USA Women Shouldn't Be Allowed to Vote? Hegseth's Video Sparks Fury!

[Will B Good]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

That's a serious problem of course, but it's not just that - In every country where women have been allowed to occupy the top ranking political position the situation for that country has invariably got worse.

 

Germany - Angela Merkel's period in office is basically the marker for modern Germany's decline.

 

UK - We can see today some of the most ineffective and perverse policies in the  office of Home Secretary, headed by  Yvette Cooper, and also  one of the worst stints any Chancellor of the Exchequer has ever inflicted on the UK people. It's not just her crying, all of the UK is crying. Arguably the ascent of Margaret Thatcher precipitated the UK's current economic decline.

 

Ukraine - Yulia Timoshenko paved the way for total corruption and total war with Russia.

 

Australia - Julia Gillard oversaw the beginnings of Australian decline, hung parliaments and general instabliity as even the Guardian conceded. Her main achievement? A lecturing speech on the misgony. of men.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/26/julia-gillard-where-go-wrong

 

Brazil - Delma Rousseff was forcibly removed from power and impeached, having been unable to adhere to budgetary laws in Brazil. One of the worst leaders Brazil ever had.

 

Thailand - Yingluck Shinawatra precipitated a war with Cambodia and was dsitinguished mostly by her attempt to cling to remnants of power by assuming a cultural minister position having achieved nothing.

 

Slovenia - Alena Bratusek of Slovenia was forced to resign after corruption investigations, but not before she nominated herself for a top post in the EU.

 

The list of truly catastrophic female political leaders is endless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unlike the resounding successful leaderships offered by the likes of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Hussain, Gaddafi, KimJong II........the leader list is endless.

 

 

[topt]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

Thailand - Yingluck Shinawatra precipitated a war with Cambodia and was dsitinguished mostly by her attempt to cling to remnants of power by assuming a cultural minister position having achieved nothing.

You could at least get the right Shinawatra...............

[Cameroni]

3 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Unlike the resounding successful leaderships offered by the likes of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Hussain, Gaddafi, KimJong II........the leader list is endless.

 

 

As bad as their failures were, and they were very bad, each and every one of those leaders has contributed some major positive achievement as well. The women named in the list you responded to have not.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

That's a serious problem of course, but it's not just that - In every country where women have been allowed to occupy the top ranking political position the situation for that country has invariably got worse.

 

Germany - Angela Merkel's period in office is basically the marker for modern Germany's decline.

 

UK - We can see today some of the most ineffective and perverse policies in the  office of Home Secretary, headed by  Yvette Cooper, and also  one of the worst stints any Chancellor of the Exchequer has ever inflicted on the UK people. It's not just her crying, all of the UK is crying. Arguably the ascent of Margaret Thatcher precipitated the UK's current economic decline.

 

Ukraine - Yulia Timoshenko paved the way for total corruption and total war with Russia.

 

Australia - Julia Gillard oversaw the beginnings of Australian decline, hung parliaments and general instabliity as even the Guardian conceded. Her main achievement? A lecturing speech on the misgony. of men.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/26/julia-gillard-where-go-wrong

 

Brazil - Delma Rousseff was forcibly removed from power and impeached, having been unable to adhere to budgetary laws in Brazil. One of the worst leaders Brazil ever had.

 

Thailand - Yingluck Shinawatra precipitated a war with Cambodia and was dsitinguished mostly by her attempt to cling to remnants of power by assuming a cultural minister position having achieved nothing.

 

Slovenia - Alena Bratusek of Slovenia was forced to resign after corruption investigations, but not before she nominated herself for a top post in the EU.

 

The list of truly catastrophic female political leaders is endless.

 

 

 

 

Mummy issues is my guess.

[Will B Good]

3 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

As bad as their failures were, and they were very bad, each and every one of those leaders has contributed some major positive achievement as well. The women named in the list you responded to have not.

 

 

 

 

I can't begin to imagine what a female leader would have to achieve in order to receive any form of even qualified praise from a dyed in the wool misogynist like you.

 

 

 

[Will B Good]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Mummy issues is my guess.

 

No...all down to female teachers who failed to give oodles of praise when he achieved the highest IQ known to man (obviously one not known by women)

[Will B Good]

Women Shouldn't Be Allowed to Vote? Hegseth's Video Sparks Fury!

 

Can members who are considering starting a thread, please avoid using that first word seen above.

 

The amount of triggering it is causing certain members is becoming life threatening to them.

 

 

 

[Cameroni]

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in the failures of Pol Pot or the policies of Julia Gillard. Let's stay on topic and think this through, how this could in fact look like.

 

Obviously politicians passing laws most people disagree with is not the issue, this happens all the time. Let's suppose a bill were introduced and passed which removes the female vote.

 

That would of course only be a first step. To truly reap the potential benefits of this controversial move then a number of other measures would need to be implemented:

 

1. Re-design family law in favour of men, to incentivize women to stay at home and reduce divorce rates, and to have children again.

 

2. Pass a bill that would restrict women from driving, again women would be confined to the home.

 

3. Icentivize women who have a lot of children with prizes like Iphones, Ipads and anti-ageing creams (all made in the USA of course by then).

 

4. Re-design anti-discrimination laws to make the workplace more male-friendly, and with the ultimate aim of removing women from the workforce entirely.

 

Realistically these measures are probably too controversial for Trump, this is more something for JD Vance or even Barron.

 

Still, it looks like steps in the right direction are being made. We need to de-sensitize the public to the possibility of women losing the vote. Obviously decades of pro-feminist programming will not be easy to erase and there will be stiff resistance by those men whose mind has been truly colonised by feminism, however, with sufficient will and iron determination a turnaround can be achieved.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in the failures of Pol Pot or the policies of Julia Gillard. Let's stay on topic and think this through, how this could in fact look like.

 

Obviously politicians passing laws most people disagree with is not the issue, this happens all the time. Let's suppose a bill were introduced and passed which removes the female vote.

 

That would of course only be a first step. To truly reap the potential benefits of this controversial move then a number of other measures would need to be implemented:

 

1. Re-design family law in favour of men, to incentivize women to stay at home and reduce divorce rates, and to have children again.

 

2. Pass a bill that would restrict women from driving, again women would be confined to the home.

 

3. Icentivize women who have a lot of children with prizes like Iphones, Ipads and anti-ageing creams.

 

4. Re-design anti-discrimination laws to make the worklplace more male-friendly.

 

Realistically these measures are probably too controversial for Trump, this is more something for JD Vance or even Barron.

Non of which is going to happen.

 

Which leaves you short of a reason for failing in life.

[Cameroni]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Non of which is going to happen.

 

Which leaves you short of a reason for failing in life.

 

That's what they said in 1932. In fact that's what they said when Trump ran for office.

 

Life can be full of surprises.

[Will B Good]

10 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Anyway, let's not get bogged down in the failures of Pol Pot or the policies of Julia Gillard. Let's stay on topic and think this through, how this could in fact look like.

 

Obviously politicians passing laws most people disagree with is not the issue, this happens all the time. Let's suppose a bill were introduced and passed which removes the female vote.

 

That would of course only be a first step. To truly reap the potential benefits of this controversial move then a number of other measures would need to be implemented:

 

1. Re-design family law in favour of men, to incentivize women to stay at home and reduce divorce rates, and to have children again.

 

2. Pass a bill that would restrict women from driving, again women would be confined to the home.

 

3. Icentivize women who have a lot of children with prizes like Iphones, Ipads and anti-ageing creams (all made in the USA of course by then).

 

4. Re-design anti-discrimination laws to make the workplace more male-friendly.

 

Realistically these measures are probably too controversial for Trump, this is more something for JD Vance or even Barron.

 

Still, it looks like steps in the right direction are being made. We need to de-sensitize the public to the possibility of women losing the vote. Obviously decades of pro-feminist programming will not be easy to erase and there will be stiff resistance by those men whose mind has been truly colonised by feminism, however, with sufficient will and iron determination a turnaround can be achieved.

 

 

Some posters, unfamiliar with these threads, will think the above is a spoof......IT'S NOT

 

 

 

[Cameroni]

38 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Unlike the resounding successful leaderships offered by the likes of Stalin, Hitler

 

Actually this is the ultimate argument to remove the vote for women, as it has been well documented that it was in fact the female vote that brought Adolf Hitler to power.

 

In a real sense, removing the vote for women is an anti-fascist policy.;

[transam]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Let's not be emotional about this issue, that would not be a manly way to approach the problem, that's more of a womanly approach. If we look at it like men, ie, rationally, we need to ask: "Is it really such a bad thing if women lose the vote? Do the pros or cons prevail?"

 

Looking at it rationally removing the vote for women would solve many of the main issue afflicting the world today. For instance declining birth rates are a major risk for almost all industrial nations. Women refusing to have children is one of the key concerns of economic observ ers, as  it makes the budget deficit a real issue  If too few taxpayers are born to sustain older populations, if too few workers are born to sustain economic growth, the economic collapse of the nation is inevitable.

 

What would incentivize women more than anything to have children again? If by attaching themselves to a man their quality of life improves and women do not have the option to go to work outside the home. This would give birth rates an instant boost and safeguard the economic development of society.

 

Only removing the vote for women could achieve this.

 

One of the other ills of society, massive divorce rates, falling marriage figures and infidelity, all these are encouraged by lax family laws that favour women. What would incentivize women to not file for divorce, to marry and to stay faithful? A radical revamp of family law in favour of men. 

 

Only removing the vote for women could achieve this.

 

Then there is the environmental issue of countless millions of women driving on our roads, exacerbating traffic jams, pollution and environmental problems. A total ban on women drivers is not illusory, Saudia Arabia has shown for decades that it is perfectly possible to implement.

 

Only removign the vote for women could achieve this.

 

Sure, there would be protests to contend with, that would have to be ruthlessly put down by imprisoning the feminist agitators, however, would the benefits of this controversial policy not be worth the pain?

I wonder if the likes of Hitler started of thinking like you.......

[Will B Good]

1 minute ago, Cameroni said:

 

Actually this is the ultimate argument to remove the vote for women, as it has been well documented that it was in fact the female vote that brought Adolf Hitler to power.

 

In a real sense, removing the vote for women is an anti-fascist policy.;

 

It is true that women voted roughly in the same proportion as men did for Hitler.......but in the 1930's, surely they were just doing as they were told by their betters......it was the good old days.

[Cameroni]

25 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

It is true that women voted roughly in the same proportion as men did for Hitler.......but in the 1930's, surely they were just doing as they were told by their betters......it was the good old days.

 

Unfortunately not. The 1930s were when the feminists really started to make a mark.

 

In fact Hitler was a feminist. In the 3rd Reich women were treated equally under the constitution and allowed to vote and work.

 

Have we learned nothing from the horrors of Nazism?

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, Digitalbanana said:

Which ones should not be allowed in your world?

 

Usual rules.

 

Those in jail.

 

Illegal immigrants etc.

 

I assume you know the law.

[Bacon1]

An sexist comment removed 

 

An offensive reply to it removed 

[Dave0206]

12 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

That's a serious problem of course, but it's not just that - In every country where women have been allowed to occupy the top ranking political position the situation for that country has invariably got worse.

 

Germany - Angela Merkel's period in office is basically the marker for modern Germany's decline.

 

UK - We can see today some of the most ineffective and perverse policies in the  office of Home Secretary, headed by  Yvette Cooper, and also  one of the worst stints any Chancellor of the Exchequer has ever inflicted on the UK people. It's not just her crying, all of the UK is crying. Arguably the ascent of Margaret Thatcher precipitated the UK's current economic decline.

 

Ukraine - Yulia Timoshenko paved the way for total corruption and total war with Russia.

 

Australia - Julia Gillard oversaw the beginnings of Australian decline, hung parliaments and general instabliity as even the Guardian conceded. Her main achievement? A lecturing speech on the misgony. of men.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/26/julia-gillard-where-go-wrong

 

Brazil - Delma Rousseff was forcibly removed from power and impeached, having been unable to adhere to budgetary laws in Brazil. One of the worst leaders Brazil ever had.

 

Thailand - Yingluck Shinawatra precipitated a war with Cambodia and was dsitinguished mostly by her attempt to cling to remnants of power by assuming a cultural minister position having achieved nothing.

 

Slovenia - Alena Bratusek of Slovenia was forced to resign after corruption investigations, but not before she nominated herself for a top post in the EU.

 

The list of truly catastrophic female political leaders is endless.

 

 

 

 

Margaret Thatcher doesn't even get a mention 🙄 if you had included her I may have considered your list 

[annotator]

11 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Actually this is the ultimate argument to remove the vote for women, as it has been well documented that it was in fact the female vote that brought Adolf Hitler to power.

 

In a real sense, removing the vote for women is an anti-fascist policy.;

Well documented? Share a link with us to those documents.

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

12 hours ago, Cameroni said:

Unfortunately not. The 1930s were when the feminists really started to make a mark.

In fact Hitler was a feminist. In the 3rd Reich women were treated equally under the constitution and allowed to vote and work.

Have we learned nothing from the horrors of Nazism?

Whilst I agree with your overall sentiment that women on average are 'inferior' to men on average, that does not mean that they should not vote if they choose to do so. I say that because if you truly implement a system of merit for being allowed to vote, then many undeserving men should be excluded, and many deserving women would be excluded under your proposal. No - IMO the 'solution' to the problem all democracies face with regards to voting immaturity, is to increase the age before people can vote. The reason a lot of left wing Parties all over the world have started a campaign to allow 16 year old kids to vote is because they know the younger a person is, the more likely they will vote based on feelings and emotions - and that means more left wing votes. As the old truism states - if you are under 25 and dont vote left wing then you have a hard heart - but if you are over 40 and vote left wing then you have a soft head (because as we mature we realise that all the save the planet/poor/workers BS is just that - BS).  Increase the voting age to 21, and that will remove a lot of the identity and emotion based politics that the left wingers partake in and make politics overall more 'mature'. The politicians will still all still be stupid corrupt fools, but the future form of woke progressive fools will not do so much damage next time over such a long period before being thrown out. 

[stevenl]

7 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Whilst I agree with your overall sentiment that women on average are 'inferior' to men on average, 

Some people have real issues.

[Digitalbanana]

On 8/11/2025 at 12:57 PM, JonnyF said:

Usual rules.

 

Those in jail.

 

Illegal immigrants etc.

 

I assume you know the law.

So you meant standard voting laws for everyone, not just women? Why phrase it like that then? Seems like you’re stirring the pot - as usual.

[Cameroni]

19 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Whilst I agree with your overall sentiment that women on average are 'inferior' to men on average, that does not mean that they should not vote if they choose to do so. I say that because if you truly implement a system of merit for being allowed to vote, then many undeserving men should be excluded, and many deserving women would be excluded under your proposal. No - IMO the 'solution' to the problem all democracies face with regards to voting immaturity, is to increase the age before people can vote. The reason a lot of left wing Parties all over the world have started a campaign to allow 16 year old kids to vote is because they know the younger a person is, the more likely they will vote based on feelings and emotions - and that means more left wing votes. As the old truism states - if you are under 25 and dont vote left wing then you have a hard heart - but if you are over 40 and vote left wing then you have a soft head (because as we mature we realise that all the save the planet/poor/workers BS is just that - BS).  Increase the voting age to 21, and that will remove a lot of the identity and emotion based politics that the left wingers partake in and make politics overall more 'mature'. The politicians will still all still be stupid corrupt fools, but the future form of woke progressive fools will not do so much damage next time over such a long period before being thrown out. 

 

I'm not saying women are "inferior", I actually don't think they are. Sure, you can argue about how the bell curve in IQ has more men at either extreme, and physical strength, but obviously the differences are smaller than the similarities. You can have exceptionally bright female partners in law firms, flying jets, and researching biogenetics. So it's not that women are inferior, they can do all these things, we just don't want them to do that, for policy reasons. Because once women are set up in a position of power, they favour women, their own. Why do you think women's news shows always have female experts? Women in law firms promote women partners. Angela Merkel put von der Leyen at the head of the EU.

 

The thing is, these women are smart, highly intelligent and they have with the complicity of stupid men, managed to fashion family law, employment law, the employment market, the sexual market place, and even medical research and politics in their favour. Do you think Bonnie Blue cares if she's working at destroying the fabric of society? No, her net worth is 24 million Dollars, she makes 2 million dollars a month by opening her legs for gangbangs on Only Fans. Do you think she cares if it's just and right that she can make 24 million Dollars by fornicating? No she does not. Do you think the average divorcee cares if she gets half the assets and alimony of the man she divorced, or whether it's just and fair?  No. Do you think female commentators care  if they got ther football or NBA gig because they're women? No they don't care if it's just. They just want to take advantage of the system, which feminists and weak men have allowed to be put in place.

 

It is a matter of policy, of survival of society as we know it, do we want women in charge or not? And you need to think carefully if you say yes, because they will fashion society in their favour. Just look at Scandinavia. There will be almost no children born. Not enough to replenish the workforce and taxpayers anyway. Our economies and social services will die. Marriage is already dying.

 

If the vote for women were removed, then women would stay at home, all these things could be reversed.

 

Now of course democracy was never meant for populations of 5 billion people, it was for small tribal groups and small populations where only men and property owners who were well informed would vote. Now, we have a partisan mosaic of interest groups, old people, women, blacks, hispanics, jews, young voters, women, men, and each group is trying to take advantage of the other. Here, after the vote for women is removed, the solution is to amplify the voting power of property owners. And yes, increase the voting age by all means.

 

But something has to be done, because our societies are in obvious decline and the falling birth rate means our economies will die, and services will disappear. When women take power, they will oversee a wasteland. It is our responsibility to save them and us.

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, Digitalbanana said:

So you meant standard voting laws for everyone, not just women? Why phrase it like that then? Seems like you’re stirring the pot - as usual.

 

Ummmmm, because the thread is about WOMEN voting. 

 

Obvious to anyone with double digit IQ.

[Cameroni]

20 hours ago, annotator said:

Well documented? Share a link with us to those documents.

 

 

Sure, why not: "It was the women's vote that propelled Hitler to power" said Herman Rauschning, a German socialist politician at the time. Half of Hitler's voters were from women. Had women not been allowed to vote Hitler would never have come to power. A full 50% of his votes came from women.

 

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/241521?journalCode=jmh

[Cameroni]

22 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

Margaret Thatcher doesn't even get a mention 🙄 if you had included her I may have considered your list 

 

Yes, she does, maybe read that post again.

[annotator]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Sure, why not: "It was the women's vote that propelled Hitler to power" said Herman Rauschning, a German socialist politician at the time. Half of Hitler's voters were from women. Had women not been allowed to vote Hitler would never have come to power. A full 50% of his votes came from women.

 

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/241521?journalCode=jmh

Really? You call that quote of a politician by the distinguished historian Richard Evans as well documentd. Here's what Evans says:

Richard Evans (1976, p. 157):

the female contribution to Hitler's electoral successes was, at the most, limited. ... Hitler and the Nazis exerted no particular attraction for women at the polls. Unfortunately, most of the separate counting of male and female votes was conducted in the years before 1930. But such evidence as we have for 1930-33 does confirm this conclusion. In the Presidential election of 13 March 1932, for example, Hindenburg had many more women supporters than Hitler, both absolutely and relatively. In the sample of polling stations in which separate voting by sex was carried out, 51.6% of the female votes, and 44.2% of the male votes went to Hindenburg, while 26.5% of the female votes and 28.3% of the male votes went to Hitler. Had it been left to the women to decide, therefore, Hitler would have been defeated on the first ballot. In the second round of the election, held on 10 April 1932, with the weakest candidates eliminated, Hindenburg secured 56% of the female votes in the sample, and 48.7% of the male, while Hitler gained 33.6% of the female votes and 35.9% of the male. Such other statistics of voting by sex as are available confirm the trend suggested by these two elections. In Köln, where we do have figures for the crucial period 1928-33, 1.4% of the female votes cast and 2.2% of the male fell to the Nazis in the Reichstag elections of 1928; in 1930 the figures were, respectively, 15.5% and 19.8%; in the first Reichstag election of 1932 - the height of the Nazis' success - they were 22.8% and 26.4%.

https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/77792/was-there-gender-bias-in-votes-for-nazis-in-weimar-republic?utm_source=chatgpt.com

[Cameroni]

6 minutes ago, annotator said:

Really? You call that quote of a politician by the distinguished historian Richard Evans as well documentd. Here's what Evans says:

Richard Evans (1976, p. 157):

the female contribution to Hitler's electoral successes was, at the most, limited. ... Hitler and the Nazis exerted no particular attraction for women at the polls. Unfortunately, most of the separate counting of male and female votes was conducted in the years before 1930. But such evidence as we have for 1930-33 does confirm this conclusion. In the Presidential election of 13 March 1932, for example, Hindenburg had many more women supporters than Hitler, both absolutely and relatively. In the sample of polling stations in which separate voting by sex was carried out, 51.6% of the female votes, and 44.2% of the male votes went to Hindenburg, while 26.5% of the female votes and 28.3% of the male votes went to Hitler. Had it been left to the women to decide, therefore, Hitler would have been defeated on the first ballot. In the second round of the election, held on 10 April 1932, with the weakest candidates eliminated, Hindenburg secured 56% of the female votes in the sample, and 48.7% of the male, while Hitler gained 33.6% of the female votes and 35.9% of the male. Such other statistics of voting by sex as are available confirm the trend suggested by these two elections. In Köln, where we do have figures for the crucial period 1928-33, 1.4% of the female votes cast and 2.2% of the male fell to the Nazis in the Reichstag elections of 1928; in 1930 the figures were, respectively, 15.5% and 19.8%; in the first Reichstag election of 1932 - the height of the Nazis' success - they were 22.8% and 26.4%.

https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/77792/was-there-gender-bias-in-votes-for-nazis-in-weimar-republic?utm_source=chatgpt.com

 

Richard Evans is just another historian trying to make a name for himself by being a revisionist and claiming the opposite of accepted fact.

 

The fact remains that almost 50% of Hitler's vote was female. Had Hitler not received these female votes he would never have been elected.

 

"In regards to the role played by women voters in Hitler's rise to power, Helen Boak notes that the "NSDAP had been gaining proportionately more support from women than from men from 1928 onwards.

 

The larger increase in the share of women's votes than in that of men's votes cast for the NSDAP from 1928 owes much to the party's growing prominence and respectability, as the party's dynamism, the contrast of its young leadership with the elder statesmen of the other parties, its growing strength, the disintegration of the liberal and local, conservative parties and the general disillusionment and dissatisfaction with what the [Weimar] Republic had brought or failed to bring all contributed to the reasons why German men and women turned to the NSDAP...Because of the preponderance of women in the electorate, the NSDAP received more votes from women than from men in some areas before 1932 and throughout the Reich in 1932. 

 

In the 1931 September elections, 3 million women voted for NSDAP candidates, almost half of the total of 6.5 million votes cast for the NSDAP."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Nazi_Germany

[annotator]

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Richard Evans is just another historian trying to make a name for himself by being a revisionist and claiming the opposite of accepted fact.

 

The fact remains that 50% of Hitler's vote was female. Had Hitler not received these female votes he would never have been elected.

Richard Evans is just another revisionist historian? I guess you don't like him because he exposed the lies of David Irving, a holocaust denier. He is, in fact, one of the most distinguished historians of the Third Reich.  And even if it was true that 50% of the vote for Nazis came from women, which it's not, the fact is that there were more women voters than men because WW1 resulted in a significant loss of the male population.

 

Still waiting for evidence that it's "well documented".

[Cameroni]

Just now, annotator said:

Richard Evans is just another revisionist historian? I guess you don't like him because he exposed the lies of David Irving, a holocaust denier. He is, in fact, one of the most distinguished historians of the Third Reich.  And even if it was true that 50% of the vote for Nazis came from women, which it's not, the fact is that there were more women voters than men because WW1 resulted in a significant loss of the male population.

 

Still waiting for evidence that it's "well documented".

 

He's obviously talking nonsense.

 

"the NSDAP received more votes from women than from men in some areas before 1932 and throughout the Reich in 1932. 

 

In the 1931 September elections, 3 million women voted for NSDAP candidates, almost half of the total of 6.5 million votes cast for the NSDAP."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Nazi_Germany