On the second day of this new year, Jule Borowski, AKA Token Libertarian Girl, made a video for her YouTube channel called “Addressing the Lack of Female Libertarians”. In it, she discusses why she believes more women aren’t attracted to the LP, sometimes in a humorous manner. You can view her video here:
Well, there has been quite a bit of discussion about this topic in the ensuing week. Sarah Skwire wrote No Girls Allowed In Bleeding Heart Liberals.
Megan Mcardle let her views be known: The Problem with Libertarian Women is Not Libertarian Men , in The Daily Beast.
David Frum wrote this piece, also in The Daily Beast: Why Aren’t More Libertarians Women?
But, my favorite response is from Cathy Reisenwitz: Sex, Butts and Orgasms: A Response to Julie Borowski She has two classic lines in this video that I’ll have to work into a conversation as often as possible: “When Julie slut-shames, she does libertarianism a disservice”, and “We Think Women are People Too”.
But this does make me wonder: do most Libertarian men think women are people, too? Why do our IPR readers think there are so few Libertarian women compared to the number of men?
Disclosure: The writer of this article is a Libertarian woman who married a Libertarian man. Update: I just found this response to Julie’s article from Tom Woods. I can’t imagine why I missed it before. You’ll enjoy reading his whole response here: The Central Committee Has Handed Down its Denunciation. Dr. Woods references an article on the topic which touches an issue being explored on another thread here on IPR. You can read Bryan Caplan’s article Women, Liberty, Marketing and Social Science here. The IPR article discussing personality types is https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/01/mark-hilgenberg-why-are-libertarians-hard-to-understand/
You previously wrote
Then you said
Sounds like you said the same thing in two different ways – IE the first description sounds like Beck, even though you had Borowski in mind when you wrote it.
Hence my comment
@49 Be Rational:
In regards to the idea that State LP’s need to get out of the way of local groups and activists…as well as the statement, “The job of the State LP is to make the party bigger.” From what I see here in Nevada…the State LP is the only thing that matters, and it is the leaders job to purge any and all Libertarians who don’t fall in line with his authoritative ways of thinking. Maybe Nevada just took too many lessons from Root and that is why our leadership is a bunch of ass clowns humping doorknobs?
Thanks for weighing in, Cathy!
My two cents
http://bighomocon.blogspot.com/2013/01/women-and-libertarianism-and-gays-and.html?m=0
Thank you so much for the compliment Jill! Glad you liked those lines!
Someone started a page on facebook for people who like “Sex, Butts & Orgasms”
http://www.facebook.com/libertarianfun
“maybe another reason women avoid libertarians is because they think libertarians are all like Glenn Beck”
Isn’t that the same reason as the one you just gave previously? LOL
Not at all. LOL
The other reason was entirely devoted to Borowski. LOL
It’s equally inaccurate to claim that someone who wears a suit, disapproves of promiscuity and consumerism, etc., can’t be libertarian.
Yes, but is there actually anyone making that argument?
Nice. Big Boi does a good job of presenting libertarian views as well as being a Gary Johnson supporter and voter. (Only a few issues, but all good.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/big-boi-outkast-vote-gary-johnson-obama_n_2460511.html
The interviewer, Alyona Minkovski, also says she voted for Gary Johnson. She has a regular show on HuffPo and used to be on Russia Today.
http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/big-boi-/50ee0378fe34443485000105
So…can the LP get Big Boi, Alyona Minkovski, and others actively involved with the party?
@ 45 & 46
It is true that you have to have leadership in place – that remains in place – to keep party growth going. This has been the difficulty that has seen a handful of state LP groups grow to a significant size and then subsequently fade back to standard LP size.
A few states have had leadership that got everything moving. Each has fizzled out when new leadership took over that didn’t have the know-how.
National has never had such leadership, although there have been a few individuals involved who got it, there has never been a majority of the LNC on board.
Eventually, if the LP is to succeed, we need to get the LNC trained up as to what to do, and working together as a team. They can assist State parties with the know-how, training, materials, kick start an advertising program etc.
The LNC can help those states that are doing well to continue to do well when leadership changes – if they will finally learn these lessons themselves and create an effective, cooperative working team.
The State LP groups, in turn, need to realize that their growth depends on building an LP county group in every county (over 1,000 population). Again, providing and passing on the assistance. LP groups in large population counties need to build down to the local level as well.
We need to lead from the top but build from the bottom.
There are many exciting opportunities for success that can keep local groups going. Every outreach event, local parade, county fair booth, state fair booth, any event that adds interested names to the mailing list, every small fundraising event, Introduction to Libertarianism nights, running candidates for local offices where significant vote totals and even victories can be earned, and all the fun socializing mixed with Libertarian friends.
These things cannot be done at the national or state level, nor by huge population county groups – but these large groups are the catalysts and inspiration for the local groups where the ideas turn to action that bring the growth we need.
It is very important for the National and State LP groups not to get in the way, discourage or interfere with the local groups. Far too often infighting at the State level discourages and disrupts. Even more often, State LPs suck out massive amounts of manpower and resources best left at the local level.
For example: Some State LP groups set up all kinds of bureaucratic drains on volunteer hours. Spending endless hours on unneeded committees, endless debates on issues when we all basically agree anyway – outside of a platform debate, shadow governments, perfecting organizing documents and bylaws … these are a waste of time … especially if these activities by the State LP are repeated at the local level.
We must avoid this. If your State LP has 3 or more people, good, it’s time to start local groups.
The job of the State LP is to make the party bigger.
Create a simple set of bylaws or constitution that will be used by every local group as an affiliate of the State LP group. Use it. One or two pages max. No local platforms. The State LP platform can be the local platform. For small State LPs, the National LP platform is enough. When you have five hundred or more paid members you can dedicate a few volunteers to drafting a State LP platform to be debated and adopted at a convention. Before that don’t waste your resources on it.
Raise money. Find new people.
Raise more money. Find more new people.
Repeat.
We need to lead from the top and build from the bottom. It’s a win/win/win for each level of the Libertarian Party.
“The party needs a lightning rod to inspire in order to reach women and minorities. That person is not present.”
Not sure that this would help with women at all, but…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/big-boi-outkast-vote-gary-johnson-obama_n_2460511.html
LNC, LPHQ have been informed. I haven’t heard them trying to reach out though.
This is the stupidest waste of time argument ever.
1 reason – creepertarians. Why? My girlfriend gives me this reason as why she doesn’t even like attending events WITH me.
another reason – bad recruiting and bad retention.
sometimes local and state affiliates act very inclusive . (I’m watching this happen at the state level with the LPF, namely their convention space, pricing, and format)
I also think that building from the bottom up requires leadership recruitment that does not happen. Using smaller sub-groups that are goal centric or idea centric would help build a foundation, but without a memorizing female candidate to market and without branding the entire “build this party” theme is a waste of time.
Voters seek utility. Working in a party that has no votes in the national leaves the work done without result voters can understand.
Working on a campaign knowing 3% is the “goal” or the “best” takes a certain kind of person, regardless of gender.
The party needs a lightning rod to inspire in order to reach women and minorities. That person is not present.
@31 Good job! the Question is how many of these are still active in Maine ?
You have got to have activist at each place who will see it through for the duration. Things also have to be interesting for men, women and children of every color to keep things going! Current event discussions including all attendees on local and national news adds a lot to most meetings! Keep it interesting and inclusive. Carpe Diem
@43 yep
It’s really not that hard to understand. There are millions of libertarians women and men who would join us if we made them feel welcome.
To become a Libertarian Party member, donor, participant etc means that these already-small-“l”-individuals have to feel that their time and money spent on the LP and LP activities is a better alternative than other choices out there. We are competing with family time, movies, dating, vacations, time with friends, buying junk and lattes. We have to make it worth their while.
It has nothing to do with our principles nor the principles of those who we are seeking to join us. First off, we don’t advertise. Second, we do very little outreach at all the events and opportunities open to us. Third, we don’t make good use of the people we already have. And finally, after people do show up, it’s just too easy for the everpresent boorish geeky types and all the constant infighting to drive off the rest.
maybe another reason women avoid libertarians is because they think libertarians are all like Glenn Beck
Isn’t that the same reason as the one you just gave previously? LOL
It seems to me the last thing the libertarian movement needs are conformists that wring their hands over what anti-libertarians think about the attire or lifestyles of freedom loving people.
I agree.
It’s equally inaccurate to claim that someone who wears a suit, disapproves of promiscuity and consumerism, etc., can’t be libertarian.
How someone dresses, their taste in music, sexual lifestyle, choice of recreation – none of these determine whether or not they are libertarians.
If they grant others the right to make these choices, so long as that respect is mutual, regardless of whether they approve of the choices those others make (again so long as that does not involve initiation of force) they are libertarians.
Every argument that goes off in the weeds about which lifestyle or appearance choices are more libertarian is a deflection and a distraction. There’s no correct answer to such questions.
maybe another reason women avoid libertarians is because they think libertarians are all like Glenn Beck
maybe one reason
By the way, am I the only one who notices how judgmental and uptight the big-tenters always seem to be?
There always seems to be plenty of room in the big tent for one more old suit & tie honky embroiled in the culture war, but not so much room for anyone that doesn’t adhere to conservative PC.
It seems to me the last thing the libertarian movement needs are conformists that wring their hands over what anti-libertarians think about the attire or lifestyles of freedom loving people. People who think libertarianism can’t be presented by anyone who isn’t clean-cut and wearing “proper” clothing don’t even understand freedom in any real sense.
Besides, their bullshit strategies haven’t been working out so well for them anyway.
Maybe the reason…
Maybe a reason.
The reason? Seems unlikely.
Maybe the reason there aren’t so many women in the libertarian movement is because they have to contend with women like Julie Borowski.
It is tedious to be around people who are always “on” – people who constantly present false personalities in an attempt to influence others. Especially when these hyper dynamos of persuasion are less intelligent than the people they are trying to sell.
Borowski simply is trying too hard. Did she go to the Wayne Root school of artificial intensity and fake enthusiasm.
Lots of people just aren’t impressed with the whole Amway-salesperson-cranked-up-on-meth persona of phony zealots babbling half-baked talking points about liberals. There are plenty of right-wing bimbos already playing that game.
Maybe folks should quit trying so hard to enlist others into the cult and try just being themselves. A little honesty with others and with yourself never hurts.
She’s executive director at national LPHQ.
Is Carla Howell still a major force in the Libertarian Party?
I didn’t think it was all that great, but I understand opinions vary. I’d recommend leaving the “wonderful” descriptor out of an IPR article, as well as “Congratulations, Julie, on getting the attention of Dr. Woods! I’m impressed! You go, Girl!!!” and the “my favorite” descriptor about Reisenwitz’s, although that one actually was my favorite.
Woods writes
He is referring to Skwire and Horwitz at http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2013/01/no-girls-allowed/
Really I didn’t see anything resembling that in that article, but let’s go on.
Right. And what’s the evidence for this disparity?
Many possible explanations exist. Given that there are now plenty of women in professions and pursuits that once had little or few, and that “racial”/ethnic barriers/propensities in many professions and hobbies have broken down or been reversed in an opposite direction, I tend to lean towards cultural explanations far more so than biological ones.
Woods’ other piece of evidence (from Bryan Caplan) is
I tend more towards feeling than thinking myself.
So what?
Libertarianism is just as much or more about cultural freedom, peace and personal liberty as it is about economic liberty, and favorability to economic liberty can be based on feeling just as much as on thinking.
If anything, failure to attract people to libertarianism because they are more feeling than thinking on the Myers-Briggs scale is a failure in the way libertarianism is marketed/sold/explained, not a failure of any demographic group.
Woods characterizes Skwire’s article as
Again, not something I got out of it. I certainly saw no inkling of dreariness is Reisenwitz’s video response.
Woods writes
He says that like being sheltered in that way is a good thing.
Neither side of this argument is more or less libertarian. Individuals – men or women – can choose to be promiscuous, monogamous or celibate, open or closeted about their sexual choices – none of which makes them more or less libertarian. Borowski introduced that red herring into the discussion.
Borowski can rail against other women being promiscuous or consumerist, and others can point out that her personal preferences there are irrelevant to who is or is not libertarian.
That all depends on what audiences you try to reach.
No, not really.
Borowski and Woods are welcome to hold all the “anti-PC” opinions they want and still be libertarian. It’s just that conflating those opinions with libertarianism, as Bowrowski does by way of explaining why more women aren’t libertarians, is changing the subject.
It’s as if I asked why more African-Americans are not libertarian and then went on to talk about how the music that “white” people are more apt to like is more libertarian than the music that most “non-white” people are more likely to like (and I’m not even talking about lyrics here. Let’s say for the sake of this analogy that none of this music has any lyrics).
It’s a complete deflection, and pointing out that it’s a deflection is not “PC thought police” or anything else that Woods characterizes it as.
BR
I didn’t say LA had enough groups or enough people, just that it has several groups, in direct reply to you saying there was only one. I agree there should be more, and I’m even willing to help make it happen if I can scratch by doing that.
br @ 31: I really have no idea how many emails go out in Los Angeles County. All I know is the attendance at my region has tripled over the three years when I’ve been chair. We certainly try to attract more people, but, I agree that we should have more involved with the party. That is certainly our goal.
@23 LA County has “several” regional sub groups. 10 million people.
When I was organizing in Maine – 1.1 million people we organized active groups in all 16 counties and about 40 legally organized local city or town groups.
LA County has 9 times the population.
Neighborhoods, precints, whatever fits … there should be a mailing list of at least 30,000 and there should be scores or hundreds of sub groups.
Jed Siple said: “Watching the convention on TV I saw a lot of female delegates, I know of several strong women that have worked in the LP (Betsy Dewey, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Mary Ruwart, Betsy Summers, Marakay Rogers, etc.).”
You must not have been paying very close attention, because I was there in person, and the vast majority of the people there were white men, just like every other libertarian meeting I’ve ever attended.
Jed Siple said: “I’ve wondered why we don’t have more people of color within the LP. ”
I’ve always hated the expression “people of color.” This implies that if one is white one is not a color. This is retarded.
Equally retarded is the expression “ethnic peoples.” Everyone is a part of some ethnic group or groups.
Here’s a link to an interview on employment laws with another hardworking Libertarian woman, Janet Hopf, the Chair of the Manhattan Libertarian Party.
Pay no attention to the dork interviewing her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJalK1ytCEk
“paulie // Jan 11, 2013 at 5:10 pm
@22 We just need active recruiting. Passive recruiting, ie waiting for people to come to us, or white libertarians going only where they feel comfortable, is the only problem here. From personal experience, NO shortage of libertarians in any type of neighborhood I have ever been in, and I have been in neighborhoods of every ethnicity, so-called race and economic mix.”
I totally agree with all points made here.
The Libertarian Party as a whole needs to do a lot more recruiting. This needs to be done in person, over the internet, and via regular mail. Also, whenever a Libertarian Party member appears on TV or on the radio, they should encourage people to join the party and to visit the http://www.LP.org website and/or call the 800-ELECTUS phone number. Harry Browne used to do this frequently when he was doing TV and radio interviews, and this is one of the reasons that the party was growing back then.
I have talked politics with thousands and thousands of people (so many people that I don’t even know how many), both in person and online, and I can tell everyone from personal experience that you can find people who are open to or who already agree with the Libertarian Party in every group conceivable. Every age group, racial/ethnic group, economic group, regional group, religious (or non-religious) group, etc… There are also a lot of women out there who are open to or already agree with the Libertarian Party. Maybe not a majority of women, but a lot more than are represented in current party membership.
The Libertarian Party has the potential to be a lot bigger than it is or ever has been.
Who’s attacking her? I think Cathy and Sarah made better points – but I don’t in any way fault Julie for expressing herself and I have enjoyed many of her videos.
I did not know about Julie until seeing this article.
Why is anyone attacking her? Her videos are fantastic, esp. the ones on TSA and fiscal cliff.
She uses humor and a great style to present a pro-freedom philosophy. How terrific.
For those who object, you can go back to reading Human Action. I couldn’t make it past page 3.
Oh, I really liked Cathy too. Competition in libertarian women’s videos. How excellent indeed.
@22 We just need active recruiting. Passive recruiting, ie waiting for people to come to us, or white libertarians going only where they feel comfortable, is the only problem here. From personal experience, NO shortage of libertarians in any type of neighborhood I have ever been in, and I have been in neighborhoods of every ethnicity, so-called race and economic mix.
This is true. But I still side with Reisenwitz and Skwire here.
LA County has several regional groups. Jill heads up one of those.
JS @ 21:” I think we need to do more to reach out to the black community and other minority communities to show how the principles of human liberty will empower them and their families.”
I completely agree. We have Libertarios to appeal to Hispanics, but otherwise we definitely need to appeal to non-whites. For some reason that remains a challenge to our party.
Can’t watch the video due to having a weak connection, but I will say that I don’t see a problem. Watching the convention on TV I saw a lot of female delegates, I know of several strong women that have worked in the LP (Betsy Dewey, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Mary Ruwart, Betsy Summers, Marakay Rogers, etc.). I’ve wondered why we don’t have more people of color within the LP. I don’t know of many black Libertarians. I think we need to do more to reach out to the black community and other minority communities to show how the principles of human liberty will empower them and their families.
I love Julie’s videos. This one made me laugh, which is always a good thing. I’ll bet if we laughed more often, more women might seek us out and stick around more. We need to celebrate the PARTY in Libertarian Party.
There are no perfect libertarians. This may not have been her best video, but otherwise she has often been a strong and amusing advocate for libertarian views.
Jumping on her for this one moment is an example of how libertarians shoot each other in the foot all the time.
With 10 million population to draw from in your county, your county LP attendance should be in the hundreds. Small attendance means you are doning something seriously wrong. With that size population, you should have a 30,000 name mailing list of interested individuals. My guess is you’re not doing real outreach and party building.
One thing you are doing wrong, your 10 million area group has no subgroups, small local groups to do the real work and drive attendance to the occasional larger population area events.
@11
So……… why is that a bad thing? Why be ashamed, why not be proud?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lqDL9WR1QT8
BR @ 15: “Large population county LP groups need to subdivide into smaller groups just like state LP groups need to do.”
I’m not sure what you mean by that. I know our email list goes out to a few hundred people for our Pasadena region, but the average amount of people who attend monthly meetings is still only around 20. I remember a few months a few years ago only having around 6 or 7. When it comes to an event in the community, I would expect only 7 or 8 people from the region to show up. I can’t think of a reason to make the group even smaller.
We had 17 people at our past meeting last Wednesday, and 4 of us were women. The best attended meeting we’ve had in years was the October 2012 meeting where we invited people in to talk about the propositions of the upcoming ballot. I believe we had 27 people, and about 10 of them were women.
It’s great that the Los Angeles County LP an active group with active women members in leadership. However, LA County has about 10 million people, so it is bigger than most US States.
The handful of very large counties in the US, of which LA County is by far the largest, should have enough active women to never become a men’s only club. This is not the case for the typical county.
There are over 3,000 counties in the US, so the average county has about 100,000 people. About 83% of US counties have populations below 100,000.
The CA LP, and the LP in every state, needs to get busy organizing and facilitating the growth of a group in every county.
Yes, counties with populations below 1,000 will be difficult, but there are only 33 of those nationwide. The rest should be organized.
In the counties with large populations – certainly in the biggest 100 counties, each of which has over 600,000 people – the county LP groups should be organizing in each city or town, or by ward and precinct, as applicable. Once again, at that level, the same problems will appear that come up in the typical State LP group.
Large population county LP groups need to subdivide into smaller groups just like state LP groups need to do.
Left parties have had similar gender deficits, and I think this applies to all political activism, men can be bossy and domineering in a way that fits women’s usual socialialization to be meek and subservient. I realze libertarian capitalists would never endorse gender equity, but on the Left, once we started enforcing gender equity in leadership positions women saw other women as leaders and as having importnat roles in the group, and at leat to a large degree, championing women’s issues as they exist in a non-equalitarian society. And thus the number of women active in Left parties and sects in the US has increased since the 1980s.
Here’s something to consider. Being a Libertarian Party member does not mean that one ever has to show up at a party meeting. I joined the party in 1996 and I never attended any meetings until 2000. Oh, I actually did attend one meeting in 1999, but still, I’d been in the party for close to 3 years at that point.
All you have to do to be a party member is sign the statement of principles and send in the minimum $25 per year (which I think should be increased due to inflation, but this is another issue). It’s nice if you show up at the polls on election day and vote for Libertarian Party candidates who are on the ballot as well, but beyond this, you don’t really have to do anything else to be a Libertarian Party member.
Beyond reading stuff I got in the mail from the party, and reading stuff online about the party, the only conversation I had with any party member prior to the first in person meeting I attended in 1999 was that I had a couple of brief phone conversations with a couple of party members back in 1996 when I was trying to find out how to get some yard signs and bumper stickers and stuff like that.
So if women or anyone else does not like to attend LP meetings, maybe because there are too many geeky single white guys, or because they don’t have time, or for whatever other reason, they don’t have to attend any meetings. Just send in a dues payment and show up and vote for the candidates on election day, and if you live in a state that has partisan voter registration, it usually helps the party maintain ballot access if one registers to vote under the party banner, so it is nice if a person does that as well.
I’m just pointing out that one does not have to attend meetings to be involved with the party.
Jill Pyeatt said: “I’ve observed some women being overwhelmed by geeky men delighted to have some estrogen in the room,”
LOL!
Jill Pyeatt said: “His hard-core supporters were all men.”
This is descriptive of the entire Libertarian Party ever since I first got involved with it in 1996. It is mostly made up of men, white men to be more descriptive.
For what it’s worth, my intention on this article was to have a little fun and open up conversation. I have some opinions of why there are relatively few active women in the LP, but they tend to be California-specific, and I’m working to change that.
First, Root really turned off women. I say that as a generalization, but I can only think of a couple women who supported him at all. His hard-core supporters were all men. I kept thinking everyone would notice that, but no one ever spoke about it. I’m not sure why that was the case (although I suspect it had to do with the general used-car salesman aura), but that’s moot now.
We have a strong and excellent chair of the Los Angleles county LP, Nancy Zardeneta, and I was just re-elected back as chair to the Pasadena/Glendale region, one of LA County’s largest affiliates. All we can do is “walk the walk”–live Libertarian principles to everyone around us. If other women see that and choose to explore our lifestyle, then our party will increase its female membership.
In my experience, I’ve been treated well by the LP men. I’ve observed some women being overwhelmed by geeky men delighted to have some estrogen in the room, but I’m kinda old and never personally experienced it. Maybe we should try to insulate new, pretty women somehow, and just make sure no one overwhelms them. We can do that by maybe surrounding her with Libertarians who know how to behave until she settles in.
Women in the big “L” party and small “l” libertarians:
There are actually millions of small “l” libertarian women about, along with the millions of small “l” men. The question of how to get more of both groups to participate – how to get more people to participate in the Libertarian Party – we must look at the whole issue.
First off, because it bugs me, post number one above: nice way to annoy or anger quite a few women, and men…
When we go to larger state LP conventions or national conventions, we generally see quite a few women, but far fewer than the number of men. Attendance at these events is an upward progression from our local groups. All politics is local, trite but true; our local groups, the number of them and the number of members in them will determine how big our state groups become. Large, successful state groups will generate a large, successful national LP.
So, let’s start local. When we go to local LP organization meetings, usually small groups of people, we often see all men. No women at all.
During the time when there are only men, some of the men develop bad habits, poor social skills and rude behavior, or their already established bad manners manifest themselves and these become habitual. Even men don’t come back because of the lack of gender balance and rude behavior – this helping to keep the group small.
When a woman finally shows up to a meeting – maybe a wife or girlfriend of one of the men, sometimes a lone interested, libertarian woman -how is she welcomed and treated and how does she feel?
Do the men continue their poor social behavior; do some of them manifest the attitude displayed in post #1; do some of them gape, gawk and ogle – displaying for all the world to see that they are desperate, geeky, lonely computer programmers long separated from the sight or scent of any female closer than 10 feet distance except on a TV screen or computer monitor? … far too often, yes, all of the above.
So, the new woman flees; The group converts back to an LP lonely men’s club.
Even if the new female prospect is treated well and isn’t the object of bug-eyed curiosity or drooling desire, she may feel uncomfortable just by being the only female in attendance.
So, how do we fix this?
We need to plan our local group meetings with this in mind. We need to coordinate within our state LP groups to assist the local groups. We need to ask our female members to discuss this problem and help us fix it; and we need to get those men who are the crude offenders described above to stop being pigs.
The way to change this is to make sure that at least three female members come to each local meeting. The women who are already members can talk to each other in advance and plan to attend. They may have to come from different parts of the state. They may have to attend the meetings of several local groups until they develop their own cadre of local female LP members. But, they will be together. They can make each other feel safe and welcome.
These women will serve as a core to attract more females to attend. This will encourage other men to attend and to bring the women in their lives.
A local group with both male and female members will grow more quickly. Both men and women will feel more comfortable.
Then, the local group then needs to spend the bulk of its time and effort on two types of activities: outreach to find and attract more interested people, members, donors and attendees; and social events to keep our goups more friendly and interesting to regular, non-geeky people. There should be events to include family members and children as well: picnics, barbeques, garage-sale fundraisers etc.
Unfortunately, most of our LP groups spend countless wasted hours arguing about insignificant points of disagreement on Libertarian principles, or worse, fighting over leadership positions, bylaws and other nonsense ( as in Oregon currently, for example).
Solving this problem then is a chicken or egg type of problem. We need women to attract women.
Soving this problem is a matter of social skill: some of our members need to develop better manners and social skills.
Solving this problem is a matter of focus: too many arguments about bylaws, control, and issue disagreements. (Have interesting outside speakers from time to time, free literature, and books available for sale. Let these speak for themselves.)
Concentrate on outreach and social events. Keep your group interesting and fun. Praise, thank and reward members and visitors. Make them feel welcome so they have a positive experience and want to come again. Everyone wants to feel useful and wanted.
Finally, State LP groups need to recognize that their local groups are their most important asset. They need to focus on building a separate LP group in each and every county in their state – no combined groups – separate. They will need help, but this can be done in every state within 1 to 4 years. Except a few tiny counties with very small populations – there is no reason why the LP shouldn’t have 3,000 county groups by the 2016 POTUS election. Of course, there are a lot of recalcitrant leaders who won’t make the attempt, so some state LP groups won’t try at this time. So, a reasonable, achievable goal would be 2,000 county groups by November, 2016.
We are turning off both women and men. We need to plan to attract everyone.
The issue is not gender specific. Each of you are assuming too much about retaining a specific group or whatever reason.
The women that I have known that acknowledge Libertarianism do so on a moment by moment basis. Very few say Libertarian forever. And we all do that as customers.
Umbrella theories and generalizations have been around this party since I started in 1996.
Independent women of means and intelligence might be a niche market, but I also know a few women who vote Libertarian because of one issue…home schooling.
If there were a big R in the proximity that branded themselves as a big R who fights for home schoolers, she would be an R.
Retaining customers is cost beneficial, but you first need to get them.
When you are on the outside or edge of your construct, expect thin numbers. We have strong women in this movement so we identify them as quality and not quantity. You use the wrong measurement model and the measurement will disappoint.
If gender is primary, then…
Exactly how smart are the present males in the party when Root and his group got to the big table? Look at the threshold before you cleaned them off?
Branding has nothing to do with gender when you deal in ideas. When the product and service have utility for the customer, then you build a brand.
My two cents worth.
Julie Borowski is correct.
I don’t think so. Her rant seems to be conservative, not so much libertarian.
Reisenwitz (video @4) and Skwire in BHL (http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2013/01/no-girls-allowed/) are correct.
You mean, Wannabe Hipster L’s vs. Vulcan L’s.
Real hipsters don’t accept L’s as true hipsters.
=========
And yes, L’s need to influence the culture.
But L’s know that they need artists and filmmakers and musicians. They’ve been saying it for decades. Just as they’ve been saying for decades that they need more women and minorities.
Julie Borowski is correct. But she’s not especially helpful, because she’s not saying anything new.
What L’s need is to actually do it — influence the culture — and in a big way, with many artists and filmmakers and musicians.
Many of us know what needs to be done, but have not been able to actually do it.
hipster L’s vs. Vulcan L’s going on here . . .
Haven’t found anything about libertarians per se in the archives, but most of this discussion was about why there aren’t more libertarian women:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/01/womens-issues-and-third-party-politics/
Of course women are people. And it would seem like individualists would be the last people to think of large groups of people in collectivist terms, but then again libertarianism does also protect the right of bigots to associate freely, so maybe some of them are drawn to libertarianism for that reason.
Cathy Reisenwitz’s video deserves to be more than just a link…
http://youtu.be/a49r8iGdOJ0
I feel like this beaten up topic gets revisited once a year. Deja vu.
In my opinion, there should be no doubt that the answer is “yes”.
Washing
Ironing
Fucking
Ect