Categories
aggrieved entitlement alt-right antifeminism antifeminist women empathy deficit entitled babies literal nazis men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA none dare call it conspiracy racism TROOOOLLLL?

No one told these Tweeters that the #RepealThe19th hashtag was all a big joke

Not a Trump supporter
Not a Trump supporter

Yesterday, after poll guru Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight posted a chart showing that Donald Trump could easily win the election if only men were allowed to vote, some Trump fans began wondering, with varying degrees of seriousness, if maybe it would be a good idea to repeal the pesky 19th Amendment that gave women in the US the vote in the first place.

Soon #RepealThe19th hashtag was trending on Twitter.

The good news is that most of the people using the hashtag were those who were appalled by the very idea of it. The Washington Post went through 1000 Tweets posted in the hashtag last night, and as best as they could tell, only about a tenth of the posts were from Trump supporters, and most of them weren’t serious about actually taking the vote away from women.

Indeed, some took it upon themselves to tell the world that #RepealThe19th was nothing more than a big goof.

https://twitter.com/andeew2016/status/786342381964496896

Some even went so far as to claim that the hashtag was some kind of disinfo operation designed to make Trump supporters look bad:

https://twitter.com/commiesgohome/status/786441807492157440

But if this was all some big conspiracy against Trump supporters or the Alt-Right, someone forgot to tell this to the Alt-Righters who actually do want to roll back the 19th Amendment, some of whom had been using the hashtag already.

Consider, for example, Paul Ramsey (RAMZPAUL), the affable white supremacist YouTuber who’s been arguing publicly against women’s suffrage for at least as long as I’ve been running this blog (and probably a lot longer than that).

https://twitter.com/ramzpaul/status/786478584684830720

https://twitter.com/ramzpaul/status/786505386513854464

https://twitter.com/ramzpaul/status/786512496974626816

https://twitter.com/ramzpaul/status/786481791788060672

And apparently the female role involves a lot of not voting.

RAMZ is apparently unable to detect irony, because alongside all of these tweets he also posted this:

https://twitter.com/ramzpaul/status/786657673127272448

Then there is the woman known as Spacebunny, also known as Theodore “Vox Day” Beale’s apparently non-imaginary wife.

https://twitter.com/Spacebunnyday/status/786311866024734722

https://twitter.com/Spacebunnyday/status/784667107875229696

These guys seem, well, fairly sincere in their hatred of women voting as well:

https://twitter.com/RedPillScience/status/786392337328971776

https://twitter.com/RedPillScience/status/786389870901985280

https://twitter.com/huWhiteDaily/status/786362432692203520

 

https://twitter.com/DinduReport/status/786334728408408064

But these days who knows who’s sincere or who’s trolling, or if there’s even a meaningful distinction between the two, at least when it comes to the most energetic shitposters in the Trump army.

Whether or not these guys really think women should be forbidden to vote, I feel fairly certain that they are really a bunch of hateful dicks.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

169 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
sparkalipoo
sparkalipoo
3 years ago

@starfury and Dalillama

cracked has a horrible habit of writting apologia for rather terrible people and I think a lot of it comes from a lot of their writers are middle class white cis men who don’t completely get that a lot of the people who are mad at misogynists and racists and the religious right and alt right are people whose lives are directly, negatively affected by those factions of society and they have the privilege of having the actions of those groups be an abstraction.

Well I agree with him that rural America is largely ignored and forgotten and that rural America has problems such as job loss that politicians largely ignore, but I don’t think basing an article on that issue on why liberals should be more understanding of Trump supporters is the wrong move.

Trump supporters tend to be wealthier than average, so the idea that he appeals to the rural poor is a myth (and something I actually think comes from a negative bias towards the rural poor)
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

Also, Trump lost some rural areas and for a lot of people in rural areas, Trumps lack of a strong religious commitment is a real issue
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/10/04/rural-vote-presidential-election-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-creston-iowa/90951050/

sparkalipoo
sparkalipoo
3 years ago

@podkanyelives

I am sick to death of being told that I, as a struggling lower-middle-class American from a liberal urban area can’t possible understand what life is LIIIIIIKE for struggling lower-middle-class Americans from…frankly…usually the burbs of big red-state cities.

I agree with you so much, I’m from Western Massachusetts, so even though I’m from a blue area in a blue state, a lot of the economic issues we have here are similar to economic issues in rural areas in red states (even the economic problems of the cities in my region) so I get the frustrations of the rural poor in red states although I do think the way the respond to the same issues I’m dealing with is stupid. I also find wealthy urbanites explaining to me that I don’t understand the white rural working class (of which I’m a member of) while assuming that I’m from the same place as they are and then tell me that Trump is “culturally working class” deeply insulting. Nothing about who Trump is reflects the values that I was raised in and he wouldn’t fit in with anyone that I know

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
3 years ago

Scildfreja Unnýðnes

First one’s sort of philosophical – is there a meaningful difference between us causing the extinction of every form of life on the planet and the extinction of arguably-sentient life on the planet? Second, there’s a not-unreasonable chance that our pollution could cause literally everything in the biosphere to die, a la Venus. Or has that been refuted at some point?

Second question first. No. We can’t do a Venus. Basically – the oceans didn’t boil away during the PETM, so it’s unlikely to happen now even though we’re driving the process much faster than the PETM. We could, of course, turn the oceans into fetid stinking anaerobic swamps if we’re not careful.

I really don’t see how we could cause the extinction of all life forms, no matter the brain size-capacity-function. There is life – of a sort – in every conceivable and inconceivable niche environment/ ecology across the world. From weird thingummies in the bottom of the lightless depths of the ocean to the pitiless heat and radiation of near waterless deserts to those strange things that accumulate in the sulphurous environments of volcanoes both above the ground and those venting through the sea floor as well as the lichens and moulds that live in icesheets.

There’s also the post-meteor, post-dinosaur period 65ish million years ago. Every land based critter of any substantial size (or speed of metabolism needing constant nutrition) died off for lack of food and shelter in fairly short order. But there were lots and lots of other survivors. Little tiny scuttling (but not too fast) things – mammal precursors, marsupial and monotreme oddities, small dinosaurs and reptiles, proto-bird critters, lots of worms and beetles as well as various food sources – not much development of grasses, let alone flowering plants at the time. Ferns, fungi, other things that grew slowly and were already adapted to low light, low nutrient environments. So long as an animal was capable, like many reptiles nowadays, of surviving and reproducing while not consuming any nutrients for lengthy periods, then they could survive and eventually evolve.

Some people think that the kangaroo reproduction strategy of mating when a healthy male is available to mate with – but not starting the development of the foetus until there’s enough fodder and water available for the mother to sustain both herself and the developing offspring – is a pre-existing feature that allowed whatever came before kangaroos to survive that period. But whatever they were, they weren’t the size of a big red, more likely to be restricted to the size of a rat-vole-weasel and to shelter in burrows and hollows.

Remember, everything dead or alive is, or becomes, food for living things at some point. So if we’re talking about killing every living thing on land, we’ll be killing trees shrubs grasses as well as all the insects, fungi, slimes, moulds, reptiles, amphibians, mammals and birds. Some adaptable critters will survive more or less everything you can throw at them – rats for instance. And there are about 50 million species of bacteria and the same number of fungi – in soils alone. So long as they’re not ploughed up and exposed to radiation from the sun, they’re pretty hard to kill. Certainly you couldn’t kill all soil life. The other environment of course is water, both fresh and ocean waters.

We could certainly kill off ourselves and many of the plants and animals we rely on for food along with lots of other valuable-ugly-strange-beautiful living things. But we’d be very hard-pressed to kill everything.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
3 years ago

I recall reading somewhere that most of the biomass on earth is unicellular, and also that most of it is subsurface.

Anyone know if that’s true?

kupo
kupo
3 years ago

@Alan
Unrelated, but I thought you might find it amusing that a bunch of Trump supporters keep whining on FB about how Clinton once defended a child rapist in court.

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
3 years ago

Anyone know if that’s true?

Maybe yes. Maybe no.

There are these two wiki items https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microorganism and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_%28ecology%29 .

However, there’s also this. http://phys.org/news/2012-08-biomass-life-planet-earth.html It revises the estimate of seafloor organisms downwards substantially.

Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
3 years ago

@sparkalipoo: thanks for the post about the economics of Trump supporters. I’d bought into the theory that his support was mostly rural poor. Learning is good.

@Kupo: The point I’ve seen them harp on about is that she laughed in an interview about the case several years ago. Someone else posted a link to an analysis of that interview, which made it clear that she was laughing at specific oddities of the case, rather than at the victim, but Trumpists keep saying, ‘she defended a child rapist and then laughed at his victim!!!!’

Its an election year. Facts are optional /s
(that last was meant to be funny/sarcastic)

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
3 years ago

@ kupo

Yeah saw that. It’s all BS of course. Firstly HRC was nominated by the judge to act. (there’s an interesting aside here that it’s generally perceived that rape cases are best defended by conventionally attractive young women, which is why she was picked. Feel free to discuss from a feminist perspective)

But even if she hadn’t been drafted, so what? I’m a firm believer in the ‘cab rank’ principle (see also Adam’s quote about defending Benedict Arnold)

The case didn’t even go to trial. There was a plea bargain. (that was at the behest of the victim’s mother who very understandably didn’t want her daughter to have to go through the trauma of a trial)

It was in a later interview that Hilary pointed out that the guy who later admitted the offence had passed a polygraph test. Her laughter was in relation to the reliability of such tests. Nothing to do with the victim at all.

And anyway, Trump should be wary about dissing lawyers who defend rapists. He’s likely to be needing one soon.

Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
3 years ago

@Kupo: thank you for what you had to say about the post I was getting hot and bothered by above. It’s lear that the majority of the community read it the same way you were, which tells me I was rather badly misreading the intent.

@WWTH: hmm, you may have a point. In any case, a white man posting on a site dedicated to mocking racist misogynistic arses probably shouldn’t be trying to make anything about himself. And you are definitely correct that it isn’t the task of anyone here to educate me. Thank you for taking the time to make the attempt.

Dalillama
Dalillama
3 years ago

@Axe

Yeah, but it was still a reasonable question. Especially when every other question was about whether or not Murica would immediately sink into the ocean if a black dude sat at the Oval Office desk

Oh, it totally was, but I’ll take inexperienced over malevolently incompetent any day.

The fact that ‘Establishment’ is capitalized fills me with a mild sorta existential panic on behalf of political discourse

Don’t blame me man, I didn’t do it.

1 back and 2 forward, I suppose…

At best.
@Sparkalipoo

Trump supporters tend to be wealthier than average, so the idea that he appeals to the rural poor is a myth (and something I actually think comes from a negative bias towards the rural poor)

Support for Trump specifically is basically irrelevant to the commentary I made earlier on that article.The truth is, rural and suburban areas both vote predominantly Republican, and no Republican politician is significantly different from Donald Trump on a policy level.

Also, Trump lost some rural areas and for a lot of people in rural areas, Trumps lack of a strong religious commitment is a real issue

The fact that they’d rather have someone like Sam Brownback doesn’t change a word of what I said above.

I also find wealthy urbanites explaining to me that I don’t understand the white rural working class (of which I’m a member of) while assuming that I’m from the same place as they are and then tell me that Trump is “culturally working class” deeply insulting. Nothing about who Trump is reflects the values that I was raised in and he wouldn’t fit in with anyone that I know

That’s just ludicrous, though. Nobody in Trump’s family has been working class for a century now. He’s silver spoon asshole all the way through.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
3 years ago

@Dali

Oh, it totally was, but I’ll take inexperienced over malevolently incompetent any day

Now, if only the Republican candidate weren’t somehow both…

Don’t blame me man, I didn’t do it

The Establishment: the Illuminati for people who wanna be taken seriously 😀

EJ (The Orphic Lizard)

Off-Topic:
I had a discussion on another website about what constitutes the distinction between the “left” and “far left” in Europe. I’m curious: in the opinion of the lefties here, what would be the acid tests of distinction between the two in American politics?

(My definition of the distinction between the two in European terms is to do with the attitude towards the validity of private property.)

Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
Joekster-betas bearded, sheeple shamed, dragons derailed. Reasonable rates.
3 years ago

@Axecalibur: I’d never thought of comparing ‘Establishment’ to ‘Illuminati’, but you’re totally right. Thanks.

Dalillama
Dalillama
3 years ago

@Axe

The Establishment: the Illuminati for people who wanna be taken seriously

Eh, yes and no. There’s certainly an establishment, although not necessarily an Establishment, in U.S. (and other places) politics. Which is to say that there is a certain pool of people who are defined as ‘qualified’ for various high appointive and even elective offices, and this pool of people is very homogenous. Specifically, the people who are generally chosen are those with degrees from an Ivy League institution, supposedly ‘The Best and the Brightest. These people are, for the most part, white anglo-saxon Protestant men from upper class or upper middle class backgrounds. The problem is twofold: First, the assumption that people from such schools have been received a superior education to others, and indeed must be superior intellectual specimens to even be admitted, neither of which is remotely true. There are plenty of schools that are as good acadmically as Harvard or Yale, but they don’t grant entry into the old boys network. The second is, basically, that most of these people don’t actually have the first clue how the world works, because they’ve lived their entire lives cushioned in a bubble of wealth and privilege. Since they have deeply erroneous premises, their education is basically useless for creating solutions to problems faced by anyone who’s not a rich white guy, because they have no clue what those problems are or where they come from. See, for instance, Thomas Frank’s Listen, Liberal for a discussion of what that does to economic policy.

Diptych
Diptych
3 years ago

So, essentially, it’s less “plausible Illuminati” and more “aristocracy without the rows of motheaten ermine”.

Dalillama
Dalillama
3 years ago

That’s about the size of it. For all our pretensions to the contrary, the U.S. has a well established class system with very little mobility, and also a caste system based on race and ethnicity.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
3 years ago

@Dali

Which is to say that there is a certain pool of people who are defined as ‘qualified’ for various high appointive and even elective offices, and this pool of people is very homogenous

*nods*

the U.S. has a well established class system with very little mobility, and also a caste system based on race and ethnicity

*more nodding*

Mikki
Mikki
3 years ago

“Women are evil cunts who only want high-T alpha savages and dont give any other men a chance”

“Women are evil cunts who only want low-T beta cucks that they can dominate.”

kupo
kupo
3 years ago

So now a bunch of people have decided that #RepealThe19th is so ridiculous it must be a false flag operation by the Clinton campaign to convince women to vote for her. Congrats, MRAs. Your position is so ludicrous that even non-conspiracy theorists think a conspiracy theory makes more sense than you believing what you actually believe.