Against female suffrage

It’s not that women voting hasn’t made a difference. There is evidence that women’s suffrage helps shift public spending toward health, education, and children and that in the US, it contributed to greater overall government spending.

Note that higher government spending isn’t a sufficient reason to reverse it but it’s certainly a cost….

26 thoughts on “Against female suffrage”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    The technical phrase is “evolved parasitism”. Women have evolved to exploit men and their willingness to provide. For instance, why don’t humans signal sexual availability in the way that virtually all other mammals do? The feminist answer is so that women can trick several men into thinking her children are theirs and so providing for their mother.

    The vote just gives them a way of taking money from men without the messy sex and children bit. The welfare state is largely about taking from men and giving to women

  2. How do we distinguish between this being a feature of female suffrage, and it being a feature of mass suffrage?

    The point being that they both occurred at about the same time …

  3. M’lud, the article is solely about the voting behaviour of American women and the consequences. In the USA mass white suffrage dates more than a century before universal suffrage for women so Vox thinks it can demonstrate the effect of female suffrage – but utterly fails to cite the differences between those states that had women’s suffrage and those that did not prior to 1920 which would have been the best way to do so.
    Question: is Vox really that stupid? Or is it just that they didn’t like the answer?

  4. For many decades, British women principally voted Conservative. (Or so my fallible memory teaches). If that’s no longer true, why?

    (Were they maybe voting against trade union power?)

  5. American women were in a struggle against the United States government over the issue of female suffrage. It was a struggle that they were losing at every turn because most American women thought that they were better off being dependent on their husbands and having the freedom to work outside the home with full rights granted by the law. Women were able to go to school in order to receive higher degrees, have the right to vote and be appointed to important government positions. This would seem like a big deal to the women, yet they were not aware of the fact that many of these same American women were supporting political organizations that were trying to take away these basic rights.

  6. It has been abundantly clear for decades that female suffrage has not led to an improvement inthe quality of government. It’s fair enough they should have the vote of course, but let’s not delude ourselves as to the consequences.

  7. Bloke in Lower Hutt

    Is the increase spending to do with female suffrage specifically? I suspect it created a whole new constituency of voters that had to be bribed with other people’s money. No doubt we would see even more spending on the teenage demographic if the voting age was dropped to 13yo’s for example.

  8. yvonne, love, mansplaining, if you started by defining in strict terms the first two words in your comment, you’ll find the rest of it works. Or doesn’t. But, yunno. Let’s see where it gets us…

  9. Universal suffrage has been a disaster, particularly when combined with other decadent influences like feminism and socialism. Increase the voting age to 25 and deprive anyone of the vote who receives more in benefits than they pay in tax….It’ll never happen, but the suggestion winds up lefties beautifully.

  10. ‘Issues such as paid maternity leave and sick leave are largely at the whim of their employers or dependent on where they live.’

    Who you work for and where you live are your choices. Dumbass.

    ‘Women, and in particular women of color and in other disadvantaged groups, are still behind. Women experience higher rates of poverty. They are paid less for their work. While single women outpace single men in owning homes, they get a worse deal in housing transactions.’


    A string of unverified assertions.

    Women got the vote, yet free enterprise persists. It ain’t right, I tell ya! Women’s suffrage has failed!

  11. To sum up then:
    Female suffrage has raised taxes, reduced freedom and made life worse for all

    Can anyone name a good, competent female cabinet minister in last twenty years?

    I see May was off on another FemiRant this week about lack of women on FT250 boards – hmm, May had <20% female in cabinet. Glass houses…

  12. Who’s going to Unis? Females

    Re: Sh1t Unis (eg Nottingham Trent*) now demanding Gov aka Taxpayers bailouts as inflated grades mean no thickos rejected by better Unis applying to them

    In full as paywalled:
    FT: [Fall Back] Universities demand financial support over A-level U-turn
    Fallback colleges fear significant shortfall should regraded students switch back to first-choice courses

    UK universities have demanded the government provide “significant financial support” to those institutions that look set to lose students as a result of the government’s U-turn over A-level grades.

    The demands are driven by concerns that less prestigious universities could face a crippling financial shortfall as A-level pupils, whose results have been upgraded by the change in tack by ministers, reject their “insurance” offer in favour of their first-choice institutions.

    In a letter seen by the Financial Times, Alistair Jarvis, chief executive of Universities UK, urged Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, to ensure there would be funds available. “A number of institutions will lose out from this very late policy change and will need significant financial support from government to stabilise their finances,” he wrote.

    The crunch comes as universities scramble to deal with the fallout of the government decision to scrap the original process used to calculate results and rely solely on teacher assessments, which has led to a steep year-on-year increase in top grades.

    That has resulted in more students becoming eligible for their first-choice courses, prompting Mr Williamson to drop a cap on student numbers that had been introduced earlier in the year. Two sources in the admissions process warned that the new official grades may not be available to universities until the end of the week.

    Less-prestigious institutions now fear they could be left with fewer students than they had planned, while high-tariff universities struggle to accommodate a sharp jump in enrolments.

    Vanessa Wilson, the chief executive of University Alliance, which represents some of the institutions offering vocational qualifications, said that while some members looked to see an increase in numbers, others could lose out.

    “There could be in some cases an explosion at one end, and at the other universities not being able to fill places,” she warned. “The government needs to come up with some sort of financial safety net.”

    The grade uplift has presented particular problems for medical schools, which are now obliged to offer places to more students than they are permitted to accept under a strict government number cap for specialist courses, which remains in place.

    The sector has also been in urgent discussions with the government, demanding a boost in funding for vocational courses in areas such as medicine and nursing, and an end to the cap on places.

    Louise Kenny, pro-vice chancellor at the University of Liverpool’s School of Health and Life Sciences, said in normal years medical schools correctly estimated how many students would meet their conditional grades and would never go over the cap. “But this year it’s in complete disarray.”

    Prof Kenny said without the official grades the scale of oversubscription was unclear but warned there could as many as 30 per cent more applicants eligible than there are places available across all UK medical schools.

    She said the university would do “everything in its power” to ensure as many eligible students as possible could join this year, but acknowledged many may need to accept deferred places.

    In order to increase the number of places for trainee doctors, the government would need to support the creation of new hospital placements and training facilities such as dissection rooms. It would also have to increase subsidies for medical training, which amounts to around £175,000 per student over the five-year course.

    “We are lobbying for a really rapid injection of cash and infrastructure, as well as lifting the cap,” Prof Kenny said.

    The Royal College of General Practitioners also called on the government to ensure all medical students could study, warning that a larger cohort “will have significant financial and administrative implications”.

    Vocational courses such as nursing and midwifery had already seen a spike in interest during the pandemic and would now struggle to accommodate a rise in eligible students, according to a number of universities.

    The Department for Education said it was working with the health and social care department to ensure any capacity issues for regulated courses were “resolved quickly”.

    Michelle Donelan, the universities minister, said she was holding meetings daily with a task force from the sector.

    “We are working closely with the higher education sector to understand the challenges facing universities and provide as much support as we can,” she said.”

    The grade uplift has presented particular problems for medical schools, which are now obliged to offer places to more [UK] students than they are permitted to accept [by GMC]

    Results U-turn put out short term political fire but will cause greater harm next year

    The economy is on the brink of disaster, illegal immigrants are flooding in, Johnson is invisible and all you media waffle on about is BLM and A-levels

    A generation of Einsteins that cannot change a lightbulb

  13. So Much For Subtlety

    UK universities have demanded the government provide “significant financial support” … driven by concerns that less prestigious universities could face a crippling financial shortfall”

    I am not sure if it is wrong to take pleasure in the suffering of others. If Hell exists, would be it wrong to enjoy the torments of the damned? Surely compassion would be misplaced as it would doubt the wisdom and judgement of The Big Guy. It is a tough theological issue.

    So I am torn here. I do not want to publicly express pleasure at the idea of Britain’s third tier universities collapsing. But on the other hand …. I can think of more tragic things that might happen

  14. No good ever came out of government interfering in universities. Let them rot, or change their approach to one that makes money.

  15. So I am torn here. I do not want to publicly express pleasure at the idea of Britain’s third tier universities collapsing. But on the other hand …. I can think of more tragic things that might happen

    My own 3rd tier university (Leeds Poly when I was there back in 1990) is one of those threatened and while I have some feelings for the old Alma Matar, they shafted themselves when they greedily decided (along with all the others I should add), that the Danegeld of student fees was to charge the maximum across the board and reduce all incentive for differentiation.

    If they hadn’t been so greedy and charged a level of student fees that was appropriate to their capability, facilities and prestige (probably about 1/3rd of what they charge) then they probably would still have a reasonable influx of the local student population. When I was there, most of the student body were vocational types who had a specific career in mind and were attending courses tailored to that. The current 4 year degrees in navel contemplation serves neither the vast majority of students, nor their prospective employers.

    So yes. They deserve to go under for being rent seeking bastards.

  16. JG, exactly right. The third teir have one outstanding asset. The right to confer a degree. If they realized that their marketing of this right was an opportunity to give that degree over a shorter period, or for less money or by some other advantageous arrangemnt they could then find a marketing niche. The trouble is (possibly) they believe they are in the noble pursuit of academia with all the virtue thus entailed. And so they need help from the government that promoted them into a degree-conferring entity instead of using that in order to survive.

  17. How do we distinguish between this being a feature of female suffrage, and it being a feature of mass suffrage?

    Look at the results of Sweden’s 1922 referendum on alcohol prohibition. Apparently men and women voted separately since they’re able to break down the figures. (I’m guessing but couldn’t find any evidence that the theory was if you put women in a separate room to mark their ballots, they can do it freely without any fear of interference from their husbands.)

    The referendum failed 51-49 (so alcohol remained legal). Men voted 59-41 to keep alcohol legal; women voted 59-41 for prohibition.

  18. Universities.
    The top tier universities want more government money because they will have more customers than expected.
    The lower tier universities want more government money because they will have less customers than normal.
    It has been said that every cause starts as a movement, changes into a business and ends up as a racket.
    Universities have clearly reached the final stage.
    I suspect that secondary education isn’t far behind.

  19. A majority of teachers have assumed that other teachers will cheat. They have responded by upping the grades of their students so that when OfQual adjusts the grades their students will get the grades they deserve.
    What is clear is that teachers in dud schools went beyond that and cheated so that their pupils would get grades that they didn’t deserve even after adjustment.
    Then someone claimed that it was unfair that those schools had bigger adjustments to their grades than the schools that didn’t cheat.
    Gavin Williamson should have ignored the screams and offered them the option of the adjusted grades or taking the exam with downgrades possible.

  20. Once NI, Scotland and Wales went, no choice remained but to join them in the fantasy or leave all English kids at a disadvantage. Shoulda had the exams.

  21. @john77

    Disadvantage? Unis & employers will now ignore all 2020 results

    England should have refused and said “We are more honest, the provinces are corrupted”; England pupils would then be advantaged

    The whiners on TV are carefully selected to invoke sympathy

    Good article:
    Exam grades have lost all credibility
    “In addition, future employers need to know that 12 per cent grade inflation was built into this year´s A Level grades and nine per cent for GCSE”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *