I'm posting this here for people to celebrate! We have the first female VP elect in US history!

Women of ovarit! Post your happy thoughts!

I'm posting this here for people to celebrate! We have the first female VP elect in US history! Women of ovarit! Post your happy thoughts!


[–] margerydaw 49 points (+49|-0)

It’s awesome! Gives her a huge advantage if she runs for president in the future.

[–] Gini 7 points (+23|-16) Edited

I don't get the excitement at all. She thinks transwomen are women. If anything it's nothing but another extra hurdle for the GC movement.

Edit: Whats with all the downvotes ? If i say something factually wrong ok, but if you dissagree with me thats just shitty internet etiquette. Are you all trying to turn ovarit into reddit? Because it's starting to feel like it...

[–] margerydaw 21 points (+26|-5)

You don’t get it “at all”??

I don’t agree with her on lots of issues. But she may change her views, and it’s still great to finally have a female veep.

Let people be excited about something that legitimately is good news for women.

[–] Gini 8 points (+15|-7)

And how many of those female "veeps" that started with TWAW have changed their minds so far in any country? They started as an lgblolwtfbbq representative and they stuck with it or got fired.

Just because a woman finally becomes a vice president in the US does not mean its necessarily good news for women as a whole.

[+] [Deleted] 15 points (+16|-1)
[–] Boudicaea 11 points (+13|-2)

That is not the only thing that matters. And like many of us, she may be going with the flow and keeping her opinions on the subject to herself. I don't think she's actually done anything to further the TRA agenda.

[–] DarthVelma 39 points (+39|-0)

I'm just glad to have a place where I can be joyful about this. I've wanted something like this for so long.

[–] [Deleted] 30 points (+30|-0) Edited

I’m really excited about her! She seems like someone who can potentially bring common sense and women’s rights back to the American Left. My two issues would be TRA and instead of “defund the police,” requiring more extensive training. For right now though I’m most concerned with the Dems addressing income inequality, student loans, and health indebtedness.

[–] Boudicaea 10 points (+11|-1)

I'm with you. She seems so common sense, and we really need some leadership with common sense in the Democratic Party right now. I think most people view those issues as much more crucial than police reform. Obviously police violence is not OK, but the solution is a lot more complicated than simply stripping their funding. A good part of it is addressing income inequality and educational access (student loan reform being a huge prt of that).

Elizabeth Warren is similar, but got painted with the Hillary Clinton brush, quite unfairly. I think Harris may have some more success because she's a black woman. People seem to really hate white women right now.

[–] Kevina -20 points (+3|-23) Edited

"Dems addressing income inequality"

Can you elaborate?

"student loans"

And this one always puzzles me as well. Just don't get them, go to a cheaper school, or ask colleges why their costs have gone up so much in such a short amount of time. I don't see how getting the government involved by forgiving loans is the answer.

[–] Midnight 16 points (+16|-0)

I'm in the UK so not sure how student finance works in the US, but looking at this from a left-wing economic / social class perspective...

Student debt is a way of preserving economic / social class inequality.

If your parents are wealthy & have well-paid jobs, they can afford to save to pay for your uni education and/or they can support you while you study. This means you don't have to go into massive debt to get your degree, which means that when you leave uni, you aren't starting adult life weighed down by debt - this gives you a better start in life.

Moreover, if you're paying off your uni debt as an adult, you maybe can't save money to pay for your kids to go to uni, so your kids also have to go into debt to get thier education too. This creates a cycle of debt-repayment through the generations which ensures that families from poorer backgrounds take longer to escape poverty & move up the social ladder.

In addition - many people from poorer backgrounds are afraid of taking on thousands of pounds worth of debt just to get a degree. When they come from a home where they sometimes had to choose between electricity or food, the thought of taking on such a large financial burden can be prohibitive to education, which in turn leads to economic security, better health, a higher standard of living & social mobility.

Thus student debt is a way of preserving the social class system & economic class privileges.

[–] [Deleted] 14 points (+14|-0)

It’s absolutely about keeping people locked in a place. People with huge bad debt are more likely to stay in shitty working conditions and less likely to walk out for something better because they can’t. It also kills innovation and makes people less likely to qualify for business loans or mortgages or car loans because it eats up a whole part of their paycheck. Educated masses are good for a developed economy. If the government has the finance to drop $15 million bomb in the middle of nowhere, they have the ability to soften the affects of student loan debt.

[–] Kevina -7 points (+2|-9)

Imo uni is starting to become nothing more than high school 2.0. It isn't necessary to go to college or go into massive debt in order to get a decent paying job. In the US we have (cheaper) community colleges, trade schools and even some apprenticeships, many of which go unfilled because today's kids don't want to do that type of work.

Also, kids with low earning parents can get grants and scholarships. These typically aren't the kids who rack up such debt anyways, since because of the above they don't need to. Its the average, middle class kids meandering about in gender studies with no clear end goal that does this, the kid that only went to college because his parents and the school told him to his whole life.

So, in general, I disagree with the whole college is the only path to succes mantra, but if you do want to go you don't have to rack up debt to do it. Among other ways to pay for college in the US are the military or there are some programs that will essentially pay for your schooling if you agree to to serve in a professional capacity in a certain city or state for x amount of time after you graduate.

[–] bellatrixbells 7 points (+7|-0)

Wow this part about the student loans sounds so weird to someone outside the US. I think the entire education system should be reformed to make it accessible, like others in the Western world, where state pays for the biggest part (or even the whole thing in Germanic/Scandinavian countries) and also provides an interest free loan.

Here in Quebec we have "issues" with students not paying back their loans but they don't even go after them because after a while the person usually just refunds everything in one shot.

A system like this allows one to contribute (and be more tempted to do so) cause they're not always caught at the throat.

[–] [Deleted] 4 points (+4|-0)

or ask colleges why their costs have gone up so much in such a short amount of time

One of the main reasons why is because of government-backed loans.

Get rid of them or make college free for all by slightly increasing taxes.

And forgive all current loans.

[–] Kevina 1 points (+1|-0)

"One of the main reasons why is because of government-backed loans."

I completely agree with this statement, but...

"Get rid of them or make college free for all by slightly increasing taxes."

I don't quite understand how this one would work. You say that college costs have increased partly because of government backed loans, but yet you think the government paying for it by some other method would be better? How would this drive costs down? Even if the government guaranteed the cost up to a point, the schools would just continue to wring every dollar they can out of students by other methods, wouldn't they? Or perhaps we could offer these "free" educations at only state supported schools. But then I don't think the other poster would be happy about that one either because then "oh sure the poor kids have to go to the state schools and not harvard", apparently being able to get a college degree without debt must also mean that everything must be 100% equitable for people, or rather that's what "income inequality" means.

[–] emptiedriver 3 points (+3|-0)

Just don't get them, go to a cheaper school, or ask colleges why their costs have gone up so much in such a short amount of time.

It's nice you had your act together so well by the time you were 17 but many of us didn't, and just went along with the norm, which was taking out a completely available and seemingly free loan, that ...sometime in the future would cost more but by then you'd be able to pay it so whatev.

Of course it doesn't work like that, and the cost accrues at an incredible rate so that you graduate and then after a few years of not becoming an investment banker you suddenly owe enormous amounts of money that either takes all your income once you become responsible, or put you into bankruptcy. There should be some way to get out from under it - it doesn't have to be completely erased but turned back into the sum you actually borrowed, and then some small and reasonable interest, for example? Money that is recognizable to the person who borrowed it.

[–] Kevina 1 points (+1|-0)

I didn't "have my act together at 17". I went to an inexpensive state school and paid the majority of expenses myself. I had an on campus job all through school and had 3 jobs my last two years in school. Even with all that I couldn't have afforded some of today's rates, but I hope some adult would have said "I'm not sure borrowing these giant sums of money is such a good idea", but I doubt it. Its almost as if we shouldn't let kids get themselves into these kinds of situations. I'd be OK with helping people out of the mess if the problem were fixed first.

[–] chrysthefeminist 30 points (+30|-0)

YAY, so excited that we have a woman VPOTUS, for the first time in our history! And we'll have a coherent national response to COVID! And maybe Kamala will even eventually become POTUS! I was beginning to think I wouldn't live long enough to ever see a woman in either of our two highest offices.

[–] Boudicaea 9 points (+9|-0)

knocking on wood

She's Biden's most obvious successor right now. There's a decent chance she may be our first woman president as well. Gives me all the warm fuzzies. :)

[–] mountainwitch 24 points (+24|-0)

I am so happy things will return to a sense of normalcy! Hopefully mask mandates will be ordered and I can come back home instead of living abroad indefinitely in a country that is awful for women 😭😭😭. Having a woman holding the second highest office in the country is just icing on the cake.

Regarding the possibility of Biden passing away in office Trump said (I'm paraphrasing): "don't worry you won't have a socialist VP, especially a female socialist president." The way he put an emphasis on "female" to degrade Harris only makes her victory even better.

[–] r4df3mcynthia 16 points (+16|-0)

Noice! I thought she wasn't just the first black female VP of USA but also the first woman! I think it's a huge win! Celebrate, my fellow american gyns \o!

[–] chrysthefeminist 17 points (+17|-0) Edited

She is the first woman VP. I remember well the 1984 election in which Walter Mondale and his running mate Geraldine Ferraro (the first female VP nominee) were crushed. Male news anchors were looking at each other knowingly and talking about "what was happening all over the country." Earlier in the day the news had covered Ferraro's voting by broadcasting on TV pictures of her high heeled feet visible sticking out from under the election booth privacy curtain.

Edited. That was the election of 1984, not 1988.

[–] Marmorsymphata -1 points (+0|-1)

Are you guys, like... Not aware that she's an infamous prosecutor notorious for overcriminalization? If you're aligned with BLM she is not your friend

[–] r4df3mcynthia 0 points (+0|-0)

Yeah, I've heard of the accusations recently, out her stances on that nowadays. Honestly, I'm happy trump lost lol.

[–] zephyrean 12 points (+16|-4)

Surely you mean the first ex-menstruator veep.

Which is to say: no, it's not good news. Unless Biden keels before inauguration, when you finally get a female president, 'female' will be hate speech.

[–] TerfSedai 12 points (+14|-2)


(And also another four years of Maya "Mama-la" Rudolph on SNL. BLESS.)

[–] darksunset 12 points (+30|-18)

I'm so happy too. Harris might end up being the first POTUS. I don’t know that Biden will last 4 years. Hopefully he isn’t such a narcissist that he refuses to step down when his dementia becomes too severe. I’m hoping Biden lets her have a very active role as VP with this possible endgame in mind.

[–] [Deleted] 15 points (+15|-0)

I have no idea why this was downvoted, so I gave you an upvote lol.

[–] gnarlyfem 38 points (+41|-3)

Probably because Biden doesn’t have dementia? He’s always had a stutter, and some in the media have been using it to claim he has dementia. People who stutter don’t have less mental capacity than the average person.

[–] dixiechick547 25 points (+27|-2)

The man does not have dementia. Or if he does he’s had it for nearly 50 years. He’s notorious for misspeaking. I used to watch the Judiciary Committee on CSPAN and he frequently misspoke due to his stutter.

He has made it clear that he sees himself as a transitional president. Passing the torch to the next generation. I doubt he’ll run for a second term. He’ll surround himself with a young cabinet and give them a chance to make a name for themselves.

Had the Democrats not spent the entire primary season bogged down in crap like the housing of transgender inmates instead of talking about issues, he probably wouldn’t have stayed the course.

The fact of the matter is, he’s the only one who could beat Trump. The rest were too consumed in wokeism to run a decent campaign.

[–] r4df3mcynthia 14 points (+14|-0)

omg, how nasty to spread lies like that. thanks for bringing this to light! I wouldn't know.

[–] [Deleted] 4 points (+10|-6)

Maybe not dementia, but he does show the classic signs of "sunsetting", which is associated with Alzheimer's. He's not as sharp-witted as he was 5 years ago. I don't think she meant it as an insult either, but his cognitive functions have noticeably diminished. It's worth noting.

[–] Kevina 2 points (+5|-3) Edited

Maybe because of this?

Harris might end up being the first POTUS.

Pretty sure that ship has sailed.

[–] [Deleted] 6 points (+7|-1)

lol I think they left out female, I didn't even notice cause I'm a true feminist xD

[–] chocolatefondant21 12 points (+13|-1)

I doubt Biden will win re-election in 4 years. His presidency is transitional and Republicans could take it back easily.

[–] darksunset 16 points (+16|-0)

Agreed. Dems need to get their shit together and groom actual contenders, not just pander to the squad or other opportunists. Republicans will want revenge for displacing their god-king.

[–] [Deleted] 8 points (+8|-0)

I don’t know why democrats pander to the squad. They are in Democrat strongholds. They are in the safest seats so easiest to ignore.

[–] [Deleted] 9 points (+9|-0)

Pretty much. Republicans always give the financial mess to Democrats to clean up and take credit for an already thriving economy like Trump/Bush did. They did that with Obama and they are doing it with Biden.

[–] worried19 7 points (+8|-1)

I'm skeptical Biden had any burning desire to be president. I think he threw his hat in the ring because Democrats knew he was the safest choice with the best chance to defeat Trump.

Load more (9 comments)