The âIâm Just a Girlâ to Household Voting Pipeline
So Iâm not one for conspiracy theories (because letâs be real, it gets racist really fast when you fall down an online rabbit hole), but let me just pop on my tinfoil hat for a second.
Because my personal theory (and I will die on this hill) is that the âIâm just a girl / girl maths / men think about the Roman Empireâ discourse on social media (even when it was tongue-in-cheek) helped prime the ground for the conversation that is now starting to bubble up on the American right around household voting and womenâs independent political power. And because American culture-war politics rarely stays in America, this is probably going to ripple out around the world via the populist satellites of MAGA (looking at you Reform).
Because even ironic discourse can still help normalise an idea. And the idea being normalised was that women are not really serious adults: that we are too frivolous to grapple with intellectual complexity such as Diocletianâs tetrarchy (that every man apparently has on his mind 24/7 despite one of the best classicists living being the GOAT Professor Mary Beard), too silly to be trusted with money, or too helpless to perform basic adult tasks.
Then the âdivine feminineâ, âfeminine energyâ, and âsprinkle sprinkleâ dating discourse adds to this, because even when it is supposedly framed as female empowerment (or as a critique of men being the source of all evil in the world- because womenâs pretty little heads arenât capable of malice) , it often ends up circling back to the same idea: that women are not really meant to stand fully on their own two feet.
That is also where tradwife content fits in, because it takes that same underlying premise and turns it into a lifestyle. If âgirl mathsâ makes women being bad with money funny, and âsprinkle sprinkleâ makes dependence on a man sound like strategy, then tradwife content sells full financial dependence as aspiration (almost a solution to the girl maths and an end point for the sprinkle).
Because although this content is all coming from different parts of BeyoncĂŠâs internet, it has the same common thread running underneath it. And this is how a cultural milieu gets created: different strands of culture keep repeating the same premise until it starts to feel like common sense in the Gramscian sense (not common sense as in the Chanel from the back of some guy called Daveâs van is probably fake, but common sense as in the assumptions a society absorbs so thoroughly that they stop looking political).
And that is also why the gender essentialism of the current culture wars matters here, because the argument is not only that women are bad with money but that biology creates fixed social roles and that stepping outside those roles is a threat to the social order (which is why the attacks on womenâs autonomy and the attacks on trans people are not separate moral panics so much as different fronts of the same project). Once you have spent years insisting that cis men and women have natural social and domestic functions, it becomes much easier to make individual rights look like a dangerous modern excess rather than the basic condition of being a free adult.
So when people then start soft-launching taking away the vote from women (and later, anyone who is not a rich, cis white man), the cultural groundwork has already been laid. Women have already been rhetorically softened into dependants.
I would like to add all the "Luteal Phase" posts to this as well, because we spent like 3000 years fighting the "she's on the rag" bullshit and now we're also adding in an entire HALF of the menstrual cycle to the "she's on the rag" discourse?
You're telling me you're comfortable saying that about idk 60-75 percent of the time you're useless?
SHUT THE FUCK UP. LOCK IN.
