this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
748 points (98.7% liked)

News

25357 readers
3958 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 84 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

This isn't a leaopards eating faces thing for republican women. These women derive social, economic, and political benefits through their association with the men who hold power in our patriarchal system. By aligning with backwards gender roles or evil ideologies, they feel protected and valued within the system even as it restricts their autonomy. They know what they're doing.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 10 hours ago

I read years ago that white republican women will put up with being treated as lesser in their circles in order to treat others as lesser. So they're fine with being spoken down to and shuffled aside so they can feel free to yell at minorities.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

They do, but there is an assumption that the relationship between women like that and the wealthy ruling class men they attach themselves to is reciprocal. It, of course, is not.

Take the woman who has a child by Elon Musk. Her and Musk had a romantic getaway and brief liason. She clearly wasn't upset at being pregnant by him. There was an assumption that she'd be cared for. Even if not directly, indirectly. She definitely did not anticipate that she would actually be confined to an apartment 24 hours a day, entirely neglected without any contact from the father of her child. Nor that she'd be left with a child to raise on her own, and no support either financial or emotional or in terms of literal labor.

Call her ignorant and bigoted, both are valid criticisms. But she absolutely was not anticipating this outcome. There is a presumption from conservative/fascist women that they occupy a position of hierarchy over non-fascist/non-conservative women. That by virtue of supporting fascism and patriarchy that fascist men will afford them personhood. They don't believe in any of the assertions of feminism. They instead believe that women who suffer at the hands of men simply deserve it. That all women are judged in some kind of meritocracy, where belief in fascism and support of fascists itself is a determining factor of merit.

They are infuriatingly wrong. But do not be so quick to mischaracterize all conservative/fascist women as knowingly participating in the elimination of their own rights. They are systematically indoctrinated. Inexcusably, I will add. There is no justification for supporting fascists, no justification for supporting violence against women. To combat the ideology they espouse it is crucial to understand not just what they say but what they think.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

There is a presumption from conservative/fascist women that they occupy a position of hierarchy over non-fascist/non-conservative women. That by virtue of supporting fascism and patriarchy that fascist men will afford them personhood. They don't believe in any of the assertions of feminism. They instead believe that women who suffer at the hands of men simply deserve it. That all women are judged in some kind of meritocracy, where belief in fascism and support of fascists itself is a determining factor of merit.

This may be true for some women, maybe in the "tradwife" and white supremacist circles. But if, as you say, it's critical to understand what these women think, you have to understand that they are not a monolith. There are other motivations to consider.

I was raised in a fundamentalist, evangelical church. Within that community, there was no presumption of a hierarchical position over other women. There was only our god-given position to be subservient to our fathers, and later, our husbands. We could either obey the divine plan to someday reach heaven or disobey it and be resigned to hell. There was no in-between.

Now, a reasonable person would see this as patently ridiculous. But the problem is that reason has no place in this worldview. You doggedly follow a literal interpretation of the King James Bible, or you go to hell.

Many years ago, when I was 16, I had asked for a particular privilege. And my mother agreed to grant it if I would listen to some audio tapes that she had of a series of sermons from a woman. Now, that was unusual in itself, because women are not allowed to teach men within fundamentalist churches (Because The Bible Says So™). So this was definitely a teaching that was only meant for women. What I heard was horrifying.

The entire point of this sermon series was to teach women how to be good, submissive Christian wives. The lesson of one tape was literally that if your husband commanded you to commit murder, you would have to do it, because God put him in charge of you and your duty to God was simply to follow orders from your husband.

A woman would not be judged for breaking a commandment if she followed the direction of her husband. The husband would be punished for causing someone to break God's commandments, but the wife would be spared because she was simply doing her duty as a wife to follow what her husband said.

Women's agency is completely removed in this scenario. Which sounds exactly like what the men described in the article want.

Again, the problem here is that reason has no purchase in this worldview. No amount of evidence or argument is going to change their minds or magically give them a sense of agency.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Can confirm, was also raised as a woman in a fundamentalist church. We didn't stick just to the KJV, but then the pastor would turn around and preach out of LaHay's Left Behind series too, soooooo.

When I was 17, I went to a youth christian convention, and during the main speaker, they had the thousands of teens and 20somes in the audience participate in a mass marriage to god. They said that god would provide a good husband for me.

Then I got raped and made the mistake of turning to the bible for comfort. The bible says that women who get raped in the city should be put to death, and women who get raped outside the city need to marry their rapist. Now, the text I read made it sound like it wasn't really the location, but whether or not she screamed, and I had screamed, so I reasoned that I needed to marry the man instead of killing myself.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I am so sorry that happened to you and that the place where you turned for help just added to your trauma.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

Well, good news is that I've been out of that fuggin cult for nearly 20 years now, and therapy has done so much more for me than religion ever has.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

Damn, I saw the same kind of thing. Most of the non denominational churches are poisoning society for a sliver of power, if only over the women.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago

The wondrous simultaneity of having free will while being a product of the universe that created you.

When push comes to shove though, what do we do, remove a person's agency and look at the environment, or allow them their agency and make them responsible for their choices?

I feel like answering this paradox is akin to reconciling quantum mechanics with general relativity.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

They just want to sit at home during the day taking queludes and fucking the mailman.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

I mean, to be fair, I wouldn't mind fucking the mailman for some qualudes either.