Why are Libertarians mostly men?

[Sandra Craft]

Frankly, I have no opinion on this at all -- don't know enough to have one -- but I thought it might make for an interesting discussion for those who do know enough:

Why are Libertarians mostly dudes?

Here's why Libertarians are mostly men

[jumbojak]

I know a few libertarians. White males who think they know everything, are generally incompetent in their claimed areas of expertise, and have a history of failing in their pursuit of women. They also tend to get uncomfortable when you bring up Robert Nozick. Not sure why that it.

[Pasta Chick]

I wouldn't say I know enough, but that's always been my impression. The libertarians I know are all middle class white men who can't seem to understand that they aren't actually self-made successes. Most women deal with enough bullshit from their ideal systems on a daily basis that they aren't buying into the delusion.

Not to mention how incredibly hostile many libertarian organizations are to women, right up to being full blown MRAs. One of the articles mentions atheism as a similar "men's club". To be honest, if atheism were an ideology, not a definition for lack of belief, I wouldn't identify as atheist either.

[Firebird]

One of the articles mentions atheism as a similar "men's club". To be honest, if atheism were an ideology, not a definition for lack of belief, I wouldn't identify as atheist either.

Interesting. I was surprised to find out that there's a perception of atheist/secular organizations as sexist, but apparently that really is the case with some. Really unfortunate.

Anyone else here remember when ThinkAnarchy hung out on the forum? I got into some pretty long, heated arguments with him about this kind of stuff. Though he identified more as an "anarcho-capitalist", it sounded pretty much like libertarianism taken to its logical conclusion.

[Recusant]

It will be a while before I'm able to read the words "anarcho-capitalist" or any of its variations without thinking of the (likely completely made up) Reddit story of the "an-cap" tourist in Greece. "I was beat up by left anarchists in Greece."

[chimp3]

When I read this post I questioned the lack of women libertarians. I thought of the 3 women credited with founding the movement and coining the word "libertarian" itself. I thought of the facebook page "Association of Libertarian Feminists" and others. As a white male libertarian - not quite middle-class - I do not consider myself "self made" but a member of a society which thrives on mutually beneficial relationships and I love what comes of spontaneous order - Burning Man , Rainbow Gatherings , the under the radar vegan catering service I operated in the '80s. I found a recent article on this topic : http://www.examiner.com/article/where-are-all-the-libertarian-women-they-re-everywhere

[Davin]

I agree with those articles, except the one linked by chimp3. If people were saying there were no women involved in the start of libertarianism or that there were no women, then chimp3's article would be a rebuttal opinion piece that made sense.

The Purge movies are a good depiction of what the libertarian dream would look like, except not just one day a year, it would be like that all the time. Of course not the dream they envision, but a more realistic outcome of their goals to get rid of all regulations.

[chimp3]

The libertarian philosophy prohibits coercive use of force. It is now almost mandatory that a libertarian candidate take the Non-Aggression Pledge: https://www.facebook.com/IPledgeNAP/?fref=ts to be accepted by the libs. The role of the state being to protect the individual against the majority does not add up to the chaos scenario in The Purge.

[Davin]

The libertarian philosophy prohibits coercive use of force.

I can accept that yours does. But I doubt that applies to every Libertarian. You're not the first I've seen, but you seem to be trying to speak for them all.

It is now almost mandatory that a libertarian candidate take the Non-Aggression Pledge: https://www.facebook.com/IPledgeNAP/?fref=ts to be accepted by the libs.

"Almost mandatory[...]" Not very comforting. And only for the candidates? There are more libertarians than just candidates. This is one of the problems when talking to libertarians, they focus on one tree to try to prove the forest is not on fire. Of course they also try to hold individuals to majorities too. All around comparison logic failures.

The role of the state being to protect the individual against the majority does not add up to the chaos scenario in The Purge.

What do you think happens when you remove all regulations? It in effect, makes everything legal. Just like in the purge.

[Pasta Chick]

The libertarian philosophy prohibits coercive use of force. It is now almost mandatory that a libertarian candidate take the Non-Aggression Pledge: https://www.facebook.com/IPledgeNAP/?fref=ts to be accepted by the libs. The role of the state being to protect the individual against the majority does not add up to the chaos scenario in The Purge.

That doesn't mean much, unfortunately. There are plenty of ways to coerce and abuse people without the use of force. In my personal experience they're often far more insidious as they allow the abuser to gaslight the hell out of their victims, claiming to come from a position of love and fairness and if the victim can't see that they must be the crazy one. Which is pretty much exactly where the Libertains I know stand on racial issues, workplace equality and rape culture denial.

[chimp3]

You seem to be mixing up anarchism with libertarianism. Some libertarians are anarchists. IMHO , anarchy would be fine if everyone behaved themselves. Not likely. We would still need to protect ourselves from murderers , beaters, rapists, and thieves. I also am not speaking for all libertarians. I am just echoing the party platform outlined here:

http://www.lp.org/platform

I think we are going off track from the original topic. Perhaps I will start another thread.

[Davin]

You seem to be mixing up anarchism with libertarianism.[...]

I am not. But I would like to see you support that vacuous claim.

I think we are going off track from the original topic. Perhaps I will start another thread.

Yeah, that tends to happen when talking to libertarians. Like how you ignored the points in my post that were on topic and went for something else entirely.

Notice how in response to the statistics that show that there are hardly any women involved with libertarianism, you reply with and article that says, "well some women started it and here is a small list of women that are libertarians." That "counter" does more to support the point you disagree with.

[chimp3]

I agree I went off topic from the original claim that the majority of libertarians are men. I had no idea that was true. I was not disagreeing , merely pointing out the women in the libertarian movement from the beginning.  My claim that libertarianism is not anarchism is already answered with my link to the party platform.

[Davin]

I agree I went off topic from the original claim that the majority of libertarians are men. I had no idea that was true. I was not disagreeing , merely pointing out the women in the libertarian movement from the beginning.

So you started off off topic, that makes more sense.

My claim that libertarianism is not anarchism is already answered with my link to the party platform.

The claim you should support is the claim that I seem to be confusing the two.