I'm voting Trump because I care about women

a reply to: scojak

but couldn't what you are saying also be true for the first women to enter a machine shop as a machinist, the first women doctor, the first women ceo, or heck, even the first man who took power long ago when the matriarchies fell? if those women sat aside because of the fear of failure and the effect that that failure would have on women, we'd all still be sitting home with our 7, 8, or 9 kids.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar
I didn't say that poor ole bill was broken solely by hillary, did I??

No, but the fact you said solely just then shows you aren't immune from sexist remarks.
There's no problem with that, it's a reality of life.

Wade V Roe has stood for how long, if it changes there will be riots. It's settled.
As for other reproductive rights, you would have to clarify further for a discussion.

Depleted uranium is far more than a gender issue, once again it's a little sexist to suggest that (Which again is fine).

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

you say that feminists should be focused on the bad treatment of care in the middle east... as is no feminists in the western world are concerned with it. but well, why did you try to distract by making that statement to begin with? just what do you wish for the feminists to do? jump on the conservative "sharia law is coming to the US" bandwagon? support bombing these countries again to "save" the poor women, which we've already tried, and it seems that we've just made life more difficult for them while really screwing up their dna, as well, as their children's dna, and their children's....
maybe you would like for us to save these women and children by bringing them to the US? no, can't be that....
just what do you wish for the feminists to do about it??? because, the more this country gets involved in the area, the worse things seem to get for all the people living in those countries!

Wade V Roe has stood for how long, if it changes there will be riots. It's settled.
As for other reproductive rights, you would have to clarify further for a discussion.

ya, that's why they are focusing so much on that empty seat in the supreme court and all those possible empty seats that might turn up in the next four years. and, even if they don't overturn it, just look at how busy they've been at writing up laws to make it harder. lol...south carolina had to take a step back recently when they decided to just by pass the laws altogether by just slightly changing the wording of the regulations of existing laws. one of those changes would make a husband's consent mandatory. which some might think is find by as the laws stand now it restricts third term abortions to just when the women's life is in danger but then they tacked on a requirement for husband consent onto it...basically taking the decision of weather or not a women should die out of her hands and putting into the husbands instead. the supreme court ruled that the existing law was unconstitutional so they don't enforce the husband consent part of the law, and like I said, they backtracked on this part of their changes in the revision. but there's still other stuff that has been changed to make it much harder...and all they need is for trump to stack that supreme court and who know, maybe dying women in south carolina hospitals will have to wait till their husbands come back from their business trip overseas and give their consent so they can life.

as far as what other ways that women's reproductive rights have been attacked... how about the constant attack on planned parenthood, the idea that birth control isn't really healthcare so it doesn't matter if it's left out of women's insurance policies, or the fact that the biggest share of the non-profit hospitals in this country now are being run by religious groups (mainly catholics) who's answer to a tubal pregnancy isn't to abort the pregnancy medicinally but to just cut out part of the affected tube because, well, the tube's integrity has been compromised anyways. or that they refuse to discuss birth control, or do tubal litigations after c-sections, or induce labor when a women is having a miscarriage and causing an infection.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: scojak

but couldn't what you are saying also be true for the first women to enter a machine shop as a machinist, the first women doctor, the first women ceo, or heck, even the first man who took power long ago when the matriarchies fell?

Sure, but not to the entire US population. The first female CEO would be scrutinized by her company, not 300,000,000 Americans. And I'm sure her actions and efficacy, whether positive or negative, had a lasting effect on the stereotypical view of people in her company.

if those women sat aside because of the fear of failure and the effect that that failure would have on women, we'd all still be sitting home with our 7, 8, or 9 kids.

Like I said in my OP, I would like to have a female President someday, but I feel that Hillary is not the right one. I think she is set up to fail and I would like to see our first female President succeed.

a reply to: dawnstar

Pushing for the education of women is the main thing. A little girl with a math book is far more threatening than any military intimidation. And far more effective, it's not going to happen overnight tho.

The consent thing is disgusting. I'm happy it didn't stand.

A lot of this is more a religious issue that affects women than a feminist issue. (Sounds like a cop out, and if you think so I'm happy to concede) But women are pushing these views also, and would claim (wrongly) that their way is the correct one.
The middle east isn't the only place where people need to read more than one book I guess.

a reply to: scojak

If not ignore it then oppose it. But certainly don't go along with it or allow it to influence what you do.

Saying you'll support Trump because you want to protect women from Hillary damaging their image is choosing to allow a false idea to take hold and influence you in something that you know is incorrect.

Let's just assume that Hillary does mess up and there is a significant blowback toward women in general because of it. Even though that is pure speculation, just for the sake of this argument let's say that is what happens.

We've already established the fact that thinking in that way or judging women because of Hillary is wrong. So knowing that, it shouldn't matter past that point, either you do and act in ways you know are right or you act wrong. It doesn't matter what other people choose for themselves. You can only choose what you do and if they choose wrong, f*ck em. Or at best try and educate them, but either way you still can only choose what you do. So do the right thing.

Choosing Trump based on a false ideology isn't right. It's wrong. Even if you're the only one in the room who's going to choose the right choice you still choose it. What you don't do is go along with everyone else making the wrong choice just because it causes the least amount of trouble. You either stand up for what is right or you don't. You can't rationalize that away. Especially not by using hypothetical situations that may never happen in the first place.

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: scojak

Same can be said about blacks and Obama. After Obama, a lot of people wont want a black man in office again. With Hillary, not many will want a Woman in office again either. The Libs/Dems are shooting their entire wads with these two candidates and spoiling perceptions going forward.

That's not exactly right though. It's not that anti-Obama people don't want another Black Man in office. They don't want another BLACK in office. They don't include him being Male as being a problem.

With Hillary however they will use it to attack her being a Woman. They won't say we don't want another White Woman in office. Just not another WOMAN.

You see because it's a false argument. It isn't even consistent. They simply attack any characteristic which suits them at the time regardless of whether or not that characteristic even matters.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

and how do you get the little girl with the math book safely to school with a bunch of religious wackos around waiting to throw acid in her face?

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: Black_Fox

If only... unfortunately we are stuck between a crock and an orange face.

Wonder what would happen.........

If everyone who said they wish they had a better choice, (which they do its called third party) ACTUALLY voted 3rd party.....

I bet you a peradime shift would happen......

"It will never happen" yeah because YOU NEVER MAKE IT HAPPEN!

a reply to: scojak

However, if Hillary wins, she will probably destroy any current positive perceptions of women in office.

How so? Is she going to get her "womanhood" all over everything? Did her "womanhood" taint the office of Secretary of State for any other woman?

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
Can you see anyone saying she shouldn't get the job because women can't do the job?

Yes.

There are plenty of people saying exactly that in those exact words too. Although most of the time they are at least conscious enough to know they'll need to change the language a little to try and hide what it is they really mean. Saying something like "Well, what about when it's that time of the month?? or "Women are always so emotional." But everyone knows what they're getting at.

But don't kid yourself. There are still plenty of ignorant sexist a-holes in the world who don't even attempt to hide it. They come right out and insist that a Women shouldn't have power equal or over men. Simply because they are Female.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask
that's the best move in this case, I would consider just not voting, have done it before but I want to do my part in making sure my congressman gets back into office (happens to be republican by the way), but I just can't bring myself to vote for either hillary or trump, so am going with johnson. mainly, because I am afraid that if I leave it blank someone will fill in the empty space. but of all those running, I really do think trump would be very bad for us, all of us, not just women.

trickle down economics just does not work, and I've seen how corporations took advantage of those economic zone incentives, who promised jobs, hired not as many as they promised, then closed up shop soon after and headed outside of the country, and wondered if the money they got wasn't used more to fund their relocation.

"renegotiating" our debt like trump said would just cast more doubt onto the value of our dollar and once we lose the dollars position as the world's reserve currency, that is the end.

his flippant attitude towards nukes is scary as all heck.

and I could go on and on.
at least Hillary has a plan to get the US somewhere.... ya it's probably somewhere we really aren't gonna like, but trump is liable to bungle us into nuclear winter while the stores are empty of any blankets because well, they all are made overseas and no countries want to trade with us.

a reply to: Bloodydagger

I'll tell you this, I wanted CARSON because of his intelligence ,I thought he would sort out the medical issues best and would let those in his cabinet advise him in an APOLITICAL fashion.
Skin is irrelevant and NOT worth dying for,America as country ,as a people to me ARE, all else is a waste of time.
I don't demand accommodations from those who don't share my values ,they WILL not do so to me and mine.
Other than that white and poor and hasn't really SHOWN me a whole lot of privilege,that's on ME no one else and NOT my skin.
Trump won't have the TIME to worry about women's issues so I HIGHLY doubt he will go after the vast SJW army of feminists,LGBT and BLM nut jobs.
The CURRENT nut job in office is kicking off WWIII very nicely, I want it stopped ,not allowing any crap in the military gutting the Obama traitors ,the ladies need not worry.
Trump can't TOUCH abortion ,MURDER away animals,MURDER what you wish for your connivence,but I DO believe, non life threatening issues are a waste of time and abstinence should hold greater value over slaughtering any mistake a female makes.
ALL I see is wrong and people should NOT live this.
I'm throwing a businessman at it to see what kind of splatter he makes against the oligarchs...or HOW long it takes for them to kill him.
Trump represents a chaotic Tea Party effort to strike back.NOT all of his policies make sense and I doubt him capable of combatting the system but IT WILL give me valuable information on the value of these peoples lives to veterans in balance with the Constitution .
SUCH clarity might cause...issues.

originally posted by: windword
How so? Is she going to get her "womanhood" all over everything? Did her "womanhood" taint the office of Secretary of State for any other woman?

Please take your feminist BS elsewhere. I've shown complete respect for women this entire tread and said multiple times that I welcome a women President, just not that woman.

a reply to: scojak

"However, Hillary will be held to a different standard. She is a woman, and if you don't think Americans will view her and judge her differently because of that, then you live in a fantasy world. In the real world, sexism and stereotypes are real and run rampant, and many Americans will have their views enforced by any failures of Hillary.
"

I live in a world that fights for its rights, like women had to for the right to vote. I accept non of this BS because stupid people like that are not good to follow. Their numbers will dwindle, globally hopefully. And I live in a free country where I can kick people who think like that out of my house. And I can vote.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: Black_Fox

If only... unfortunately we are stuck between a crock and an orange face.

Wonder what would happen.........

If everyone who said they wish they had a better choice, (which they do its called third party) ACTUALLY voted 3rd party.....

I bet you a peradime shift would happen......

"It will never happen" yeah because YOU NEVER MAKE IT HAPPEN!

Ugh, this old shtick. "Let's all think about what would happen if everyone did something and then blame the individuals for that not happening." Sheesh, give me a break.

My single vote is not going to change anything, so yes, it will never happen.

I'm not going to go be an activist because I honestly think it's a waste of time. People won't change their minds when presented with logical alternatives, so yes, it will never happen.

a reply to: scojak

I've shown complete respect for women this entire tread

I disagree.

(I) said multiple times that I welcome a women President, just not that woman.

Her womanhood has nothing to do with it.

The first American "black" president was illegitimatized as a non-American, foreign born, secret Muslim communist, married to a man and born of a white woman, who will go down as the "Worst president ever" that failed because of his health care reform policy.

How does that taint the office for the next "black" president?

a reply to: mOjOm

But public perception can be a real bitch sometimes.

a reply to: windword

He also saved the local auto industry from bankruptcy, but it's not like that's important or America was built on Cars or have any sort of affinity for American made cars or anything like that.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: scojak

"However, Hillary will be held to a different standard. She is a woman, and if you don't think Americans will view her and judge her differently because of that, then you live in a fantasy world. In the real world, sexism and stereotypes are real and run rampant, and many Americans will have their views enforced by any failures of Hillary.
"

I live in a world that fights for its rights, like women had to for the right to vote. I accept non of this BS because stupid people like that are not good to follow. Their numbers will dwindle, globally hopefully.

That's great, I never said we shouldn't fight, I just like to analyze battles before drawing my sword. I started this thread to put forth an aspect of this campaign that most people probably haven't considered. That's all. I thought, "Hey, people might want to hear that Hillary's election might backfire for women." Looks like people just want to argue that people like me are the problem and that when I'm saying is sexist or backwards. It's a completely plausible outcome and I'm happy to sit here defending myself to those that can't comprehend my point.

And I live in a free country where I can kick people who think like that out of my house.

Um, so you live in a country that fights for its right, but you don't fight, you just kick people out. I'm assuming you're voting for Trump then?