Do Republican women have Stockholm Syndrome?

[Cyrano]

Stockholm Syndrome is a condition in which hostages empathize with their captors. In documented cases, they have even aided and abetted their captors in their crimes.

The terms “hostage” and “captors” may seem like a reach to some, but I cannot understand how else any woman can vote for or be a Republican. Why would any woman who gave it just a little thought, stand by a political party that is bent on destroying all the advancements made by women in the 20th century?

I understand that some women are in it for the money, (Palin, Malkin, Coulter), but such women are figuratively in bed with the enemy. Others may be suffering from a form of battered wife syndrome.

I’m not a woman, a psychologist, or a psychiatrist, so maybe the women here on DU can give me a better explanation than those I’ve stated here.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Yes

And coercive control

[dkf]

2. Maybe they achieve their success through their men.

Thus a woman succeeding is to their detriment.

[el_bryanto]

3. Problematic

You pose this in the form of a question, but it does seem like you are suggesting that for a woman to be a Republican she must be either corrupt or emotionally damaged such that she doesn't process information correctly. I suspect an answer would be that there are a wide variety of issues that Republicans and Democrats disagree on - she may not see what are sometimes called womens issues as all that important, or she may not feel that the Republicans pose all that much threat on those issues. So she focuses on things like balancing the budget or welfare reform or whatever.

It goes without saying that we both think that everybody in America, no matter their nationality, religion, gender, race, or sexual preference should vote and support Democratic/Liberal politicians When they support Republican policies they hurt both themselves (unless they are the 1%) and the nation. But many people don't see things that way.

Bryant

[Cyrano]

5. Regarding your second paragraph, it amazes me how

many people, women and men, consistently vote against their own best interests and well being. It seems to be that their biases/prejudices are stronger than their sense of self.

[el_bryanto]

7. Or, alternatively, they feel that what they want actually is better for them and for America n/t

[HereSince1628]

4. IMO some think they are moral soldiers countering the effects of liberal public schools.

[hifiguy]

6. Some, but most Republican women are either

religulously insane, 1%ers, or deluded, just like the Repig menfolks.

[DCKit]

10. Don't forget "medicated".

You can overlook a lot when you're in a constant state of bliss.

[lunasun]

11. Some just have to go along

if they want to continue shopping or partying too

Living the highlife one way or another

They dont care if others are hurt by their cheerleading if cash is involved in the end.

Money trumps all with repugs
not religion.

IMO

[get the red out]

8. I think religious right women do

And that's pretty much the same thing as "republican women" these days.

[Cyrano]

12. The religious right may account for many of them. But I

don't understand why the rest don't just do what Olympia Snowe did and just walk away from the lunatic party.

[get the red out]

14. Rich and greedy

Some of them come from rich and greedy backgrounds the same as the men.

[Tom Ripley]

9. They prefer being pampered dogs rather than common dogs

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. No. They're just assholes, like Republican men. n/t

[mathematic]

15. This is a typical mistake in analyzing opposing political views

People make a lot more sense when you realize that their political views spring forth from their values rather than some desire to effect an end goal. Let's take a look at a couple of examples.

Abortion
Both men and women can have religious values that say abortion is ending a life. To these people it doesn't matter that outlawing abortion reduces the freedom of women. They view abortion as a great crime that must be prevented. The women that believe this aren't traitors to their sex or in thrall to men or anything like that. It's not like the goal is to reduce the freedom of women and abortion is just the lever.

Family Roles
Both men and women can favor traditional family roles: men work a job to provide income and women raise the children and manage the household. The good news here is that unlike two generations ago, these men and women can easily find each other and avoid spouses that do not value the traditional family roles. The traditionalists happily living their lives in traditional family roles don't understand that a man might not want work himself to death with no spousal income to be the best "provider" and a woman might not want to be shackled to home life with no economic independence. Nevertheless, they support the things that are relevant to their lives. What difference does workplace discrimination make to a woman that is happily living a traditional family role? (It could even be said that such a woman would favor workplace discrimination but I don't think people usually think that abstractly). Practically speaking, traditionalists will have friends and family that are not traditionalists and that informs their political views as well.

Based on these two examples, women can be republicans based on their own values while supporting their own best interests.

In general, I dislike explanations of political beliefs that rely on people being stupid, mean, bad, crazy, etc. This goes for poor, white people voting R too.

[Cyrano]

17. Regarding both religious and family values,

they have every right to hold whatever beliefs they want to. However, they, and their party, are trying to ram those beliefs down everyone else's throats. And they want to do so by any means necessary.

If "supporting their own best interests" means that I too will have to abide by those values under laws they want to pass, they are my enemies.

[mick063]

16. Not just women.

I would expand it to all Republicans are hostages to some type of captor. They all aid some form of a leader (a priest, a CEO, etc., etc.) in ways that conflict with their own best self interest.