The Case for Disenfranchisement

I see we've got a book advertising with us called Why Women Should Rule the World which reminds me that it kind of seems to me as if granting women the franchise in 1920 was an inadequate remedial measure for having denied it to them for over 100 years earlier. Really there ought to be a 100-year span during which men can't vote. That would have more procedural fairness and it would also lead to substantively good outcomes as women have, in general, sounder electoral preferences than do men. UPDATE: I've actually made this modest proposal before, it seems.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2008/04/the-case-for-disenfranchisement/44214/