Wednesday, September 6, 2017

MALE DISENFRANCHISEMENT IN MATRIARCHAL MARRIAGES

A few years back Mistress Kathy’s Femdom101 blog featured a provocative discussion with her readers on whether submissive husbands should be required to vote according to the dictates of their ruling wives.

That discussion is no longer accessible, alas, as Mistress Kathy has taken down those particular archives. But I recall many strong opinions voiced on both sides of the issue, with even a few wives saying they wouldn’t think of restricting the free exercise of hubby’s First Amendment rights, even if it was the only decision he was permitted to make.

Mistress Kathy herself, somewhat to my surprise, came down firmly on the other side of the matter—i.e., for the wife taking full control of the husband’s vote.

Fortunately, I did save her answer, and you can find it at the bottom of this post.

But, as I should have said, Ms. Kathy's lively back-and-forth debate was framed in terms of Female Led Relationships. In strict matriarchal, gynarchic or female supremacist marriages, I suspect it is pretty much a settled matter that husbands will be ruled in voting, as in all other areas of the life, by the females of the family.

In fact, the goal of many gynarchists seems to be a world where all males, like children in today's world, will be under close female administration, be deprived of the right to vote and will neither as group nor as individuals have any say in any matter whatsoever.

One such formidable female, Ms. Charlotte, states the matter unequivocally, albeit in her somewhat convoluted Germanic sentence construction: “Fifty years from now males will as humans probably still enjoy some kind of limited legal protection but in practical terms they will be livestock.”

Let’s hear her a bit further on the matter: “There is in my opinion no reason why any males should have the right to vote. Politics, economy and all sorts of social matters are not matters for males to be concerned with; boys only see it all as a game. And why trust persons who are defined as children and incapable of managing their own affairs with the right to vote? It will just complicate things and give males an unhealthy feeling of importance and also encourage the silly idea that, after all, they are perhaps our equals.”

However, another female supremacist from birth, Ms. Zoe (a former frequent commenter to the Femdom101 blog), is willing to concede limited voting rights to some males:

“I guess ‘free men’ should have the right to vote. After all, they have some commonalities with females. I would expect my ‘free’ boyfriend to ask my advice, though; that seems only right. But my sissy husband Tom doesn’t have the right to do anything without permission. That permission is required for voting, too. We have amusing conversations where I try to explain the differences between the candidates for President in simple girly terms. He just votes as he is told, but it amuses me to go through the motions of explaining why he must vote for whom I say he should.”

“Brian,” another male in total gynarchic thrall to his wife, “Miss Beth,” explains the dynamic that comes into play during election season at their house: “Obviously Miss Beth ‘owns’ my vote just like She owns everything else in my life, but my Wife truly is a kind and wonderful ruler, therefore She welcomes my opinions and ideas. We sat for awhile and had a very intellectual and respectful discussion (something the presidential candidates really need to learn) and, afterward, Miss Beth complimented me about how well I articulated my viewpoints and how much She respected them. My Wife finished by saying that She will keep my opinions and ideas in mind while making Her own. Then, the night before Election Day, Miss Beth respectfully sat me down and told me who we were going to vote for.

“On the drive to the poll I was given a list. I was not allowed to question or discuss her decisions. To me this feels absolutely correct. One rationale for my decision to become a 24/7 slave is rooted in my personal belief in female superiority. It’s an article of faith for me, almost a religion. I do as She says. I should note that in the not so distant past (and in some families, even now), men have told their wives how to vote. I am grateful to my Mistress for allowing me to do penance for that kind of thinking.”

Actually, I see now that the title of this post is misleading. These husbands are not disenfranchised. They are rather encouraged, nay required to vote. The only compulsion is how and for whom they are to vote—precisely as their wives decree.

Another case in point:

“My Wife does guide me in all things, including voting. It is only natural as She keeps on top of these things while i tend to the domestic side of life. She reads the front page while i go for the section of the paper dealing with home life.”

And yet another:

“i am [another] one of the ones whose Wife instructs on how to vote. i was interested in politics and my Wife and i mostly agreed. When we entered into our matriarchal marriage, my Wife’s opinions naturally took precedence and i deferred to Her more and more. i now adopt Her political and business opinions and follow Her lead. Should we ever differ, She overrules me. So now i vote the way she tells me. She will make out a sample ballot or write down who and what to vote for. Occasionally we talk about it, but Her decisions are final.”

An interesting variation on wife-led voting came to me from a matriarch in the Netherlands. Instead of instructing her submissive husband how to vote, she delegated the entire matter to her teenage daughter, relying on the girl’s superior judgment and awareness of current events. Her daughter would then mark up the ballot carefully for her father and make it clear to him that he would be voting exactly according to that sample ballot.

In effect, the Dutch woman explained to me, by choosing what he votes on and for whom, her daughter exercises her father’s franchise.

What do readers think?

Oh, I almost forgot! Here is how Ms. Kathy likes to handle the matter of male enfranchisement:

“[My husband] John is not only allowed to vote, but is required to vote. He, of course, votes the way he is told. This morning John and I went to vote. We voted early. On the way home I asked John who he voted for. He answered ‘The way you instructed me to vote, Mistress.’ That earned him a ‘good boy.’"


*

3 comments:

  1. Since nobody has commented, I guess I'll add my two cents here. I believe in the right of every adult to vote in our present society. Things are the way they are, and every vote is needed, including those of males. This issue doesn't come up for me much on a personal level, because I'm one of the "indoctrinated" ones, and I don't recall many times there was an argument with my mother, sister, or wife about whom to vote for. It's pretty clear cut in our area which candidates have women's interests at
    heart, and those are the ones I've always voted for. My mother was more political than my sister or wife, perhaps because of the greater oppression of her era, and my father always voted as she wanted him too. My wife has certain issues she's interested in, and I've always voted for the candidates she does. It isn't even a question with me.

    As for whether men in gynarchic households should vote (or not vote at all) as the alpha female, or temporary alpha female of the family wishes, yes, I think they should. These men have made a commitment to their wives or mistresses, a commitment so strong and binding it makes regular marriage seem like exchanging high school promise rings. Except for health and safety, they have promised to obey and serve in all things. That includes political ideology. I think there should be discussions, because communication can clarify things for everyone, but the final decision is the woman's, completely.

    As for "free" men, I agree with Ms. Zoe. They haven't made that commitment, and they should retain their choice, although if they are involved with a female supremacist in some way, they should ask advice, etc., as Ms. Zoe said. But it's always up to the woman whether she even discusses her politics with her boyfriend, let alone require him to vote a certain way. The husband is a different matter altogether, for the reasons cited above. I also think that if an adult son continues to live with his gynarchic birth family, he should vote as his mother, sister or whomever the alpha female of the family puts in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The question of males voting is a good one but a temporary one. At the moment Female Supremacist advocates are in the minority even amongst the Left and Feminism. Ideally then every vote should count to advance Women and in turn the males they steward. When a Female Supremacist society is established the males should be disenfranchised. Just as there is the concept that males can enjoy a Woman's orgasm as Her orgasm is his then Her vote is his in a committed relationship. I really appreciated the thinking and philosophy behind the Dutch Matriarch. It demonstrates that the Daughter is an adult whereas the male of whatever age is not to be thought as responsible as a teenage Female. Femsup

    ReplyDelete