Yeah - imagine, if exactly 40 years ago - 1985 to be exact, someone had basically outlined this exact chain of events.

Prevent women from leaving marriages, despite the husband beating her.

The goal is the end of no fault divorce.

No fault divorce doesn’t mean that your husband can’t get rid of you, it just means that he’ll call the cops and tell them you’re crazy so he can move his side piece in.

Republicans passed a bill requiring married women to have a passport to vote.

I don't want to defend the horseshit Republicans are shoveling around but this isn't true. You can access the text of H.R. 2022, the so called Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, at this link.

If you read 2(b)(1), don't worry it's on the very first page of the link, it clearly states:

“(1) A form of identification issued consistent with the requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates the applicant is a citizen of the United States.

As of September 2020 all US States and territories are issuing REAL ID compliant Drivers Licenses and State ID cards.

So anyone whose undergone a name change, regardless of gender, who has a State Issued ID meets the requirement. No passport necessary.

Republicans are up to enough awful shit without needing to lie about it. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act does not disenfranchise 80 million married woman.

The Right in the United States today is a social and political movement controlled almost totally by men but built largely on the fear and ignorance of women. The quality of this fear and the pervasiveness of this ignorance are consequences of male sexual domination over women. Every accommodation that women make to this domination, however apparently stupid, self-defeating, or dangerous, is rooted in the urgent need to survive somehow on male terms. Inevitably this causes women to take the rage and contempt they feel for the men who actually abuse them, those close to them, and project it onto others, those far away, foreign, or different. Some women do this by becoming right-wing patriots, nationalists determined to triumph over populations thousands of miles removed. Some women become ardent racists, anti-Semites, or homophobes. Some women develop a hatred of loose or destitute women, pregnant teenage girls, all persons unemployed or on welfare. Some hate individuals who violate social conventions, no matter how superficial the violations. Some become antagonistic to ethnic groups other than their own or to religious groups other than their own, or they develop a hatred of those political convictions that contradict their own. Women cling to irrational hatreds, focused particularly on the unfamiliar, so that they will not murder their fathers, husbands, sons, brothers, lovers, the men with whom they are intimate, those who do hurt them and cause them grief. Fear of a greater evil and a need to be protected from it intensify the loyalty of women to men who are, even when dangerous, at least known quantities. Because women so displace their rage, they are easily controlled and manipulated haters. Having good reason to hate, but not the courage to rebel, women require symbols of danger that justify their fear. The Right provides these symbols of danger by designating clearly defined groups of outsiders as sources of danger. The identities of the dangerous outsiders can change over time to meet changing social circumstances--for example, racism can be encouraged or contained; anti-Semitism can be provoked or kept dormant; homophobia can be aggravated or kept under the surface-but the existence of the dangerous outsider always functions for women simultaneously as deception, diversion, pain-killer, and threat.

The tragedy is that women so committed to survival cannot recognize that they are committing suicide. The danger is that self-sacrificing women are perfect foot soldiers who obey orders, no matter how criminal those orders are. The hope is that these women, upset by internal conflicts that cannot be stilled by manipulation, challenged by the clarifying drama of public confrontation and dialogue, will be forced to articulate the realities of their own experiences as women subject to the will of men. In doing so, the anger that necessarily arises from a true perception of how they have been debased may move them beyond the fear that transfixes them to a meaningful rebellion against the men who in fact diminish, despise, and terrorize them. This is the common struggle of all women, whatever their male-defined ideological origins; and this struggle alone has the power to transform women who are enemies against one another into allies fighting for individual and collective survival that is not based on self-loathing, fear, and humiliation, but instead on self-determination, dignity, and authentic integrity.

Dworkin, Right Wing Women

Think of how many middle class white women have watched/listen to Nancy Grace, Dr Phil, Laura Schlesinger. They get on Facebook and talk about being a “mama bear” - protecting their children from the “human traffickers” (random non white people) at Walmart.

It also gives them a measure of power. They have none in their relationships or marriages. At the ballot box - if they don’t have rights, well neither can any of the “lesser people.”

They genuinely hate themselves and want less choice/power, they think because they themselves aren't capable of leadership, no other woman is, its frustrating af talking to them (my sister is one, went to college and went from a liberal to hardcore conservative somehow)

Indoctrination is a hell of a drug