top 70 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 135 points 11 months ago (1 child)

"Republican Women Suddenly Realize..."

No, they didn't. To be a Republican is to abandon realization entirely.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 47 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Shut up and get back in the house, Honey. Don't you know being a tradwife is Patriotic?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    If feel like more of them just realizing that they won't be the exception to the rule and only really care now that it's obvious they'll get the shit end of the stick just like everyone else.

    For a great many MAGAs it is and always was about weaponizing a social and political movement to hurt people they don't like and now that it's hurting them, we're seeing clearly that their principles never aligned with what they espoused. It's always hypocrisy with them, they aren't willing to be tradwives and follow the ideals they claim to support, but they're happy to use the idea to attack feminism.

    If they wind up being forced out of politics, I have no sympathy for them. It was so very apparent, going all the way back to the beginning of Gamergate, that this was the trajectory of the movement.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago

    This is actually all part of their delusion. Maga genuinely think that they are exceptional people and therefore exceptions will be made for them...

    This is why they are always so shocked when the leopards eat their faces, they are supposed to be one of the good ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 108 points 11 months ago (31 children)

    I saw a post yesterday from some SAHM with two young kids, who's influencer channel is apparently filled with tradwife shit about supporting your husband in all his works, etc. And she's crying because her husband wants a divorce, has cut off her credit cards, she doesn't have any money of her own, doesn't have any credit of her own, she hasn't worked in 15 years and has no idea how she's going to support herself.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 11 months ago (3 children)
  • [+] -9 points 11 months ago (18 children)

    She shouldn't worry. She'll get half, and alimony, and child support.
    In my experience the tears are most likely aimed at prepping her followers for her GoFundMe requests.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    If you think that's not a reason to worry, you haven't tried to live on a fraction of a salary. You think costs are linear?

    Cohabitation saves a lot of money. Divorce breaks that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

    No I haven't tried to live on a fraction of a salary [edit: actually I was a waiter and bartender for years so technically I did live on a fraction of a salary :)..]. But she tried to live on zero salary doing the trad wife method. Did you miss the point of ops post?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    So she shouldn't worry because... she deserves it for choosing a lifestyle?

    Oh right, I forgot the rule. People who make choices we don't agree with should have their children suffer. That keeps slipping my mind.

    I don't agree with the idea that a couple should strictly split responsibilities and not be able to survive without each other, especially along antiquated gender lines. But I'm still going to have empathy for a broken home with children.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    That depends where she is. Alimony is rare in Texas, for example. She might get a small amount of spousal support for a few years, but she's going to need to start a career soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago*

    she better start working, her being influencer meaning she had the means to have nannies, and pretend like she is not financially well off, she just realize her meal ticket(her tradwife influencer lifestyle) is about to come to an end. this is what the people on that reddit said, these people are well off, is just that she came to realize she isnt going to be able to grift anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    So you're saying living on half of one salary is functional these days? Most folks I know can't survive on two full salaries.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    How much is one salary, to you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

    Median income for my Canadian province is $91,000 per year. So living on $45,500 per year Canadian which would be about $1000 dollars less than the statistics from the employment and social development Canada website below for 3 persons (I'm including the two kids)

    https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/foreign-workers/caregiver/financial-ability.html

    I live in on of the richest Canadian provinces and you still probably couldn't pull it off.

    I'm pulling my median salary from here.

    https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/hmip-pimh/en/TableMapChart/TableMatchingCriteria?GeographyType=Country&GeographyId=1&CategoryLevel1=Population%2C+Households+and+Housing+Stock&CategoryLevel2=Household+Income&ColumnField=HouseholdIncomeRange&RowField=Province&SearchTags%5B0%5D.Key=Households&SearchTags%5B0%5D.Value=Number&SearchTags%5B1%5D.Key=Statistics&SearchTags%5B1%5D.Value=AverageAndMedian

    any other questions?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 11 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah one question. I said I was a bartender and waiter. I made about 20 maybe 30 grand gross probably a year with tips. It was a while ago, granted, but the cost of everything increased quite disproportionately to wages since then anyway and you seem like you're trying real hard to prove something.
    So my questions is, what the fuck are you on about?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Were you raising kids? You're making this super passive aggressive comment about the wife getting alimony and shit in a relationship where she's the main caregiver for the kids. The whole thing comes across as super sexist. So what I'm "on about" is not only is your comment super sour and sad sounding, its also way out of whack with economic realities on the ground. So what are YOU on about is what I'm trying to figure out?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Why does it come across as sexist? Which part is untrue? Tell me about the "economic realities on the ground", and the experience you've had that makes you an expert in this field.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Ah I get it now, to quote another one of your quotes about sex work.

    "The.fuck with you all, seriously? Lol.
    1st, I wish I could get someone to pay for pics of my "seat meat", but that's not likely. And my wife won't let me sell pics of her feet either... yet.

    2nd, What's the premise here for all the jump up and defend?
    You're all ready to go spend the time and schooling required to get into a trade or profession, put in work 40 to 100 hrs a week at a job you hate to get some money, get your 2 bedroom house and Toyota Camry, and pay your monthly spank bank subscriptions, just to enable your duck-lip injection OnlyFans neighbor who works 20 hrs a week slobbin knob on camera to roll her F-Pace into the driveway of her 7 bed 8 bath with pool, because she happened to be born with tits and ass and no gag reflex?
    How the fuck should zero skills amount to more affluence than skills?
    I gotta assume everyone here is a keeping up with the Kardashians super fan..
    Crazy. "

    Fucking gross dude. Go fuck yourself im out. You need a better perspective on women, go touch some grass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    "Fucking gross.." Lol.
    You wanna web-stalk my comments and carry over a topic from a different thread here, alrighty, only a few points, which pertain to that thread.
    You're stuck in your little echo-chamber-masterbatorium, worried about someone turning off your porn more than the economic and societal outcomes sites like OnlyFans create.
    You wrap your defence in this fake anti-misogyny/anti-sexism flag, as if creating the conditions that lead women to do OnlyFans type sex work doesn't itself come from a misogynistic place.
    You quote my joking replies to those that made a joke to me or tried to come at me with nothing but an insult, to try to paint me as sexist? Tha. Fuck. Lol.
    As if the opinion that the incel types shouldn't pay for OnlyFans and should instead maybe go work on themselves is misogynistic.
    As if the opinion that an individual in sex work, the oldest profession as they say and also one that requires nearly zero skill, should not accrue more value than a doctor or lawyer who has to take on great debt and great time to learn their trade and benefit society, is a point of view that comes from misogyny or sexism.
    Your position is like saying, a McDonalds fry cook should be paid more than a teacher.
    Porn is just an attraction. If tomorrow a fat guy eating French fries on cam (which in this day and age probably exists somewhere lol) became attractive enough that he made 30 to 100 grand a month, I'd have the same opinion on that as I do about OnlyFans. I think so would most people.
    You're trying to make that opinion, anti-woman or anti-sex-work, to suit your narrative.
    It's anti-bullshit bud.
    You're slow, or you're opinion is hypocritical. So your stalking me around because my opinion differs from yours, doesn't matter.. and the downvotes from your little echo-chamber pals don't matter either..
    It's absolutely hilarious to me, you spent time to bother writing such bullshit to me simply because you want to defend access to porn and prove that point so desperately. The real world is outside, where I live. An absolute comedy, you telling me to touch grass.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    I just gave you economic data from the federal government, I'm not an expert but its basic shit.

    Rent here is like $1600 per month for a two bedroom apartment. How are you going to afford that plus feeding two children on about $3000 per month the after tax? Add on car, heat, electricity, food, internet, and any other expenses.

    Why does your original comment come across as sexist? Hmm maybe its the giant generalization that a traditional spouse would have alimoney child payment in a way that comes across as super sarcastic. What's wrong with a spouse who is the primary childcare provider in a relationship being entitled to those things when that relationship ends? The kids and spouse still need to eat and have their expenses fulfilled, that doesn't change because a relationship ends which is why those things exist in the first place.

    How about this, how about you explain what your original comment meant? How about you explain how its not sexist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    "How about you explain how it's not sexist?"
    Because if it was a guy who chose to be a stay at home dad and his bread-winner-wife divorced him and he cried about it on the internet, I'd also say he'd get child support and alimony.
    Give your balls a tug.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 11 months ago

    "I didn't think I would have to put the penis in MY mouth."

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    There's probably not a whole lot of outage because this has been a pretty prominent feature of GOP thought since, if we are being nice, 2016 and if we're being honest, pretty much always. They didn't really hide or change anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago

    Oh definitely always. Most of the "women" referred to here learned it from their parents who learned it from their parents etc. and so on.

    And probably all of them have a "crazy" aunt who ran off to California with some guy and they haven't talked to her in years.

    Nothing new under the sun. These women will either not learn anything or will not do anything differently. Except for the ~10% who do. And those will be fought over by the various factions of the left to ensure the omnipotence of the republiQan fascist agenda remains firmly in place.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 11 months ago

    they knew, its literally just the"only moral abortion is my abortion" shtick. same goes for LGBTQ+ poc trump supporters.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago

    Evangelicals openly claim that women are chattel.

    It's central to their beliefs. Fact!

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Only because they're misogynists who aren't working fast enough to implement their preferred flavor of fascism. These "women" have no interest in democracy.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    They thought the deal was "your career will be great if you help us wreck things for all the other women" and are now realizing the deal was actually "your career will be great (for a woman) if you help us wreck things for all the other women."

    It's more than people who strive to be "one of the good ones" deserve.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 11 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    chasing that warm fuzzy feeling they got as little girls when the pastor rubbed them juuuust right

    Far be it from me to defend Republicans of either sex, but this line says nothing at all about Republican women and a great deal about you. Shame this was not readily apparent to you when you thought highly enough of it to write it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    maybe someday the nyt will realized they've been a big part of putting those misogynists in power.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 14 points 11 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Shock.

    Anyway, the article only specifically mentions MTG and Mace as feeling like they aren't taken seriously. I think it'd be stranger if they both were taken seriously since they're fucking clowns.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    Good point. It's not that they're women, it's that they're unhinged women. Although considering there are no women in leadership roles even at the committee level, it's definitely misogyny. Mace and MTG are the only ones who seem upset by it. At least publicly

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago

    Again proving they are willing to abandon their own rights in order to hurt others, especially the "libs".

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    I'm pretty sure it's because Republicans are distracting Republican women from the party's misogyny by being extremely cruel to transgender and non-binary people.

    ETA: Just take President LBJ's quote, replace white man for woman and colored man for any LGBTQ+ person, and you'll get the idea.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago

    Eh. Doubt.

    If you're a woman and a Republican, awareness is not a trait you possess.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    I don't think they've suddenly realized.. It's just misogyny doesn't feel good to them when it's directed at privileged republican white women and not lower class black women or latinas.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    This was a very good opinion piece.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago
    [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    What's up with the New York Times? They've been having more anti-trump or anti-republican articles published in the last week than I've seen for a long time. Are the tides really turning? It's too late for me assholes, but it's good to see.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago
    [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Any alternative link? This isn't working for me.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Original: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/opinion/republican-women-misogyny-sexism.html

    If you don't link to the original, you're telling publications you are not interested in this content, and they stop making it.

    Please post links to sources, with an alternative archive link if needed.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago