The Despotism of the Petticoat

Post image for The Despotism of the Petticoat

by Keoni Galt on September 24, 2009

One of the primary means of socially engineering mainstream attitudes is to redefine the past; to get the masses to accept and internalize a narrative interpretation of history.

This has been the primary methodology that feminism has used to advance it’s agenda, and in doing so, they have also benefited from no shortage of men blinded by chivalrous notions to uphold and reinforce the narrative as factual history. This is particularly clear when it comes to the idea of  “Women’s Rights,” especially in the case of voting.

The feminist narrative regarding suffrage goes something like this:

  • Women didn’t have the right to vote, only rich white males did.
  • Everyone knows that the rich white males of the past were  misogynists that deliberately kept women from voting to oppress them.
  • Any person that would dare to even think about rescinding female suffrage, is a sexist, misogynist pig; a neanderthal who should be banished to the cave from whence he skulked.
  • Therefore, any person that would even consider the idea of ending universal suffrage is a crazy lunatic who can be ignored and marginalized. Nothing they say has any merit if they hold such a crazy position.

This is historical revisionism and a deliberate misinterpretation of the meaning behind restricted suffrage so as to foment a gender war. The actual historical facts are this:

The U.S. Constitution as originally written never designated anything about suffrage. As far as the Founder’s were concerned, that came under the domain of the 10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

At ratification, each of the 13 original States had the power to determine what laws and requirements governed who could and who could not participate in voting. In the beginning, in just about all 13 States, suffrage was only granted to property owners regardless of gender.

Now, of course, in the 18th century, the majority of property owners were most assuredly men. But there were a few women who indeed owned their own property – either from inheritance or their own efforts, and they were also extended the franchise to vote.

Previous post:

Next post: