Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Piece in Guardian - US Republicans want to repeal Amendment 19 giving women the vote.

123 replies

Treaclewell · 04/12/2025 17:02

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/04/women-right-to-vote-disenfranchisement

Land of the free?
Gobsmacked.
Though I think they might have a problem with getting enough turkeys voting for Thanksgiving.

Rightwingers are trying to destroy women’s right to vote | Moira Donegan

Calls for disenfranchisement rest on a single assumption: that women’s citizenship is partial and conditional

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/04/women-right-to-vote-disenfranchisement

OP posts:
Shortshriftandlethal · 04/12/2025 17:04

That's probably just one small Chrisrian sect rather than mainstream Republicanism.

SirChenjins · 04/12/2025 17:06

Repulsive though the Republicans are (imo obvs, other views are available) I don't think this is a widespread view among the right wingers across the pond.

ThatZanyFatball · 04/12/2025 17:47

SirChenjins · 04/12/2025 17:06

Repulsive though the Republicans are (imo obvs, other views are available) I don't think this is a widespread view among the right wingers across the pond.

It's not. Someone tried to make this a thing a few weeks ago on MN. Even if a large swath were trying to do it - which they're not - womens right to vote is a constitutional amendment which means pretty much impossible to overturn. Just more far-left panic propaganda that makes the far-left look dumb and crazier than they already are. I say that as a lifelong registered Democrat who hates Trump and never voted GOP in my life.

Frankly I have a feeling the first woman president is going to be GOP, if only to stick it to liberals that they could claim that honor.

Imnobody4 · 04/12/2025 17:50

Not really a serious journalist.
'Of all the indignities and cruelties, today this is the one that got to me.' About Girl Guides not admitting boys [on Bluesky.]

Shitty Media Men was a crowdsourced Google spreadsheet created in October 2017 that collected allegations and rumors of sexual misconduct by about 70 men[1] in the media industry, particularly in New York City. Moira Donegan,[2] a former assistant editor at The New Republic, initially began the spreadsheet online anonymously.

In October 2018, writer Stephen Elliott sued Donegan for defamation over his inclusion in the list.[3] The lawsuit was settled in March 2023, with Elliott receiving a six-figure settlement from Donegan.[4]

The Guardian seems to be getting pretty desparate these days.

FrippEnos · 05/12/2025 07:21

Some years a go on youtube there was a group going a round american colleges getting women to sign a fake petition to repeal the 19th amendment.

What it showed was that many women didn't know what the 19th amendment was.

Not that they wanted to right to vote to be removed.

So unless they have publicised what these people were asked, I would be very sceptical on the article.

AgnesX · 05/12/2025 07:25

Someone has floated the idea to get it out there and see how it'll be received...

Given that it's not the first post undoubtedly it'll turn into a never ending drip feed.

Hopefully America won't walk into this with it's eyes wide open.

LordEmsworthsGirlfriend · 05/12/2025 09:42

This stuff has been bubbling away in the US broadsheets for months. There was an interview in the New York Times that I wanted to link to last time this came up here, but it's capricious as to what it will show you when if you don't have an online subscription.

There have been some very scary articles in the NYT as some of these lunatics do have sway with far too many people. Invariably they are creepy men pretending to be Christians.

SerendipityJane · 05/12/2025 11:26

Of course nobody mentions that it took an amendment to give women a vote because they were left out of the Founding Fathers deliberations as they were declaring their all men are being equal bollocks.

Women, know your place. Just behind slaves by 5 amendments.

NotBadConsidering · 05/12/2025 11:39

The sanctimonious Left and the Guardian love to complain about how the Right stokes “culture wars” while partaking in the same on a regular basis.

nicepotoftea · 05/12/2025 11:42

Helen Andrews, a rightwing magazine editor whose recent piece The Great Feminization suggests women’s presence in public life may pose “a threat to civilization”, claims women have “evolved” toward several various and seemingly contradictory habits – too empathetic and consensus-based, on the one hand, and too gossipy, conniving and passive-aggressive, on the other.

What's the word for that? It's on the end of my tongue.... Oh yes - GENDER!

lechiffre55 · 05/12/2025 11:44

It's just the usual fear mongering by an activist media.
I tried to read the whole article but couldn't make it all the way through, my brain glazed over. One bit near the beginning made me laugh at the sheer audacity.

or the AI bots that men and boys can use to generate pornogaphy or depictions of graphic violence against women and girls

AI can be used to generate anything. That it's wrong to use AI in an immoral way does not mean that AI was designed for the purpose of supporting that immorality. The framing in the article makes it seem like AI was invented for the purpose of denigrating women. It's dishonest.

SerendipityJane · 05/12/2025 14:00

Fans of history will know that the ancient Athenians - proud of their democracy - did not see women being excluded from the material process as inherently unfair, as Athenian society was based around the notion that only women could access the realm of the supernatural that underpinned society.

Since many (but not all, as I know the replies to this comment will show 😀) regard the Greeks as the origin of democracy, it's an interesting perspective.

moto748e · 05/12/2025 14:36

Even if a large swath were trying to do it - which they're not - womens right to vote is a constitutional amendment which means pretty much impossible to overturn.

I share your doubts about how big this is, but at the same time, I remember being assured by liberals in the US that Roe v Wade was as solid as a rock, and would never be overturned, and know-nothing Brits were worrying about nothing.

Sausagenbacon · 05/12/2025 14:50

I won't give the Guardian the clicks.

LordEmsworthsGirlfriend · 05/12/2025 15:53

ThatZanyFatball · 04/12/2025 17:47

It's not. Someone tried to make this a thing a few weeks ago on MN. Even if a large swath were trying to do it - which they're not - womens right to vote is a constitutional amendment which means pretty much impossible to overturn. Just more far-left panic propaganda that makes the far-left look dumb and crazier than they already are. I say that as a lifelong registered Democrat who hates Trump and never voted GOP in my life.

Frankly I have a feeling the first woman president is going to be GOP, if only to stick it to liberals that they could claim that honor.

Even if a large swath were trying to do it - which they're not - women's right to vote is a constitutional amendment which means pretty much impossible to overturn.

21st Amendment overturned the 18th, I think? The end of Prohibition. Which is not to say that I think the franchise is in immediate danger but I don't have as much confidence in the security of civil rights in the US as I would have done 5 years ago. It's really alarming.

SerendipityJane · 05/12/2025 15:57

21st Amendment overturned the 18th, I think?

Yes. So implicit in that statement is 2 amendments happened between them.

If you can amend the constitution to ban alcohol, you can amend it to say anything.

GreenCandleWax · 05/12/2025 16:00

Shortshriftandlethal · 04/12/2025 17:04

That's probably just one small Chrisrian sect rather than mainstream Republicanism.

Not a small sect but quite large swathes of conservative evangelical opinion. They are pretty anti-womens' rights generally. Still a minority but not a tiny one.😦

GallantKumquat · 05/12/2025 16:15

There's tendency on the left (though not exclusive to it) to select fringe right-wing figures and project them onto the right as a whole. Fred Phelps, the "God hates fags" preacher, is an earlier example. The logic goes that these figures were saying out loud and offensively what the rest of the opposition to gay marriage were thinking privately. There can can sometimes be an element of truth to that. Clearly, during the 60s and 70s, when it suddenly became impermissible to be visibly racist, many people still harbored racist views and a figure like David Duke articulated them publicly.

But in the case of gay marriage very few of those who opposed it agreed with polemics Phelps, even privately. Harping on Phelps obscured the debate that was much better characterised by the positions of David Frum vs. Andrew Sullivan and the left and main stream media didn't serve the public well by constantly platforming Phelps, which was surely his goal with his brand of outrageousness. The left, IMO, has become addicted to using strawmen rather than debating real issues. Everyone is a Hitler. Everything is racist. The trans debate captures this tendency in its extreme form: Jim Crow, segregation, racism, homophobia, misogyny, genocide, apartheid, Christian intolerance, white supremacy, patriarchy, ableism, body shaming, conversion therapy, and eugenics have all been invoked to shut down conversation about the subject.

With the case of women's right to vote, the phenomena been noted on Mumsnet, that very often the most dogged supporters of trans rights within captured organisations are women, who often subordinate their very considerable responsibilities to supporting trans rights above all other priorities. Why? And what's to be done about it? Obviously the answer is not to take away women's right to vote. That's very silly. But articles like this associate anyone making that observation with an extreme form of active misogyny. Note how many imply or explicitly claim that SexMatters is a front for right wing (American) Christian extremists.

In fact one can detect why there might be a self-reinforcing dynamic at work here: if being against trans rights == being against women's right to vote, then of course the stakes are much higher for defending trans rights, as transphobia becomes the thin edge of the wedge to disenfranchisement.

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 05/12/2025 16:20

The article is clear that the 19th amendment isn't under any kind of real threat any time soon, but the general trend is disturbing nonetheless.

I am honestly quite surprised that people are so quick to discuss it as empty scaremongering when it is coming from powerful voices such as Pete Hegseth and Peter Thiel. These are not people on the far fringes of public life in the US.

nicepotoftea · 05/12/2025 16:25

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 05/12/2025 16:20

The article is clear that the 19th amendment isn't under any kind of real threat any time soon, but the general trend is disturbing nonetheless.

I am honestly quite surprised that people are so quick to discuss it as empty scaremongering when it is coming from powerful voices such as Pete Hegseth and Peter Thiel. These are not people on the far fringes of public life in the US.

If there is a trend it is certainly helped by the gaping chasm where a left wing feminist movement might be.

JanesLittleGirl · 05/12/2025 16:26

This is a real threat to women's democratic rights!*

I mean, it only needs a 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress, followed by 3/4 of State legistratures voting in favour. Such a low bar.

*No it isn't.

MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack · 05/12/2025 16:27

It's worth adding that Nigel Farage has described Andrew Tate - who doesn't think women should be allowed to vote - as an "important voice" for young men.

I don't think we should be too complacent about our rights. The right wing in America have already managed to get rid of women having rights over their own bodies. Many of them don't want to stop there.

SerendipityJane · 05/12/2025 16:32

Any dispute over the constitution can ultimately only be settled (either by action, or inaction) SCOTUS.

If that leaves anybody feeling there is no worry, then can I ask them to PM me abut some bridges that I have just acquired.

Swipe left for the next trending thread