While single herself, the always belligerent Ann Coulter seems to have a bit of a grudge against other single women — single mothers in particular. In a recent appearance on Fox and Friends, Coulter complained that the Democrats — and the media — were paying too much attention to what women think, and suggested that Romney could win the election without appealing to women — or at least to single women.
Ronald Reagan managed to win two landslides without winning the women’s vote, but it is as you say, it’s striking, it’s not the women’s vote generically, it is the single women’s vote. And that’s because single women look to the government to be their husbands and give them, you know, prenatal care, and preschool care, and kindergarten care, and school lunches.
Huh. Well, this might answer the central question in that National Review piece we discussed yesterday — why Romney isn’t getting 100% support from women, even though he’s the sort of rich guy alpha that evolutionary psychologists suggest is inherently appealing to “hypergamous” (i.e., golddigging) women. Turns out these women are already married to Obama!
The notion of government as a “substitute husband” is, of course, an old Men’s Rights trope. Warren Farrell devoted roughly a third of his Myth of Male Power — the 1993 tome from which the Men’sRights movement still gets most of its talking points — to explicating this particular theme. And it’s one that MRAs today return to again and again and again and again. (The notion of the “husband state” also, not coincidentally, played a role in the sprawling manifesto of mass killer Anders Breivik.)
As for Coulter, this isn’t the first time she’s singled out the single ladies. In a recent appearance on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox, Coulter went after Obama and the Democrats for focusing on what she called the “stupid single women” vote. “And I would just say to stupid single women voters,” she added,
your husband will not be able to pay you child support. If Obamacare goes through and Obama is re-elected, you are talking about the total destruction of wealth in America. It is the end of America as we know it. …
Great, you will get free contraception; you won’t have to pay a $10 co-pay, but it will be the end of America. Think about that!
Coulter is so miffed that single women don’t like Republicans that she’d be willing to give up her own right to vote if it means these “stupid … women” wouldn’t be allowed to vote either. As she once famously explained,
If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women. It also makes the point, it is kind of embarrassing, the Democratic Party ought to be hanging its head in shame, that it has so much difficulty getting men to vote for it. I mean, you do see it’s the party of women and ‘We’ll pay for health care and tuition and day care — and here, what else can we give you, soccer moms?’
Here’s a much more appealing take on single women. Well, honestly, it’s as terrifying as it is entertaining:
Actually, that’s only half of the answer. Why do married women vote Republican?
Tmason, if you’re not part of the rich elite, then you are being played by them. They want you to blame anyone else who might get help here and there, because they don’t want you to realize how much harm they are causing. Also, everyone benefits from government services. They just don’t always appreciate it.
Please read this
I… I think it’s trying. And I’m both laughing and crying, although I was just cutting onions….
What is it with your fascination with a dick?
3:13, by my count.
False assumption #1: We are here to rebut Ann Coulter’s “charges,” rather than mock her and her misogyny without mercy.
Fucking blockquotes, how do they work?
No one knows what the hell you’re saying tmason. People have to assume your meaning. Of course some of the assumptions are going be wrong. How about explaining what you’re insinuating? Or are you just here to troll badly?
No, people can ask. Instead, people leaped into assumptions because it was easy to shoot someone down.
Tmason dude, what is your point? To come here ask random questions then assert you can’t answer them when people make assumptions? If thats not your position then fucking say what your position is. This isn’t guess who dude be clear or stfu.
Trollololololol
3:14
Let me read more of the article you li– oh there it is:
Get a point or GTFO.
False assumption #2: I side with the rich.
The rich are only part of the problem and the idea that we can strictly focus on them without looking at what we as individuals do in our lives which cause societal problems is wrong.
Dude I have asked you several times to make your point. Make it now or I am going to keep calling you a dick wagger.
Tmason: I’m married and there’s no way in hell I’d vote Republican. You’re so cute thinking you’re original in any way. Most of our trolls roll in here with similar positions to yours. I don’t use the word argument, because so far you have none.
I’m splitting that one. 3 1/2: 13 1/2.
Oops, that should be 14 1/2.
We can only make assumptions dude because you constantly refuse to answer anything or state your point. Stop complaining about people making assumptions if you refuse to reveal your point or what you think.
Easy and fun. Keep trying to be all aloof and cryptic instead of saying what you bloody well came here to say, and the shooting will continue.
Can I point out also that I’m an unmarried woman only because Republicans keep trying to make it illegal for me to get married? If I could be, I’d be a happily married woman-thing voting for Obama.
This one sploded right out of the gate.
The wasteland ruins of green and pleasant Britain, complete with wifi, access to free-at-point-of-use healthcare, and free prescriptions for chronic illness and disability? BEST. WASTELAND. EVER!
I clearly asked my question; people came with the assumptions such as :
(1) I like rich people
(2) I want kids to starve
(3) I agree with everything Ann Coulter says.
I said nothing of the sort. Now you would like me to defend all of these projections and make my point. Nice.
A part of my position has already been stated upstream; I personally believe that you were too focused on taking me down versus actually responding to what I wrote.
Thank you, katz. Tmason kind of upset me, but seeing other people back me up really restores my faith in humanity. This is one of the many reasons manboobz is so awesome. 🙂
We were talking about school lunches. How do you propose elementary students “earn” their food? I like works projects for adults, too, but work should not be required for people to have food. Some people are children, some are disabled, and some are elderly so they are unable to work. Nobody deserves to starve.
3 1/2:15 1/2