This piece tries to argue that women are less interested in libertarianism because they are "less rationalizing-systemizing" and therefore don't "get" libertari

This piece tries to argue that women are less interested in libertarianism because they are "less rationalizing-systemizing" and therefore don't "get" libertarianism, but many underlying assumptions are very weak. For example: > A less-empathizing/more-systematizing personality would make people more interested in the politics of effective institutions than in the politics of provisioning social welfare. Could it not be that more women consider "the politics of provisioning social welfare" an effective institution than men? Or more generally, could it be that people who rely on welfare programs [0] have a different view of them? If you think poor people are not only poor because they deserve to be, some form of welfare is going to be part of your idea of "effective institutions". Producing Children poses a significantly larger economic burden for women than for men (the primary cause for women receiving more welfare is their higher likelihood of being a single parent), so it is very unsurprising that they view welfare programs differently. Alexander also implies that people who think offensive / sexist people are lowering participation of women by hurting their feelings, not by ignoring or dismissing issues that disproportionally affect women, which I find a bit odd. If libertarianism is about personal freedom there is plenty of space for issues that affect women (like abortion, freedom to wear certain types of clothing without being harassed, ...), yet I see very few libertarian talking about those issues. I find the idea that women dislike a certain thing because of some pseudo-scientific evo-psych goop rather than economic reasons a bit absurd. [0] https://www.libraryindex.com/pages/901/Who-Receives-Benefits-AN-OVERVIEW-WELFARE-PROGRAM-PARTICIPATION.html https://www.libraryindex.com/pages/901/Who-Receives-Benefits...