
18,541
17,817
Arizona
Ah... the libertarian fantasy that essentially promotes a form of nihilism for personal benefit that is really just conservatism infused with a generous helping of cupidity and anti-government anarchism.

You have only really demonstrated an inability to read a post and a tendency to trigger when you think that someone has challenged your sacred dogma and erroneous opinions. Alternatively, perhaps you like to avoid the difficult discussions by labeling everything as a form of prejudice.
I am tired of your silly posts as it is a waste of time dealing with entrenched bias that clouds a discussion rather than illuminating it.
Biff, here it is--right here--the BEAUTY of the regressive party:
You're the one with an alternative reality & opinion;
It is YOU: you've conjured up this false notion that I'm a conservative.
Guess what, in case you can't seem to figure it out from my previous post, I'm not a conservative.
(Neil's not a conservative, Biff) but I bet you knew what would come next--"I'm a Libertarian."

Libertarians--There are a LOT of those critters running around, aren't there? They're kinda like unicorns or unicorn governance--fabulous, mythical, a little bit of heaven. Dreams. Ideals. People are basically good, law-abiding. It's the government that screws things up.
Liberals are the liars, the rapists, the shooters, the pedophiles, the drug dealers, the racists, the misogynists.
No matter what we call the RW, we hear the same delightful PeeWee Herman slogan: I know you are but what am I?

AND why do "THEY" just throw it back? They throw it back because they aren't original enough to come up with anything new and creative. They can't govern. They can't legislate. They can't control the person in the White House. They can't move forward on anything so how in the world could they explain WHAT they really are? Just plain backward.

p.s. Most of the time Conservatives (possibly Libertarians) don't even have a sense of humor. They don't get satire or irony. Probably because they only think as hard as they have to. But I love it when they surprise me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Biff