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:
I’m looking at you, bionicmommy. Why haven’t you let your children eat your withered husk yet? Animal species do it all the time! Animals don’t get free lunches!
Tmason, I’m interested in your answers to cloudiah’s questions here: http://manboobz.com/2012/08/24/ann-coulter-channels-mens-rightsers-in-her-latest-attack-on-single-women/comment-page-3/#comment-197147
What do you think the solutions are to the problem of single motherhood? Specifically?
Just FYI, trolldude, you realize that you made it clear that this was where you were going a couple of pages back, right?
I wish it was harder to figure out what tired arguments trolls were gearing up to trot out, because it would make reading their shit more interesting, but sadly they’re rather predictable.
@aworld anon
Don’t ruin my conspiracy!! >_>
(There is a slight similarity I don’t think I would pull out the steele sock card yet. Obviously its not above him to sockpuppet as we have learned. XD)
Yes, even deeply held beliefs and political positions that were never mentioned.
Yup. Let’s just say that when your mommy told you you were unique, she was lying.
Yep. My grandfather ran away from my grandmother, abandoning not just her but their three daughters, during the Depression. Speaking of the Depression, I’ll bet if tmason were alive then he’d be against soup kitchens. “Why should we be feeding those people? Let them find jobs!”
My current theory is less “sockpuppet” and more “trolls have run out of ways to be stupid.”
@pecunium
Her underlying point was that single women are voting for sustenance via the government. It isn’t false.
I don’t have a problem with that; what I do have a problem with is the idea that we should never try to move people away from that. To say that we should always give everyone what they need but not enable people to provide for themselves I believe is wrong.
I don’t think Steele would sock, he’s probably still in a sulk from when he outed himself and blamed us for it.
shorter tmason: Deadbeat dads abandon their kids. How can women learn to be less useless and terrible?
Your one size fits all solutions do not work for everyone. How can people grow enough food to support themselves in a city? You need at least 20 to 40 acres of land to grow enough to provide all of your own food, and that’s if everyone in the family is a vegetarian. To get meat, you’d need up to 150 acres. I have a yard so I can do some gardening, but it’s only enough to cut down on food costs, not eliminate them.
If you’re talking about cooking from scratch, then yes, that’s a good way to cut grocery bills. But again, this doesn’t work for people that don’t have a kitchen or even electricity for cooking.
@shade
He socked 2 times before though. We didn’t know steele was varphole for awhile, he never said he was so we had to bother him to admit it. Then there was the torvus butthorn one. XD
To say that we should always give everyone what they need but not enable people to provide for themselves I believe is wrong.
Okay, but while we implement that long-term solution how many children should starve? Ballpark. 10? 10 thousand?
Speaking of not enabling people, did you know that many children start out life suckling from a literal teet? They just lie there and get food. Babies need to cut that lazy shit out.
That sounds great to me. The actual solution to that will be way more effective if we focus on creating jobs and raising the minimum standard of living (raising minimum wage, penalizing companies that outsource labor to cheap foreign markets, and keeping food and housing prices down) as opposed to policing people marital status.
But we are never going to get rid of poor people who need government help. At least, not as things currently stand. You can’t just make everyone in the entire country middle-class or higher–the free market dictates that someone always has to be the underdog, because no matter how much the lowest income bracket makes, prices will always rise until someone can’t afford them. It’s kind of the definition of capitalism, in fact.
@jumbofisch
I dunno, this one doesn’t seem quite as bad at writing as mikey.
And yeah, dude, dad’s gonna come home from his factory job and immediately go to work in the family fields. And if mother has a job — and she’ll have to in your “no government programs for poor people” world — she’ll just be so glad when she gets home at 5:30 AM after third shift at the plant is over and go clean out the chicken coop. And then to the kitchen to prepare nutritious home-grown family meals!
Why do I envision tmason’s living quarters as containing a single pot containing a dead cactus.
Before we can find solutions to get deadbeat dads to come back we need to find out what makes them in the first place. That’s where I’d start.
To take one step further back; we have to recognize it as a problem. You refer to the nuclear family as a “1950’s sitcom fantasy” when the vast majority of people move towards that. All over the globe.
Are you suggesting that we should promote policies that foster two caregivers as a family?
LMFAO! My bad, I didn’t realize that was an option! 🙂
@Bagelsan
Projecting again.
@Tmason
Well, yes and no. If you have a wide variety of food at reasonable prices nearby, and a lot of time and a good kitchen, it certainly can be. People who have all that aren’t really the people we’re talking about.
if you live in a food desert, for example, buying it pre-made is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper.
I don’t want to make any assumptions, here, but why is Tmason so supportive of Stalin? Stalin wasn’t a good guy.
Tmason,
Want to get me, a single childless woman, off government assistance programs like food stamps and programs for indigent veterans? Call up my $500/hour boss and tell that dickcheese to pay me a living wage for the numerous ways in which I bust my ass for him. Better yet, convince him to hire me on as a permanent W-2 employee instead of leaving me as a long-term temp from now until Doomsday, which he does because he knows that with 100+ applicants for every job in my field, I ain’t going anywhere in the near future. I get to suck it up and be grateful for my pittance while he gets to pocket the savings and go on vacation for the fifth time this year.
Then go out and do that with every single employer from now until forever.
Also, convince Congress to raise the minimum wage to reflect inflation and the fact that CEO pay has risen 127 times faster than worker pay because those evil greedy fucks would rather outsource jobs to India so they can get away with paying people pennies on the dollar rather than invest in the American workforce.
There’s your solution, toots. Better get cracking.
It’s great to provide for the women now but we need to work on ways to reduce single motherhood and not simply enact policies that help people in the short term.
What?
The short term should be ignored? The perfect is the enemy of the good.
As to the “ways to reduce single motherhood”. Why?
I’d rather we enable the caregivers to provide the lunch for their children versus school lunch.
How do you propose to do that, since you are against simple assistance.? A significant number of thos who avail themselves of school food programs have jobs, but fail to have enough to provide. You seem willing to let them fall through the cracks. You also say the reason single motherhood is a problem is because two (and sometimes more) caregivers are needed to take care of the children.
There is a non-sequitur there; unless you plan to mandate marriage/partnership there will be single mothers. The other is the bit about more than two… who is that third/fourth person? How to do they fit in, and who is providing support for them, and how?
Tmason: False assumption #1: That I agree with Ann Coulter’s political positions.
So far you’ve not disagreed. In fact the things you have said are in accord with her political positions. So, in action; no matter what you may think, you are in agreement with her political positions, no matter what sophistries you may attempt to the contrary.
No, people can ask. Instead, people leaped into assumptions because it was easy to shoot someone down.
Why should they? From the blocks you were hostile. From there you have refused to answer the questions you’ve been asked, preferring instead to deflect with non-responsive counter questions and an air of blasé, world-weary disaffection as well as one of presumptive superiority.
That’s sure to go over well everywhere.
False assumption #2: I side with the rich.
See above, re your agreement with Ann Coulter. Same rules apply.
Never said they didn’t benefit. Read again; I said they have “less of a need”.
Do they? They are getting aid without having to apply for it. They are getting that aid without the social stigma attached to it. They can afford to not look at the nuts and bolts of the gov’t aid they get because it’s invisible to them. The lessened need they have for school lunches is because the gov’t is already helping them.
You, however, are arguing they don’t have the need. Well they may not need it, but we don’t know, because they are getting it, automatically.
Troll is boring and won’t answer questions.
Hey, you guys heard about Mitt “Married Ladies Love Me” Romney’s little birther joke in Michigan, right: “No one’s ever asked to see my birth certificate. They know that this is the place that we were born and raised.”
Someone started a Twitter hashtag #futuremittjokes
Some highlights:
“I never get stopped and frisked in New York City either.”
“Barack Obama is only three-fifths the man I am.”
“I never get pulled over when driving one of Ann’s Cadillacs.”
“No one has ever left a noose on my door.”
“No one ever burnt a cross on *my* lawn.”