Researching!

Started by lkanneg, Nov 28, 2005, 05:35 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

lkanneg

Quote from: "Dr Evil"
Well at least you are getting a little more specific about things.

The point Lisa is that the reason women were refused the vote was not because they were women but because of issues relating to class.  When the vote was "taken away" from women it was also "taken away" from blacks.  Now why do you think that politicaians would want to do that?  Duh.  What they were trying to do was to manipulate the voting to have only white males (people with money and property) to vote.  It was not some nefarious plot to screw the ladies to the wall.  There are many reports from New Jersey papers about how happy the states residents were to have women voting.  Here are a few comments

http://www.scc.rutgers.edu/njh/womens_suffrage/intro.php

Quote
The following quotes come from New Jersey Newspapers during the presidential election of Thomas Jefferson in 1800. Read how the newspaper positively address the topic of women voting.

Newton, NJ: May their patriotic conduct at the late elections add an irresistible zest to their charms.

Mendham, NJ: May their republican conduct be pleasing and exemplary to their sisters of the Union.

Hackensack, NJ: Rights of women. May they equally participate with men in the rights of men.

Liberty Corner, NJ: The fair daughters of America particularly those who stepped forward to show their patriotism in the cause of republicanism in the late election.

Westfield, NJ: May they stand unrivaled in their love of freedom and justice.

Bloomfield, NJ: The fair of New Jersey who gave their suffrage to the Republican candidate, may they receive for their reward peace and happiness


Now does that sound like a misogynist bunch of people who really want to take away women's rights?  I think that the fems are using a little tunnel vision on this one and you are standing in the tunnel.  It is true that women were disenfranchised but so were many men, blacks, poor, etc.  The overall thrust was not one of sexist pigs it was one of people trying to maintain their power by using their class advantage.


Sorry, Dr.E., but when you disenfranchise a bunch of people solely based upon their gender, the thrust is sexist.
quot;Remember no one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"Something which we think is impossible now is not impossible in another decade."
-- Constance Baker Motley

"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got."
--Janis Joplin

Factory

And all of this is moot and useless fodder for argument.

dr e

Factory, I think there is some relevance here since it shows how the feminist spin on history twists the reality into a web of sexism and misogyny when on a local level that seems to be far from the true picture.  Prior to coming here I would be willing to bet that Lisa didn't even know that men had to fight to get the vote for themselves.  She simply thought that all men could vote as of 1776.  This is how feminism works.  It tells half the story.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

lkanneg

Quote from: "Dr Evil"
I remembered another discussion where you had said you would check things out and get back.  I had asked you about this site:

http://members.tripod.com/feministhate/id35.htm

It describes what a hate movement is and shows how feminism fits into the description.  You had said you would look at it and get back to us and you never did.  I will be curious to hear what you have to say about it.

Thanks,

E


Dr. E, I did address that, in the thread "Question for lkanneg."
quot;Remember no one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"Something which we think is impossible now is not impossible in another decade."
-- Constance Baker Motley

"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got."
--Janis Joplin

Sir Percy

We have elevated Democracy in our time to a Religion. This arguement with all its factual interpretation simply shows that as things change they remain the same. Class, gender: rationales to prove a partisan point. Its the POWER and the MONEY stupids. Those in power - those with the wealth - actively prevent everyone else until it is in their interest to include some, be they men, women, blacks, recent furriners, wombats and horses. ( The number of horses you had in the middle ages helped your case!). What mattered then and now is the sheer wealth you had. What Feminists have done is elevate their particular rationale - drum beating - to a mendacious art. The labouring classes did the same. Universal franchise was a New Zealand experiment, quickly taken up by Australia and both well before the US or the UK or Canada. As for most other western countries - all johnny come latelies. Democracy and universal franchise is a 20th Century movement. Virtually all people were disenfranchised before the century's turn.
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

Galt

I think it's interesting from a historical point of view as to who could vote and who couldn't - but only from that point of view.  The problem - and that's pretty much the problem with all "feminist scholarship" - is that they want to use it as a victim club to shame men.

It's getting harder and harder for any feminists, at least in the United States, to find an appropriate "guilt club", so they are reaching into the past, and to other countries (that these mostly middle-class, sometimes leaching-off-a-man middle class, feminists apparently need today for the appropriate guilt stimulus) to get the appropriate reaction.

There has to be SOMETHING in the past that we can use as a club against men; those stupid men just say "OK" eventually to whatever we want, while they continue to work.  Now we're reaching the point where it's getting obvious that things are unfair, so we have to reach out to any possible source of guilt stimulus ("Oh my God, what if they realize what's going on ... they may engage in a marriage strike or even demand that their tax dollars go out proportionately to them ... that has to be prevented, but by subversive guilt tactics").

dr e

Lisa there was no response that I could find on the "question for lkanneg."  You tried to divert attention away from the topic by trying to shame the members here.  I mean, really, taking TB's beer squirting robot as an example of misogyny was just too funny!  lol  Problem is you never answered the question.  Here's what was asked repeatedly that you avoided:

Quote
Let's see if you can stick with the question lkanneg rather than trying shift the ground away. Come on and tell us how David is wrong. The six criteria are all involved in determining a hate group. Tell us how David is incorrect in his assessments of feminism. Prove him wrong. Let's hear it.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

dr e

Others are welcome to join in on this thread if you have an issue that lkanneg avoided and never answered.  You now have the opportunity to bring it back to her attention.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

lkanneg

Quote from: "Dr Evil"
Others are welcome to join in on this thread if you have an issue that lkanneg avoided and never answered.  You now have the opportunity to bring it back to her attention.


Do lkanneg a favor, though, and start numbering them.  I got up to 9 on my own; I'm going to call Dr. E's voting questions 10 and his hate movement questions 11.   Please start with 12 and go onward from there.  Otherwise I strongly suspect that we are just going to have a repeat of missing queries and issues.  This thread is already four pages long.
quot;Remember no one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"Something which we think is impossible now is not impossible in another decade."
-- Constance Baker Motley

"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got."
--Janis Joplin

Galt

Honestly ... and I don't want to be a shill for lkanneg ... but she's being put through a "test of fire" that I never experienced.  I share the concerns about her sometimes-avoidance of topics, but she's been fairly good about a discussion.

It's true that she's sometimes hard to pin down, but she doesn't do the usual feminist tactic (at least what I've experienced) of absolutely negating common experiences in life.

She sounds like a worker, actually.  She works and she takes on other tasks that she has to fulfill.  She ought to kick back and drink a beer and just post crap, like I do.  LOL

Factory

It's definitely to her credit that she puts up with it really.  Of course there's got to be the assumption that she enjoys this as much as anyone, but still.

But Lkanneg, even though I believe 90% of what you say is utter tripe, and will say so anytime, you have my respect..:)

Roy

One of the things I admire about SYG and its convivial community is a respect for history.

And, trying to figure out who's telling of the story gets to define the reality of our current understandings.

The Evil Patriarchy is the feminists' default argument, and they can interpret even white men not getting to vote as part and parcel of that insidious, vile, gender-conspiracy.

MRA's look through contemporary glasses that focus on misandry and anti-male bias in the courts and media, and then work backwards to see how women were never really all that discriminated against, men were just behaving according to the economic and domestic codes of prior days. (Mostly having to do with providing for and protecting women and children.)

I think Sting said it best --- "History will teach us nothing!"

Pop logic, pop culture, pop justice, pop truths.

America has to embrace it pop-ness, if only because we have no really significant history to compare with 6,000 year-old European and Asian cultures.

Which is my way of saying, I'll continue to be tolerant of IK's attempts to "get the record straight."

Of course, I won't read too-long or too-annotated posts, any more than I would listen to a pop song that violates the 3:52 rule.

( The extreme length of any 1964 Beatles 45 rpm vinyl single ....)
It's a terrible thing ... living in fear." (Roy - hunted replicant. "Blade Runner.")

The Biscuit Queen

Ikanneg, you keep saying women were disenfranchised.


How many women fought and died in

Pequot War (1637-1638)  
 Beaver Wars  (1642-1698)
 Dutch-Indian War  (1643)
 King William's War (1689-1698)  
 Pueblo Rebellion (1680)
 King Philip's War (1675-1676)  
 Queen Anne's War  (1702-1713)    
 Tuscarora War (1711-1715)
 Dummer's War  (1723-1726)
 King George's War (1744-1745)
 French and Indian War  (1754-1763)
 Pontiac's Rebellion (1763-1766)  
 Lord Dunmore's War

How about

American Revolution (1775-1783)  
 Tripolitan War  (1801-1805)
 War of 1812 (1812-1815)
 Creek Indian War (1813-1814)
 The First Seminole War (1818-1819)
 Texas Revolutionary War (1835-1836)
 Second Seminole War  (1835-1842)
 Mexican American War  (1846-1848)
The American Civil War (1861-1865)

Disenfranchised could be seen as being socially or legally forced to kill and /or be killed, just as much as it could mean not getting to vote.


So could it be that this was a trade off? That perhaps women were not so much disenfranchised as protected from these duties, both easy (voting) and difficult (war)?

That the small benifit to risking one's life was a say in the government which risked it?

I am not saying that women should not vote. I AM saying that women were not disenfranchised as a sex. That would be missing much of the big picture, to imagine women as a class being 'victims' of men as a class.
he Biscuit Queen
www.thebiscuitqueen.blogspot.com

There are always two extremes....the truth lies in the middle.

lkanneg

Quote from: "Galt"
She ought to kick back and drink a beer and just post crap, like I do.  LOL


:1blue1:
quot;Remember no one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"Something which we think is impossible now is not impossible in another decade."
-- Constance Baker Motley

"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got."
--Janis Joplin

lkanneg

Quote from: "Factory"
But Lkanneg, even though I believe 90% of what you say is utter tripe, and will say so anytime, you have my respect..:)


:P  :lol:
quot;Remember no one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt

"Something which we think is impossible now is not impossible in another decade."
-- Constance Baker Motley

"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got."
--Janis Joplin

Go Up