Political Stances

NOTE : -- These are all work-in-progress thoughts, and subject to change --

Equalists believe men should have their own rights and choices, and be treated as "equal as possible". That last part forms a distorted equality. For example, equalists have no problem with women carrying and caring for men, even though men can't reciprocate equally. They also see it as "equal" that wives and husbands both have the equal legal right to kiss each other, even though the results are very unequal. Equalists are against the protectionist divorce law requiring signs of abuse for a man to divorce a woman, however most concede that at least they can individually let their husband go if he wanted a divorce. (whether they would follow through or not is another matter) Strong Equalists are monogamists, who believe the rarity of men is a statistical fact which should not impede the rights of an individual man, though many believe this view is born out of selfish-convenience. Non-monogamous equalists, like protectionists, view attraction to women and sexuality to be an inevitable part of life in a society 99% female, and few would begrudge their partner (male or female) for taking interest in another woman. However, men are expected to have a wife chaperon nearby during any dating or intimacy (for their own protection), while women need no such protection.

Protectionists believe it is the responsibility of the evolved female majority to protect men and the sanctity of marriage. In some ways, they hold men almost up on a pedestal. However, because of natural gender inequality, it is a pedestal of their own design, which they control. For example, the protectionist law requires signs of male abuse for a man to divorce to "protect" husbands and wives from the conflict of affairs that would occur if other women could coerce men to divorce. Protectionists are polygamists, who believe it is natural for men to either work at healing centers, or take multiple wives -- because this is far more important to society than men inefficiently working a job which women are far superior at, and paid more for. Protectionists let their men make the final decision about additional wives, but courting and intimacy are the responsibility of existing wives, for his safety. Protectionist wives maintain their marriage by striking a balance between fairness among wives and the husband's wishes, though they are very willing to use glimmer to encourage him to do what they believe is in his best interest.

Claimists believe men are inferior slave propery, akin to pets, and they should have no rights. A claimist woman who 'owns' a husband would take whatever female partners she wishes, and share or not share her male property with them as she chooses. She could also own multiple husbands, if she has the means to acquire them. They view male life as something to protect only because their loss implies loss of a valuable financial asset. She could whore her slave-men as she chooses, charging whatever the market will bear. Almost all these activities are currently illegal in the USA, so claimists are limited in how they can enact their beliefs. A claimist will glimmer her husband to control his actions, including his healing another woman to her advantage. There is nothing illegal about doing this for personal reasons. It's technically illegal if she does this for indirect corporate or financial gain, but common as it's hard to prove. Doing it for money is illegal and easy to prove and prosecute if the man speaks up, so uncommon. Famous women are more likely to have a claimist ideology, since they have multiple men seeking them out, and within the bounds of the law can use them as they like.