>>81681010
>but I don't see them lashing out against daddy pimp government.
You don't huh? You don't see them signaling that they want to divorce this establishment too, that they chose over their own men? Pointing fingers at jews and whoever the fuck else they can think of to cut ties with the tainted brand of feminism before people start connecting the dots and start associating the entire phenomenon with women in general? You don't see that?

>Weren't there more anti-suffragettes than suffragettes
Not even close. Their ideology spread like a wildfire. As soon as women came into first contact with feminism, it was like fucking unplugged Agent Smith creating copies of himself. It was irresistible because it resonated with their feelings.

Why did it work so well? Why does it always? Why did women believe any slander both the founders and later on jews cooked up about their men? Why do they still believe any outrageous lie about men when it's presented to them?

I'll leave you with these thought experiments:

1.) Would these devilish master manipulators be capable of working this backwards? Could they have manipulated women to love men or the entire thing was just a natural phenomenon that they decided to take advantage of? Do you think the slider on this moves both ways?

2.) Do you honestly think that any of these women genuinely cared about casting a vote, or were they motivated by something else, like just *being* against men and taking a stance against them?

You don't have to answer any of those, just think about it.