Categories
a voice for men alt-right andrea hardie antifeminism antifeminist women crackpottery FemRAs hypocrisy irony alert misogyny MRA trump women's suffrage

JudgyBitch: Women without husbands or sons should have to join the military to vote

Andrea Hardie, saying something terrible
Andrea Hardie, saying something terrible

With election day here in the US less than two months away, Andrea Hardie has decided that maybe it would be ok if some women were allowed to vote after all.

Hardie — the oft-suspended antifeminist Twitter activist known online as Janet Bloomfield and/or JudgyBitch — has long been a vocal opponent of women’s suffrage, on the grounds that women tend to vote for politicians who support things she thinks are bad, like economic stimulus packages and other manifestations of “Big Daddy government.”

But she’s been making some concessions on this front. Some months back, evidently taking her inspiration from Starship Troopers, she decided it would be ok for women to vote if they were to join the military — or get themselves elected to public office.

Now she’s decided that maybe it would be ok if women like her were allowed to vote too.

In a post on her terrible blog, she declares that

I have already argued that women should be allowed to earn the right to vote, either by joining the military or by being voted into leadership positions by male voters. I think I will now expand my exemptions to some other women with ‘skin in the game’.

Wives of men and mothers of sons.

Perhaps not coincidentally, Hardie falls into both of those categories, as she has regularly reminded her readers.

But ladies like her are still ladies. Why should we let them vote?

Women who are legally married to a man, who by definition is subject to the draft, have skin the game. They have a right to make leadership decisions that could result in their husband’s death. Needless to say, the right to vote is surrendered upon divorce. It can only be regained by remarriage, to a man.

Huh. Never mind that, in the US and Canada at least, there is no draft, and the chances of a draft being reinstated in the forseeable future can be rounded down to zero percent.

And never mind that all women living in a country have “skin in the game” by virtue of, you know, living in that country.

Let’s just accept her premise for a moment and work out the technicalities. Like, for example: would these women be stripped of the vote once their husbands are no longer of draft age? NOPE!

The ages of the men involved don’t really matter. In the US, the draft currently sits at 18-25 years of age, but in war time, draft ages can and do change. Men up to the age of 45 were drafted in WWII, and all men up to age 65 had to register. Men in Ukraine are currently subject to the draft up to age 50. All societies will prefer to draft men of all ages before they will draft women.

That’s quite an assumption, given that there are a lot more young women serving in the military than there are old men.

The second group is mothers of sons. They, too, have skin in the game. Once a woman has given birth to a son, she earns the right to vote on the grounds that her son can be drafted and she has a right to participate in leadership decisions that could lead to his death. The only circumstance under which this right can be revoked is if she surrenders legal custody of the boy. His adoptive mother, if there is one, earns the vote.

What if … oh never mind, it’s pointless to try to discuss this as if actual logic is involved in anything that Hardie argues.

Or facts, as her next “argument” shows:

The truly sobering thought is that even if women’s suffrage were repealed, I doubt many women would care, beyond the initial shock of ‘Muh rights! Muh rights!’ If the 19th were repealed, I sincerely doubt very many women would take any of the paths listed above for the purpose of gaining the right to vote. Women will do all of the above, but based on their personal feelings and preferences, and not because they are vitally, deeply, profoundly invested in the idea of suffrage.

It’s always seemed to me just a teensy bit strange how invested Hardie is in the whole anti-suffrage thing, because all the (admittedly halfassed) arguments she musters against women voting would seem also to apply equally to women trying to influence politics in ways other than voting. Like, for example, writing blogs and tweeting tweets and putting up videos on YouTube in order to push your political agenda — all of which Hardie herself does, of course.

And even if we accept her bizarre notion that the only women who have “skin in the game” are women in the military, elected officials, wives of men and mothers of boys, wouldn’t this exemption only apply to those women trying to influence politics in the countries in which they live?

Following Hardie’s logic to its conclusion, Canadian women like her shouldn’t have the right to publicly campaign for political candidates in the US. No skin in the game!

But who is this dude staring out from the header on her Facebook page?

jbfacebooktrump

He looks vaguely familiar. He doesn’t look very Canadian.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

217 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

So, I see the irony of her statements have finally reached her.

“Well, women can vote, but only women who are married and/or have sons, and I happen to have both!”

But, of course, all lesbians or women in relationships with other women, or women who don’t want children or women who (Gods forbid) have daughters will all be left out in the cold. Because apparently they have a “political agenda”.

She has a political agenda too, of course, but her agenda’s the only one worth pushing, and thus it’s not an agenda, but the way the world should be!

She’s backpedaling on these rules she made up on the spot like a child on a playground.

Wait, that’s not fair to the kids. They don’t know any better.

Tovius
Tovius
5 years ago

Well, good to see she’s carving out an exception for herself. /s

Robyn Blanpied
Robyn Blanpied
5 years ago

Practicing to be dictator for life.

Hippielady
Hippielady
5 years ago

Her logic is tragically flawed. But she probably doesn’t notice that or ,perhaps worse, doesn’t care.

Maximilán (they/them)
Maximilán (they/them)
5 years ago

Imagine hating yourself, and other women this much. Knowing her history ,I am almost certain that she takes her toughts seriously.
I am so used to coded and covert bigotry, that I have a hard time processing this kind. It feels like I punched in a cheat code or something.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

Someone needs to break it gently to JB that elected officials focus on many, many other things besides war and the military. Women’s healthcare, education, civil rights, public land, transportation, safety standards…we all have skin in the game. If you’re going to play the game of “this doesn’t affect you directly so you should just shut up and sit down”, then pretty much nobody should have suffrage, ever.

magnesium
magnesium
5 years ago

Can her right to vote be repealed, specifically? She’s too stupid to realize that there’s more to a government than just deciding to draft people into war, so probably for the best.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
5 years ago

Andrea, why do you want to be American so much? I’d say “Just move there already” but a) you need to have a big bank account and marketable talents to even consider immigrating to the States, and b) I like my American friends too much to inflict you on them.

Ohhh, it’s because you’re starved for attention and just want to be noticed by the Douchebag Brigade. Gotcha. Carry on, then?

Though, a note for the future. Just because you’re shallow, narcissistic, spiteful and don’t care much about anything beyond getting your way, doesn’t mean that all women are shallow, narcissistic, spiteful and don’t care about anything beyond getting their way. So maybe just consider not voting yourself, and let other women make up their own mind without shouting at them? Just a thought.

Handsome "Punkle Stan" Jack

@Anything Involving JB and the Draft

comment image

Aunt Podger
Aunt Podger
5 years ago

But the mothers of daughters in the military, they don’t have skin in the game, and you should not be able to have a say on whether there is a stop sign at 5th and Elm unless it could get you killed overseas while you are attempting to kill/ defend other people (domestically is just fine, thanks).

Ugh, I sincerely hope this woman is just an extended performance-art piece gone tragically profitable, like Ann Coulter or Trump himself. Every time I hear something she says, I want to start wearing a scold’s bridle in public, just to demonstrate as loudly and as silently as possible that I could say stupid things, too, I just choose not to do so.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
5 years ago

What about draft dodgers? I mean, they specifically chose not to have any ‘skin in the game’. Should Trump’s right to vote be taken away? Only fair…

What about those who’ve skipped jury duty? It’s like a judicial draft. Can they not vote either? Any court summons?

Tax evaders? People who didn’t ration in WWII? Anyone unwilling or unable to perform any civic duty? Cos there’s a list…

Jen
Jen
5 years ago

Aunt Podger, I’m betting she’s in denial that women are *really* in the military. They just pretend to be while only being there to find husbands and make sandwiches and play nurse.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

She doesn’t believe this stuff. She just knows which side her bread is buttered on.

She could have just said that all people who wish to vote must serve if she really believes service and the vote should be conected. That wouldn’t please her fan base though. She needs to find a way to make women subordinate to men in her suggestions in order to keep them happy.

Miss Edgy Nation
Miss Edgy Nation
5 years ago

So, I wouldn’t have to pay taxes anymore, right? I’m unmarried, childless and have never served in the military, but if I don’t get any say in how my tax dollars are spent…

Judas Peckerwood
5 years ago

Needless to say, the right to vote is surrendered upon divorce. It can only be regained by remarriage, to a man.

Huh. So a woman who divorces a man and then marries a woman serving in the military wouldn’t be able to reclaim the right to vote under this entirely reasonable scheme?

Surely this is just an oversight on the wise JudgyBitch’s part!

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Also because she isn’t about to enlist or give up her own rights.

Snowberry
Snowberry
5 years ago

I tried to come up with a scenario where a typical manospherian would think that women had any “skin in the game”. But the only things I could come up with would never come to vote at all unless society changed to the point where women were considered incapable of making decisions, period.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Judas,
You are trying to apply Earth logic to JB’s rants. The two simply do not mix.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
5 years ago

She doesn’t believe this stuff. She just knows which side her bread is buttered on. She could have just said that all people who wish to vote must serve if she really believes service and the vote should be connected.

I think she believes it; I’d bet money on it actually! If it isn’t legit and she’s faking… She’s been playing this tune for long enough that her opinions and the “pretend” opinions have long since started to blur together. You can only pretend for so long before the fake opinions start becoming real.

I think she believes it, and she’s just bad at spotting the flaws in her reasoning. The reasons she’s giving aren’t really thought out, either – they’re rationalizations. So yeah, full of holes and unforeseen consequences everywhere.

(I also think you’re right in that she realizes that expressing these opinions earns her money; it makes her more extreme and outspoken. But I’ve heard enough terrible people give stupid reasons for believing things to think she’s being sincere, I guess!)

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

You’re probably right.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Though, that’s sad. I prefer thinking she has more awareness.

Moggie
Moggie
5 years ago

Aunt Podger, only rough manly skin counts in this game. Soft, moisturised lady skin isn’t bullet proof, so it has no place in combat.

But wait! Just as a guy afraid of the draft, or already in the military, might cravenly vote against the totally necessary war with Klendathu because they don’t want to get killed, wouldn’t a wife or mother with army skin in the family be similarly swayed by emotion? Shouldn’t the only people eligible to vote be totally logical civilian stemlords, who can be relied on to apply their unemotional manlogic to the question of which brown children to burn?

Aunt Podger
Aunt Podger
5 years ago

@Lea, in all seriousness, I think if she read Why Does He Do That cover to cover, she’d explode into the worst tirade of her career, then go three weeks later, go into a hospital, then shave her head and become a Buddhist nun. This particular species of mold only grows in some very particular toxic conditions.

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

What about the mothers of trans women? Do they get to vote for awhile because they birthed someone AMAB but then get the right revoked when their daughters come out and transition? What if a woman has a son who dies? Is her right to vote revoked? What about widows? Women who are separated from their husbands but not divorced? What about women whose husbands are missing but have not yet been declared dead in absentia?

How would this law be enforced? I don’t know about how it works in Canada, but where I live, once you register to vote, you stay registered and don’t have to reregister until you move. Also, what’s to stop marriages of convenience or women having unwanted babies in order to obtain voting rights? In order to enforce this rule, you’d either have to investigate all registered women every single year, or everyone would have to reregister once a year. This would be incredibly expensive and time consuming. In other words, a lot of big daddy government would be involved.

Of course, this whole ridiculous plan is predisposed on the hypothesis that single and sonless women are more likely to vote for pro-war politicians and men are more likely to vote for anti-war politicians. While there are many anti-war men and hawkish women, in general women are more progressive and more anti-war than men. Perhaps, if the object is to stop men from being drafted and dying in war, than men should be denied the right to vote. Or conservative whites should be denied voting rights. Because I can almost guarantee that my single, childless self has protested war more often that JB has.

Wanda
Wanda
5 years ago

The truly sobering thought is that even if women’s suffrage were repealed, I doubt many women would care, beyond the initial shock of ‘Muh rights! Muh rights!’

Right, that’s why women vote at slightly higher rates than men (in 2012, 53% of voters were female). Obviously women don’t care about voting. *rolls eyes* Just like how people claimed women had no interest in becoming educated but now attend college at higher rates than men. Unlike men, women know what’s at stake if shit slides backward. That’s why we show up more than men– we’ve got more to lose.

I don’t know why she even bothers with this tripe. It will never ever happen, so why even bother going on about it? Clinton is probably going to be president. If the election swings Democrat, we could have the highest percentage of women in Congress as ever before. And unlike JudgyBitch, these women don’t write angry screeds online while doing jack shit about working for things they want. They’ve actually shown up and done the work for the things they believe in.

Victorious Parasol
Victorious Parasol
5 years ago

Ah, JudgyBitch. 😛

What about women who can’t have children, for whatever reason? Oh, right. They’re just supposed to stay home and do the dance of shame.

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

Also, do trans men get voting rights? I’m guessing the MRA answer would be “no” because they don’t consider them real men. And how do non-binary people fit in here?

I think the reason that women in the military or women who have wives or daughters in the military aren’t being considered because MRAs don’t actually care about the lives or welfare of people in the military. They probably think that people who joined voluntarily are asking for it when it comes to service related death, injury, and PTSD because they chose to be there.

They pretend to care about hypothetical drafted men because they know that draft is unlikely to be reinstated anytime soon. Caring about hypothetical draftees means they don’t have actually do any real activism. If they really gave a shit about men who were drafted, you’d see MRAs doing activism surrounding helping homeless Vietnam vets, getting the military to do a better job recognizing and paying out those with agent orange related illness or disability or fundraising for the DAV. You don’t ever see that though. Because this whinging about the draft is their excuse to either argue that women should be denied citizenship rights or women should be immediately drafted and/or killed to make for male combat deaths.

Sheila Crosby
5 years ago

I accidentally clicked on the link to her blog. The strapline is “The radical notion that women are adults.” And the vast majority of us are, but all Andrea Hardie ever seems to do is fling poo. Much adult.

rogue angel
rogue angel
5 years ago

I’m curious. This Hardie character lives in Canada, last I checked. Assuming this half-baked scheme of hers had a chance at all of becoming real, I wonder: in which country would any of it apply? Which country’s politics is she even dreaming of influencing, anyway? Is she perhaps hoping to sway any foreign governments in the process, or just her own? (And if so, why is she just blabbing on the Internet? Shouldn’t she be introducing herself to a few politicians?)

Oh, wait. That’s right. I’m trying to apply logic in a no-logic zone.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

What is it about the worst sorts of people that allows them to believe they are the best humanity has to offer?

I know about Dunning-Kuger, but this has added malice. They aren’t just the best and specialest in their opinion. Those “beneath” them should suffer in some way.

Is there a term for this sort of thinking?

Iseult The Idle
Iseult The Idle
5 years ago

No, she doesn’t believe any of this happy horse shit. She just wants to be accepted by the boys.

(((Hambeast))) Now With Extra Parentheses
(((Hambeast))) Now With Extra Parentheses
5 years ago

I’m a woman and a veteran, I separated from the AF when I was 27. I was unmarried until the age of 41.

Under JB’s desired scenario, would I have relinquished my voting rights for the 14 years between my military service and my marriage?

Victorious Parasol – I’m supposed to do a dance? I’m assuming it’s interpretive dance, that seems the correct style to me, anyhow. If I’m wrong, I’ll need some choreography, stat!

leigh summers
leigh summers
5 years ago

You know, she may have a point. If women have no involvement in the military (because no women have ever been in the military ever) then maybe they shouldn’t have a say in military decisions.

Just like (cis)men shouldn’t be able to make decisions about policy affecting abortion or birth control access for women. Because they have no “skin in the game.” Makes sense, thanks JB!

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
5 years ago

… she has a right to participate in leadership decisions that could lead to his death.

Skin in the game because politicians make decisions that might lead to the death of a (male) family member? I’d suggest that everyone has skin in the game if they or the members of their families eat food or drink water.

Contaminated food, baby formula bulked up with melamine or other non-food material, poisonous wastes that get into groundwater and private wells or public reservoirs. All these things are controlled by legislation and enforced by public servants.

We all have skin in the game all of the time – even if we’re living in a completely peaceful world.

GenJones
GenJones
5 years ago

Being a Mean Girl for a sec, but has anyone noticed that for some reason she always seems to look crosseyed, slurring shitfaced drunk when she tries to make her tough face? She seriously looks like she’s about to urp the pea soup on herself.

Lars
Lars
5 years ago

Because I can almost guarantee that my single, childless self has blah, blah, blah

@WWTH
I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

Bakunin
Bakunin
5 years ago

I feel like pointing out that in Starship Troopers (the book), it wasn’t just military service that made someone a citizen, it was federal service. The recruiter Rico talks to points out that whoever applies gets in; blind, deaf, the service can’t say no, because it is still someone’s vote that is at stake. The act of asking to vote and then doing something for a couple years is all it took. Still kind of an uncool system, but not close to what these fucks want.

Oh yeah, and you had to explicitly sign up! You didn’t get citizenship because of a hypothetical draft that might not happen, you actually had to go through the training and work for it! The system Heinlein described rewarded people for national service, not for being born with a dick! Hardie and her ilk seem to miss that fact.

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

Hey, Lars! Good to have you back! Just out of curiosity, do you just lurk until I mention my marital status and then jump in or have you been staying away because the other trolls were intimidating to you?

I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

Why? So that we’ll have to marry you instead? No thanks.
comment image?

Did you expand your little schooolboy crush to Paradoxy now too? I’m guess I’m supposed to be jealous and sad that I no longer have you all to myself. It’s alright, snookums. I’ll live.

Handsome "Punkle Stan" Jack

I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

http://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9ffct69wG1rnbepy.gif

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

I know that the last time we had a mayoral election, it hinged on the probability of each candidate taking Louisville into war against Indiana. Men voted against war while unmarried women were totes pro-war, because fuck Indiana. Unfortunately the men won and we are still at peace with our neighbor.

That’s how elections work, right?

eta:

I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

http://i.imgur.com/HrzvxHD.gif

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

Lea | September 18, 2016 at 1:39 pm
She doesn’t believe this stuff. She just knows which side her bread is buttered on.

Or, if she does, she thinks she’ll get some special exemption because she’s been a “good girl” and toed the ideological line.

Lars | September 18, 2016 at 3:10 pm
@WWTH
I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

One, I’m not single, I’m dating Jack, who just posted you the lovely “Ignore” gif. (I don’t know if I was dating Jackie the last time you slid on here on your own slime, but just FYI.)

Two, too late Pookie, I’ve already registered to vote!

Though, I am curious, what’s your reasoning for deciding I shouldn’t be able to vote? Enlighten me.

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

Lars won’t be back to enlighten shit. Mocking his fixation with me – and apparently now you as well – always drives him away.

Dreadnought
Dreadnought
5 years ago

Nobody ever willingly volunteers themselves to be opressed do they. “Yeah well I don’t think women should be given the right to vote… except for me.” Jeez

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
5 years ago

@WWTH
I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

http://pinkie.mylittlefacewhen.com/media/f/img/mlfw9048-215658__UNOPT__safe_fluttershy_animated_image-macro_haters-gonna-hate.gif.gif

(((VioletBeauregarde))): Social Justice Necromancer
(((VioletBeauregarde))): Social Justice Necromancer
5 years ago

Short JB: Ok…I think girls are bad, I think that they shouldn’t vote unless they join the military or straight. Love me…looove meeee!

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo | September 18, 2016 at 3:48 pm
Lars won’t be back to enlighten shit. Mocking his fixation with me – and apparently now you as well – always drives him away.

Yeah, but I still thought I should ask, mostly because I want to know why he thinks that beyond “you’re not married and you don’t agree with me about politics, therefore you shouldn’t be allowed to vote at all”.

Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
Sinkable John : Pansy Ass Pinko, Regicidal Beast-of-Burden
5 years ago

I don’t know about all unmarried women, but you and Paradoxy should definitely be denied the right to vote.

So that was supposed to be, like, wit, right ?

Damn I feel sorry for trolls sometimes.

EJ (The Other One)
5 years ago

What Lea said. She’s playing to a hateful audience, and the tune they want to hear is a hateful one. This isn’t about logic: logic is only an issue for people who have integrity.

If every single woman in the world performed Nobel-prizewinning feats tomorrow, then the day after that Hardie’s audience would still want her to tell them how women are worthless, and she would still deliver.

It’s just sad.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ bakunin

The system Heinlein described rewarded people for national service

She doesn’t strike me as someone who’d be a fan of a book where women in the military are disproportionately represented in the Fleet officer class because women are inherently better at maths.

PocketNerd
PocketNerd
5 years ago

What is the deal with the MRA obsession with the draft? For Pete’s sake, for USAians at least, you’d have to be about 65 years old for conscription ever to have been an concern for you.

Then again, “We hunted the mammoth for you!!” is exactly the same kind of ridiculous appropriation, so maybe I shouldn’t be surprised.

1 2 3 5