A woman doesn't need to be a celebrity with a husband on the farm-owning income tier to just be, how did you put it, "a domestic servant to some asshole they met in secondary school".
As before, when you were trying to bring in everything from the 1950s to the <expletive deleted> Suffragettes, You seem to be confusing the #tradwife thing with just, like ordinary housewives.
You don't have a reason to believe I'm doing anything of the sort. You appear to be making an effort to not understand what I wrote.
Which is about on par with *pauses to try and think how to translate this into Boomer* ... thinking that everyone who happens to have long hair is a part of the "hippie movement"?
Stop stereotyping the brave men and women serving on our nation's nuclear submarines. Some of them even have long hair themselves.
The #tradwife tag is a freaky internet cult that started about 4 years ago and has a few dozen major participants, with a few tens of thousands of followers.
Data is not the plural of "some figure I just made up". Hannah Neeleman alone has over ten million followers; Nara Smith has six million. Even the lady you linked to has three hundred thousand.
It does not refer, and never referred, to all women with houses and families everywhere across all time and space. It's mostly just those influencers, and to a lesser extent their followers. That is who any critiques of the tradwife tag are aimed at. The people who choose to identify with it.
Duh. Nobody indicated otherwise.
And if you try to edit the "<expletive deleted>" out of my post again I'll scream bloody murder about how you're misquoting me.
Scream all you want -- it's a free country.
sounds like you were proposing that tradwives just double their husbands' votes.
What the Republican Party idealizes and what it actually gets are not the same thing. I also really don't like that "just" thing you keep adding in to my post. Never. I never would.
Do tell.
Do you think most white straight women actually aspire to wait on your hand and foot as per the #tradwife manifesto? Because I think you and all the other lazy-ass men in this country are in for a rude awakening, if so! The 60s are over, man. Most women have other perogatives than -->just<-- being a domestic servant to some asshole they met in secondary school, and they will vote accordingly.
I don't ever talk about women as though they don't matter, or that their voice doesn't matter,
The whole set of women, no, you don't, because the whole set of women is a group you approve of. But there are subsets of women you disapprove of, and you've certainly talked about the women in those sets as though they and their voices don't matter. Outgroups are like children -- it's different when they're yours.
and implying that I would is an underhanded lie.
In a better world, that would indicate I have your permission to call what you say a "lie". Alas, this isn't a better world.
You keep using that phrase. I do not think it means what you think it means.
you're awfully misogynistic,
You don't have a reason to think I'm anything of the sort. Your ideology is a parasitic meme that teaches its hosts to believe trumped up ad hominems against unbelievers in order to insulate itself from critical thought, just like medieval Christianity teaching that heretics worshipped Satan.
and your dismissive attitude is seeping into your misreporting of my position. I would never describe a woman's vote as "just" anything,
I didn't say you did -- I said it
sounded like you were doing so. It did in point of fact sound that way, because you offered 'Of course she "gets to vote". What part of "submit to your husband in all things" do you not understand? Doubling his vote is a critical part of the MAGA strategy' as justification for your claim 'they are actively trying to bring full-time unpaid labor without representation on the basis of gender', and the tradwives just doubling their husbands' votes is what it would take for your purported justification to do its job. Since you are now telling us that no, that's not what you meant, it follows that your attempted justification of your earlier slur was worthless. When you wrote 'they are actively trying to bring full-time unpaid labor without representation on the basis of gender', that was a strawman. You were misrepresenting tradwife influencers. More than that, you were talking about tradwife influencers -- a set of women you disapprove of -- as though they don't matter and their voices don't matter.
It's not the only time, either. When you called your link to an anti-tradwife hit piece "the #tradwife manifesto", you were having a critic of tradwives speak for tradwives instead of letting them speak for themselves. That was you talking about tradwives as if they and their voices don't matter.
www.fastslang.com
Sorry bro, I had no idea corning was a thing! I guess I don't get out enough.