WASHINGTON, August 17, 2017 — Syndicated columnist and author Ann Coulter, not one to mince words, once wrote, “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.”
Economist John Lott, whose exhaustive studies on gun violence were published in his books “More Guns, Less Crime” and “The Bias Against Guns,” illustrated the sagacity of our nations’ Founders in enshrining the individual’s right to bear arms.
His study, “Did Women’s Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government?” found:
“Women appear to be more risk-averse than men … Since women tend to have lower incomes, they benefit more from various government programs that redistribute income to the poor, such as progressive taxation. Hence, single women as well as women who anticipate that they may become single may prefer a more progressive tax system and more wealth transfers to low-income people as an alternative to a share of a husband’s uncertain future income.”
Writing in the Washington Times, Lott observed, “For decades, polls have shown that women as a group vote differently than men. Without the women’s vote, Republicans would have swept every presidential race between 1968 and 2004.”
If Lott’s finding that “risk-averse” women see big, intrusive, redistributive government as a substitute husband or sugar daddy, Kristen R. Ghodsee, professor of Russian and East European studies at the University of Pennsylvania, says the mother of all redistributive states, the Soviet Union, offered enslaved women under its totalitarian sway something their female counterparts in the West sorely lacked: better sex.
Writing in the New York Times, Professor Ghodee said:
“A comparative sociological study of East and West Germans conducted after reunification in 1990 found that Eastern women had twice as many orgasms as Western women.”
A Bulgarian woman named Ana Durcheva told Ghodee that her 43-years under communist repression may have been bad, but “life was full of romance … I didn’t need a man to support me. I could do as I pleased.”
Ghodee adds that Ms. Durcheva “often complained that the new free market hindered Bulgarians’ ability to develop healthy amorous relationships.”
The lesson we should take away from Soviet-style Marxism, says Ghodee, is that “women enjoyed a degree of self-sufficiency that few Western women could have imagined. Eastern bloc women did not need to marry, or have sex, for money. The socialist state met their basic needs and countries such as Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and East Germany committed extra resources to support single mothers, divorcées and widows.”
But the orgasmic attraction of bad-boy Marxism to women like Durcheva came at a terrible price: the systematic murder of millions of human beings, which included many women.
Eveline Vincke of Ghent University, Department of Communication Sciences, published a study in 2015 that found women are attracted to cigarette-smoking, two-fisted drinking males with the financial savvy of your average squirrel.
This masculine “physical risk taking,” however, is only preferred in “short-term mating contexts.” And bad-boy communism’s risky behavior is what landed it on the ash heap of history.
An ugly demise that should inspire a healthy dose of morning-after regrets in its lustful, female admirers.