Front national's success in france and feminists

[cyberguy94Participant 81]

Yesterday it became clear that Marine Le pen’s National Front is now the most supported party in France, with its leader Marine Le Pen together with her nephew, Marion Le Pen.
What does it have to do with feminism?
It’s pretty simple and hilarious because feminists are now in outrage against the hyper-conservative, just graduated, 25 years old Marion.
The funniest part is that France is now in a strategical political position so that being elected as president would make you very relevant on a world wide range. For the first time france could have, not only a female president, but a female president (Marine) and a female governor (Marion) who could together become the most relevant, politically powerfull and influent women in the world.

So…
How comes they are so harshly against them? How comes they aren’t going to fully support them? C’mon, you have a strong lady on one side, and a very young girl beginning to be succesfull in politics on the other, what’s wrong about that? Isn’t exactly what you asked for, feminists?

So, again, what is the purpose of my thread?
Simple, asking you: Do you think that THIS PARADOXICAL SITUATION will be enough to get feminists to understand that “Same sex as me” doesn’t mean “Politically representing me” at all, and so to stop bulls~~~ting about men being “overrepresented” in politics and “privileged” because of that?

[RoyDalParticipant]

Do you think that THIS PARADOXICAL SITUATION will be enough to get feminists to understand that “Same sex as me” doesn’t mean “Politically representing me” at all, and so to stop bulls~~~ting about men being “overrepresented” in politics and “privileged” because of that?

I admire your optimism when it comes to them applying logic and reason to much of anything.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[Anonymous 42]

A new Joan of Arc? GOOD! I always enjoyed a good cat fight! Imagine that, a woman tearing into the arch of feminism’s covenant! My money is on me!

[Everything is all we’ve gotParticipant 233]

Despite knowing what Thatcher was like and what Hilary is like – If I were French right now It’d be difficult for me to not vote Front National.

I believe France’s feminists are imploding at the thought of having women in power that don’t support their PC crap. Feminists hate non-fem women just as much as they hate the ‘oppressive men’ too remember.

"You can suffer from a life experience, or you can learn, move on and thrive."

[cyberguy94Participant 81]

Yes, however the real poin is: will this cognitive dissonance allow them to understand that your sex has litterally NOTHING to do with what you stand for in politic?

The fact that there will be two WOMEN in power who doesn’t follow their agenda and don’t represent them even if THEY ARE WOMEN will allow them to understand that the vast majority of men in power do not represent “normal” men just because THEY ARE MEN?

[Bob BashboshParticipant 160]

cyberguy94 wrote:

…The fact that there will be two WOMEN in power who doesn’t follow their agenda and don’t represent them even if THEY ARE WOMEN will allow them to understand that the vast majority of men in power do not represent “normal” men just because THEY ARE MEN?

Nicely put!

[Biggvs_DickvsParticipant 3725]

cyberguy94 wrote:

understand that the vast majority of men in power do not represent “normal” men just because THEY ARE MEN?

‘ Holy s~~~ from your lips to God’s ears. I’ve been stewing over that one for years and have posted about it too. We need a way to describe this schism whereby a few small group of men exploit the vast majority of us, yet we the “normal” majority are then rhetorically blamed for the deeds of the few at the top.

We need a word for this. Plutocracy starts to cover it, but doesn’t really capture the blame factor that cascades down to those who not only are NOT to blame, but are often even greater victims of it than women supposedly are.

Plutocratic gender blaming?

"Data, I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I'll let you know." --Captain Picard,

[MonkeyMindParticipant 5340]

cyberguy94 wrote:

Simple, asking you: Do you think that THIS PARADOXICAL SITUATION will be enough to get feminists to understand that “Same sex as me” doesn’t mean “Politically representing me” at all, and so to stop bulls~~~ting about men being “overrepresented” in politics and “privileged” because of that?

I suspect it won’t. Feminists are coming from a perspective that equal male/female representation will equate to more equality across the board. Politicans are there first and foremost to represent their voters. If their voters aren’t happy with their representation, they’ll vote for someone else so that politician will loose his/her seat. I consider that fair. The rest is up to the candidates to work hard and win the peoples votes regardless of their gender.

I’m not up on French politics but i’m guessing a lot of this came off the back of the recent terrorist attacks? We have (or had) a political party in the UK called the National Front and their roots stemmed from a group of racists. They weren’t the sort of people i’d want to gain any kind of political power over a country.

[narwhalParticipant]

I think gender still does mean a lot in politics, as both a tool for the politician and for the voter. In the US, there were certainly a ton that voted for Obama because he was black. Obama didn’t milk that too much, but he never needed to. What he has done is made sure he didn’t p~~~ off the black voter base.

Hillary is doing the same thing. There are a ton that will vote for Hillary because she’s a woman, although she doesn’t have a track record for women’s right. And she is making sure everyone thinks of her as a woman, not just as a leader.

For me personally, the race of a candidate doesn’t really matter to me. Gender does, at least in American politics. There is so much political pressure to cater to what feminists want the a female candidate will be forced to listen, even a conservative candidate. And we all know, it’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind.

Ok. Then do it.

[QuietlyquietlyParticipant 728]

I also don’t think that feminists will get it. I think they’ll blame “Teh Patriarchy” for the two Le Pens lack of feminism. Anything to bolster their belief in the insane and ridiculous. They couldn’t think any other way, because to assume that a WOMAN is wrong, is to squarely undermine 50 years of Ideology. It will have to be the fault of Teh Menz.

[MonkeyMindParticipant 5340]

narwhal wrote:

I think gender still does mean a lot in politics, as both a tool for the politician and for the voter. In the US, there were certainly a ton that voted for Obama because he was black. Obama didn’t milk that too much, but he never needed to. What he has done is made sure he didn’t p~~~ off the black voter base.

Hillary is doing the same thing. There are a ton that will vote for Hillary because she’s a woman, although she doesn’t have a track record for women’s right. And she is making sure everyone thinks of her as a woman, not just as a leader.

For me personally, the race of a candidate doesn’t really matter to me. Gender does, at least in American politics. There is so much political pressure to cater to what feminists want the a female candidate will be forced to listen, even a conservative candidate. And we all know, it’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind.

We had Margaret Thatcher in the 80’s and you’d think that she’d be held up as an icon by feminists for her political achivement of running the country but they absolutely hate her. She was a hard woman, but anyone who gets to the top needs to be tough as nails to run a country and make tough decisions.

My guess is that more women at the top isn’t going to pan out the way feminists will think it will. My experience is that female bosses are a lot tougher on other female staff than male bosses. If anything, i think more women in politics would reduce a lot of female entitlements that they get over men because women can see through other women’s bulls~~~ a lot more easily than men can.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22578]

cyberguy94 wrote:

How comes they are so harshly against them? How comes they aren’t going to fully support them? C’mon, you have a strong lady on one side, and a very young girl beginning to be succesfull in politics on the other, what’s wrong about that? Isn’t exactly what you asked for, feminists?

Because most western women are spoiled and they fear actual strong women, the few that are out there, raising the bar of standards for all women. And most western women do not want to live by any standards.

This is the same reason such women hate men whom have standards for the women they seek to date.

[SnakeSpectator 2080]

Biggvs_Dickvs wrote:

We need a word for this. Plutocracy starts to cover it, but doesn’t really capture the blame factor that cascades down to those who not only are NOT to blame, but are often even greater victims of it than women supposedly are.

It’s called slavery.

[Author]

Posts