Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
At some point, someone is going to need to explain MAGA women.
If you are intimately tied to bullies, going along with the bully can be the easiest course of action. Hopefully then the bully sees you in a good light and doesn’t turn on you. The authoritarian mindset sees the world in terms of hierarchy, so there’s lots of jockeying for power and being sure that you’re in the best possible position in the hierarchy. Sometimes women can move up in their own, and there are plenty of awful women willing to do their own awful things to climb the ladder. But men still have all the real MAGA power, and ultimately the women can only hope to stay in their good graces. (See, eg, Phyllis Schlafley — after all she did to fight against the ERA, and despite strong professional credentials, she reportedly wanted a political post after the ERA battles and was denied by the old boys club she’d just worked to support. But I suspect everyone thinks that she’ll be the exception while she’s on top, only to learn the same old lesson every time.)
Also, women are offered psychological comfort tricks to keep them from feeling too torn about being on the side of the awful people — think of all the “she shouldn’t have been at his house in the first place,” or “where where her parents,” or “my daughter would know better” arguments people have used on this thread. I’ve seen studies of test juries in simulated rape trials that found conservative women held the most negative judgments against the hypothetical victims, even more than men. It’s a coping mechanism because distinguishing “your type of woman” from “THAT type of woman” makes you feel safe from ever facing the same kind of dangers.