Women should lose electoral rights – as should men #16 (1/2002)

200 anniversary Vindication of the Rights of Woman(1) Mary Wollstonecraft seems like a good chance to reminders to readers and readers, but often the forgotten truth. That women should have the same right to Making laws like men is out of the question. It's women and Men are truly equal: ‘No one has no right to constitute rights’ (2).
Succession suffragettes, modern mainstream feminists say to end the oppression suffered by women and theirs Discrimination requires the rights of the State. Whether this discrimination is simply a difference in pay, employment opportunities, rights to possess property or, most importantly, approval (male) societies on force against their individuals and property, feminists request remedies and justice to the State Legislation (3).
Society can be based on 1 of the two mutually exclusive axioms: coercion or Agreed. Force creates a hierarchical, force-based relation between individuals, usually taking the form of theft, slavery and Murder – and it is it is institutionalised in the State. Consent is the basis for free trade or laissez-faire with only 1 rule, a law of nature, who retains the right of everyone to control their individual and property provided that he does not interfere in a akin right of individual else to free usage of your own body and property, and controlling them.
Male chauvinist employer, condemned by “politically correct” intellectuals for refusing employing women is punished for his prejudice, having to offer higher places to attract additional staff – men. Its increased costs and reduced competitiveness allow companies employing cheaper female workers sell cheaper than him, which after a while raises wages women and lower wages for men (4).
Act o ‘equal wages’they give a very different result. Prohibition on the replacement of costly men cheaper female workers reduces women's employability; workers already employed they draw wages above the marketplace rate, which equals forced redistribution from the mediocre to the rich. No wonder trade unions support the minimum squares Act.
Such legislation, or claims to the property of others, resurrects the return The situation in which feminists believe women suffer, i.e. a legalized compulsion like slavery – and supporting this, feminists seem to deny their earlier The rules. American feminism emerged from the 19th century, radically individualist anti-slavery movement related to letter ‘The Liberator’William Lloyd Garrison (5). Sisters Grimke, Sarah and Angelina, showed in pamphlets and lectures, like women's rights and rights Slaves on equal footing do not be before state law.
A However, any feminists support the reintroduction of laws Slavery, expressed more in the language of claims than in the law to control myself. This is the consequence of the run for the statutory ‘Rights to abortion on demand”(6). The nature of this task reveals the following scenario: imagine That all doctors refuse for 1 reason or another abortion. With ‘almost to abortion on demand”it would be essential to force respective or all resistant doctors to conducting the operation and thereby establishing relations human beings based on violence, forcing them to The function of slaves.
The view that specified claims can be raised from the rules of democracy is false due to the fact that it is Whether individual has the right to control himself One person, or 1 million people who vote it and pry it. someone in slavery. Feminists Demanding Justice and freedom should realise that justice must not be provided by force of the State over units, but must be discovered by removing this fatal government that invalidates the law of men and women to control themselves (7).
As Lysander Spooner noted, ‘if women, alternatively of petitioning for admission to power establishing more rights, they will announce to the current legislators that They, women, will go to parliament and press on fire all existing codes will do a very sensible thing – 1 of the The most reasonable things they can do. And they will. had a crowd of men with them – at least all reasonable and honest men in this country – who will go with them” (8).

W This article tried to present any ideas and general ‘confusion’ of the arguments characterising traditions individualistic feminism utilizing it as a background to review of widespread modern claims Socialist feminism. Although this text defends itself and does not I request quite a few footnotes, I decided to include it – for those afraid – fitted by footnotes a bibliographic guide which refers to individual arguments contained in the text for origin materials.

Footnotes:
1.“A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: with Structures on Political and Moral Subjects [1792]’Penguin, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1992.
2. Opinions expressed in the article is akin to those expressed by czole 19th-century freedom theorist Lysandra Spooner in an essay ‘A Right to Make Laws?”published in ‘Liberty’and ‘The New Age’J. M. L. Babcock, and again in excellent anthology Wendy McElroy “Freedom, Feminism, and the State: An Overview of Individualist Feminism’ Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., 1982 [1st edition]. Book McElroy is possibly the final collection of texts from this fields.
3. McElroy in his article ‘You’ve slide a long way, baby!”, published in ‘No Statesman’, Vol. 1, No. 1 (1990) offers peculiarly ruthless criticism The view of socialist feminists that oppression has its origin in the marketplace process. It shows that oppression is not a consequence market activity, but results from the force of the state and its market interference. As the marketplace process punishes after any time voluntary discrimination of individuals, it introduces, as he put it Ludwig von Mises, harmony of well understood interests. The advantages and privileges can so be maintained in the face of this process only through the usage of violence, whether individual or institutionalised in state form. See besides classical differentiation
between you and the marketplace outlined by Franz Oppenheimer in ‘The State’Vanguard Press, fresh York, 1926.
4. This argument is outlined. More specifically by Walter Block, which shows why “Men The chauvinist Pig’ should be considered modern hero – finds he is in his notable and profoundly penetrating message tolerance: ‘Defending the Undefendable: The Pimp, Prostitute, Scab, Slumlord, Libeler, Moneylender, and another Scapegoats in the Rogue’s Gallery of American Society’Fleet Press Corporation, fresh York,
1976.
5. About historical sketches on the emergence of thoughts individualistic feminism, see ‘The True Mothers of Feminism’Wendy McElroy, published in ‘Reason’, July 1983, p. 39-42, and its
a later treaty for this theme, ‘The Roots of Individualist Feminism in 19th Century America”, p. 3-26, which is the first chapter ‘Freedom, Feminism, and the State’. Dr. Stephen Davies wrote a akin outstanding
history freedom feminism in Britain, ‘Libertarian Feminism in Britain, 1860-1910’LA Pamphlet No. 7, Libertarian Alliance, London, 1987. The latter text is utilized to overthrow the myths of contemporary socialists feminists on the origin of the feminist movement in Great Britain.
6. Regarding the argument for the right to abortion as a consequence of manifest control, see appearance McElroy, ‘What Does it Mean To Be An Individual? (Self-Ownership) Is Key To Abortion Issue)’in a debate with Doris Gordon of Libertarians for Life, organization Antiabortion, in ‘Rampart Individualist’, Vol. 1, No. 4, fall, 1983, p. 3-9.
7. This view of state, law and justice is simply a view Woluntarists, with whom Wendy McElroy powerfully identifies. A useful collection of Woluntarian writings was published as ‘Neither Bullets nor Ballots: Essays on Voluntaryism, The Voluntaryists”Baltimore, Maryland, 1983; there are essays by McElroy, George H. Smith and Carl Watner. Volunteers prosecute ‘delegation countries by education’and ‘orbit in favour of withdrawing from cooperation and silent consent to which State authority yet resists’. It should be noted, however, that this is not the last news strategic among freelours and, as stressed by this Modern Volunteers, comes from a classical work ‘Etienne’a de la Boetie The Will to Bondage [trans. A Discourse on Voluntary Servitude]’,1577, (1735), Libertarian BroadsidesNo. 6, Ralph Myles Publisher, Colorado Springs, 1974. For part of this tradition can besides be recognised by Lysandra Spoonera; his “No Treasure: The Constitution of No Authority and Natural Law: The Science of Justice’are late available in an excellent collection under George H. Smith “The Lysander Spooner Reader, Fox & Wilkes”San Francisco, 1992.
8. Lysander Spooner, ‘A Right to Make Laws?”, p. 330.

© 1993; Libertarian Alliance; Brithish Association of Libertarian Feminists; Barry Macleod-Cullinane. Text published for the approval of the Libertarian Alliance, http://www.libertarian-alliance.com/. Crowd. J. Sierpinski. The first can be found at http://www.capital.demon.co.uk/LA/pamphlets/no-vote.htm.