Right-Wingers Ask: Why Let Women Vote?

Vote. Too many people still hope you won't.


Janis Lane, president of the Central Mississippi Tea Party. Photo: Virginia Schrieber/Jackson Free Press.

Janis Lane may consider herself a political activist, but that doesn’t mean she thinks she should actually get to vote in the upcoming election. Women getting the right to vote, according to Lane, is the worst thing that ever happened to the country. In an interview with the Jackson Free Press, Lane declared:

Because women have the right to vote, I am active, because I want to make sure there is some sanity for women in the political world.

Lane may be this year’s winner in the race to send us back to the turn of the century, but sadly she is hardly alone. This cycle we already saw another Tea Party activist, reverend, and Fox News guest argue women were too “emotional” to vote, saying in a sermon:

“I think that one of the greatest mistakes America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote.“We should’ve never turned this over to women. And these women are voting in the wrong people. They’re voting in people who are evil who agrees with them who’re gonna take us down this pathway of destruction.

“And this probably was the reason they didn’t allow women to vote when men were men. Because men in the good old days understood the nature of the woman. They were not afraid to deal with it. And they understood that, you let them take over, this is what would happen.”

In 2007, it was Ann Coulter fighting to repeal the right for a woman to vote in an election, saying it was necessary to stop the country from electing any more Democratic presidents.

If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.

Pundits and activists believing in a better country if women no longer had the right to vote is one thing. What’s more self-defeating is when actual female lawmakers believe it as well. In 2001, one state senator in Kansas said if she had a do over, she’d advocate against allowing women the vote in the first place, even if that meant she’d never hold office.

A female state senator says if women’s suffrage were being voted on today she would not support it, because the 19th Amendment was the start of a decades-long erosion of family values.

“I’m an old-fashioned woman, Senator. Kay O’Connor told The Kansas City Star. “Men should take care of women, and if men were taking care of women (today) “we wouldn’t have to vote.”

Delores Ftlrtado, co-president of the Johnson County League of Women Voters, had asked the 59 year-old Republican to the league’s “Celebrate the Right to Vote” luncheon, and O’Connor responded: “You probably wouldn’t want me there because of what I would have to say.”

Furtado said she was shocked by O’Connor’s view. As a state senator, Furtado said, “she is the beneficiary of a system she doesn’t support.”

O’Connor said she does vote. But she said she believes that if men had been protecting the best interests of women, then women would not be forced to cast ballots and serve in the Legislature. Instead, they could stay home, raise families and tend to domestic duties, she said.

Remarkably, O’Connor managed to still serve until 2006, when she retired from office.  There is no word on whether she ever voted for herself or not.

As we head into the final weeks of the election, the most important thing to remember is that we, as women, need to get out and vote. After all, there are still many, many people who think we shouldn’t be allowed to.