"When they came for me, there was nobody left to help."
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2025
997 points (98.4% liked)
News
25384 readers
4521 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Christian right woman will support this. "He's right, I'm not fully capable."
Incels are finally having their moment. Next they will propose laws requiring hot girls to date them.
Not date them, breed ala handmaids tale
Incels aren't getting shit out of this, this benefits rightwing patriarchs who have abused wives at home.
Incels are alone in a basement or some shit dreaming about being the rightwing patriarch but the rightwing patriarch doesn't likely feel anything but disgust for the incel. They'd purge the incel in a heartbeat if they could.
It's more about doing everything they can to increase white birthrates. This us very much to secure white identity and majority.
Replacement theory in effect
No they wouldn't. That's their voter base
Note the "if they could"
load more comments
(1 replies)
The Anti-DEI people hate women? Whodathunk
Can't wait to see all the videos of right-wing women surprised: "What?!! No one told us he was going to do this! We thought when he said he hated women he was only trolling/owning the libs/joking around!"
Look at how Teheran women were dressed in the 70s, and contrast that to how they're dressed now. The same future awaits American women.
Handmaids Tale, anyone?
Margaret Atwood is rolling in her... checks google... Well-appointed Canadian home.
I'm sure she's just going "I literally warned all of you, and the government is using it as an instruction book."
This never gets old.
Unfortunately this never gets old.
load more comments
(15 replies)
Trump is like a 5 years old spoiled child...
This is creeps like Stephen Miller and the other nazi goons. Trump is an idiot. He'll do anything if you compliment him enough.
Scanning the article, the practical threat (besides crazy ideological stunts) seems to be stealth disenfranchisement of this type:
House Republicans passed a bill (which stalled in the Senate) this session to require citizens to have a passport or birth certificate matching their name to vote. This would be a back-door ban on voting for any woman who took her husband's last name and doesn't have a passport, an estimated 69 million women. It would also disproportionately affect Republican women, who are more likely to be married, more likely to have changed their name and less likely to have a passport.
It won't affect republican women because the people running those voting stations won't enforce the rule for "their own".
load more comments
(13 replies)
For the believers, I think that tmany would be fine with this. It reinforces their preferred structure of a patriarchy in which they have a well-defined place and role (head of the domestic household, subservient to the man). No worries about having to deal with a fickle job market or figuring out what you want to do with your life. Your life path is set (get married, raise kids, take care of family), and, for some, that well-defined role the status that it conveys is really comforting. It provides a sense of security.
It's why, I expect, while there are many who fight it, there are plenty of women in Muslim societies who are fine with things as they are. We emphasize with those women who chafe at that and fight it since we've history valued the individual rights of self-determination and freedom, of course.
Thats a big allure of the American taliban to some folks. It provides structure and defined roles in a chaotic world.
Of course, republican men like it for the power, but more importantly, that women voters mostly vote against them. Stopping women from voting would cement them in power.
If you gloss over the fact that it could be FUCKING VOLUNTARY instead of hate crime. your point is valid for anyone that loves to be forced to do things they don't believe in
I'm not arguing for it, I agree that it's fine if it's a free choice. I don't think personally that it's a good one, though.
My point is that many of the women pushing this on the republican side view all of this, including their own loss of rights, as a positive likely. It's not like a "leopards eating faces" or "voting against their interests" situation where they might be reachable.
But they are. As soon as they don't want what they vote to force. It doesn't matter what specific type of faschism or what rights they are removing, if they are removing rights they don't need they are still being eaten by leopards once they fall down the other side, accidental or not
view more: next ›