Women’s Suffrage

At a July 4^th party last night I made the comment, half in jest, that I thought giving women the vote was a mistake … to the startled gasps of most in the room. I say half in jest because, even though I know this is a losing cause, there are arguments that might still be made on both sides of this “settled law.”  Nothing has 100% positive results and I believe that the 19^th amendment is recently exhibiting its downside … in particular a relatively recent and persistent gender gap ... see: New York Times Article.

Yes, I know that many of you now have steam coming from your ears … and are vowing never to read another thing I write … including the rest of this blog.  But bear with me, please.

Clearly there were many excellent presidents who were elected because of the female vote; FDR, and JFK come to mind. But then again, I believe that females were also instrumental in electing Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama (twice) … and, to my mind, as a result of knee-jerk feminism. One can also make the argument that Bill Clinton’s bad-boy image helped many females pull the voting lever for him two times too. Whether he was a good or bad president is still open for debate … but he clearly was better than the other two I have mentioned. And let us not forget that an all-male voting population did elect quite a number of presidential lemons before 1920 … Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, James Buchanan and Franklin Pierce … to name just a few.

I know making generalizations is dangerous, but I believe that many … but clearly not all … women vote with their hearts and not with their heads. And I believe that politicians try to take advantage of this propensity when they callously put forward issues like “the war on women.” Perhaps I can be (wrongly) accused of being a misogynist, but no sane Republican politician cares to be tarred with that brush. If a female were to vote for a Democrat purely because she believes that she will have her birth control pills paid for by the government, then she is a silly and willing victim of this demagogy.

And I also know that, if Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, millions of voters, including a number of males, will vote for her just because she is a woman. And, if she doesn’t run, which name comes up next most often? … the female Senator from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, that woman with Amerind cheekbones … a double whammy for the emotional voter. Does this not prove that savvy political operatives feel that gender is now a bigger vote getter than experience and qualifications? (Just as race was, I firmly believe, a big political plus to the voters in 2008 and 2012 … and we see what a mare’s nest that this voter naiveté has caused.)

Does this mean that I would never vote for a woman? Of course not. I can name many woman politicians whom I have admired … Maggie Thatcher, Barbara Jordan, Golda Meir, Condoleezza Rice … probably just as many as I can name outstanding male solons.  But this does beg the question: Have we now a population of callow voters who do not know … nor care to know the issues confronting this country … and will let their emotions govern how they vote? And I do believe that a statistically significant higher percentage of this voting bloc is likely comprised of women? This is my point regarding women's suffrage.

Perhaps, a 28^th amendment?  Just kidding …