To be alarmed at the number of women who are throwing support behind causes that are clearly anti-woman?

[DorothyGaleFromKansas]

With the recent threads about flags/immigrants and Charlie Kirk etc, there seem to be a bewildering number of women supporting causes that directly go against their own interests, and it’s baffling and frankly a bit disturbing.

Reform have voted against tougher laws on stalking, sexual harassment and upskirting, against clamping down on revenge porn, and against further protections in the workplace. Farage cited Andrew Tate as “an important voice for men”.

Then you have Trump, who was found to have committed rape, forced himself into changing rooms where teenagers were undressing, made sexual comments about his own daughter, not to mention 34 other felonies, and that’s before we even get to the Epstein files.

Charlie Kirk said that women should only vote if they were voting for the candidate chosen by their husband, that women shouldn’t go on to higher education unless it was to find a husband, that women should have to submit to their husbands, and that little girls as young as 9 or 10 including his own daughters should be forced to give birth to babies conceived as a result of rape.

What has happened to us that there are so many women willing to endorse attitudes like this? And how do we fix it?! How have we sunk so low that there are women who think this is what we all deserve? It’s terrifying.

Well you were about the third post into this thread and you started straight away with an aggressive stance.
The Op wasn’t being aggressive or defamatory in any way. She was just asking a why question.

If you cannot define women without also including men with lady feelings then there are no women's issues are there?

There are only women + men with lady feelings issues 🤷🏻‍♀️

you cannot defend what you cannot define

I wasn’t replying to your post. Don’t know what you’re on about. I was replying to Amber

And she made a statement. I don’t see why that is argumentative.

should she use flowery feminine language?

i Know! I was asking what was argumentative in her post as I did not read it that way.

She was being aggressive and defensive from the get go.
Third post into and bam straight to the defence and taking the Ops post personally

No one who votes for or supports the people in the OP can call themselves a supporter of women.

Well maybe argumentative is probably not the best adjective to use. Defensive is better

How does it affect economic issues. I dont get that.

The patriots are lobbing shit at the police now. Wonder where the ‘save our kids’ handmaidens are right now?

How ‘Great’ our Britain is! How brave our men!

Too bad. Don’t you want to understand what women you disagree with think?

Read the post I was responding to then it will make sense.

Yes, obviously the concern about understanding why other women support people that they disagree with is fake.

Maybe time for you to look a little further into some of the things Charlie Kirk actually said.

A murder is always going to be tragic on a personal level, but politically this man was downright dangerous in some ways. Of course that doesn't justify his murder, but at the same time it does mean people who weren't personally connected to him aren't exactly likely to be weeping into their hankies given some of his policies.

you cannot defend what you cannot define

Quite. It is extraordinary how many people do not seem to understand this.

What words or wording were ‘agressive’?

@MyHeartyCoralSnail Bringing the trans debate into every issue and dominating the discourse and making it the focus IS tedious. That’s my, and others posters, experience of it. This thread is not about trans rights, it’s about why women endorse misogynistic views of people such as Trump and CK.

I will not be dragged into trans rights rhetoric. There are umpteen threads on MN focused on that, usually full of the same posters saying the same things. Why does this need to be yet more of the same? As I say, tedious.

You’ve just got to look at photographs of these so called patriots to see that they all look as rough as the back of a bus. I wouldn’t want to be in a pub late at night with any of them. The women would probably shout at you if you happened to glance in their direction “what you looking at” and the men look unhealthy

Too true, I bet they’d run for small boats at the drop of a hat!

Thank goodness all non racists are so attractive! Certainly all immigrants are super good looking.

Not true about prisons, it was stopped a couple years ago.
And Labour accepted the Supreme Court judgement on transgender last spring.

I agree with you OP - I find it quite baffling

You really don't get it do you?

This thread is about women's rights.

The way the left has treated women who even question the impact of allowing the definition of woman to become 'any person who says they are' is misogynistic and threatens women's rights.

If we can't be defined - we don't have rights.

It is not a right wing position to say that the left have failed women on this.

You are trying to silence us on this on this thread. Why? Why won't you actually engage with the points that we have raise rather than repeatedly banging on about 'trans rights'?

& keeping it for himself & his wealthy friends

Defensive straightaway. If you don’t think the below statement is defensive then I don’t know what to say really…..

“I'll decide for myself what counts as being for or against women's interests thanks.”