CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: You recently founded the League of Men Voters to encourage more men to vote. What kind of response are you getting to the League in the media and from other political organizations?
MIKE ASPEN: Response from the major media and political organizations has been mixed. Other than an Associated Press article which was published soon after the distribution of the original press release, the primary media has pretty much taken a "wait and see" attitude.
Their inclination, which is entirely reasonable, is to withhold enthusiastic recognition until they can more clearly get a better read as to what the League of Men Voters is all about. I suspect, too, that they are a bit fearful that there is some potential here for mischief. Hence, they are proceeding conservatively. And I have no objection to that approach.
Regardless of the major media's original attitude, I remain grateful for the increasing exposure that has already come my way via Talk Radio and newspapers. There is little doubt in my mind but that everyone involved will ultimately overcome their apprehension and welcome the League of Men Voters into the national debate.
For this to happen, however, American males are going to have to seriously modify their sorry record of not supporting seemingly near-hopeless causes.
Although he said it in a different context, I believe that Abraham Lincoln's statement is appropriate for my appeal to men today: "The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just."
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: Was there a triggering event that made you want to found the League of Men Voters?
MIKE ASPEN: Actually, there wasn't one distinct triggering event. Having conceived the basic idea for the League of Men Voters during one particularly sleepless night in December of 1996, I decided to investigate the statistical data pertaining to the actual numbers of male and female voters. Procrastinating, I finally got around to doing this sometime in April of 1997.
Happily, upon discovering that over 7.17 million fewer men than women reported having voted in the 1996 Presidential Election, I was mildly stunned. Stunned enough, you might say, that any further temptations to procrastinate evaporated immediately. From that moment on, I started in earnest to seriously work toward the creation of the League of Men Voters.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: Why the "League of Men Voters" in particular. Why not just try to get everyone to vote?
MIKE ASPEN: I believe very strongly that there are already enough bureaus and organizations whose announced goal is to get "everyone" to vote. Meanwhile, there are over 7 million fewer males than females who reported voting in the 1996 presidential election. I don't want to sound flippant or unfeeling, but I must tell you that someone else can start the League of Everyone Voters.
Speaking for myself, I don't want to pretend that 7.17 million fewer male voters isn't relevant or important.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: You have done some statistical analysis of voting. Is it true that men tend to vote more conservatively than women as is commonly assumed?
MIKE ASPEN: It takes two genders to make a gap.
According to US News, 53% of men view government as the problem. Only 43% of the women see it that way. Assuming that this is a true reflection of male and female perspectives as a group, it could just as accurately be said then that women tend to vote less conservatively than men.
Most people are probably aware that there was a 16 to 17 point gender gap in the Dole vs. Clinton presidential election. Women reported voting 54% for Clinton and 38% for Dole. (The remaining 8% presumably voted for Ross Perot and others).
While this titanic gender gap certainly was larger in 1996 than in most previous years, the Democratic Party has historically been able to count on a solid 8 -10 point advantage with women in general.
Having said all of the above, I must also say that the League of Men Voters is a non-partisan organization. Our focal point is on gender, not political party affiliation. We want men and women to vote in near-equal numbers because decisions are often best made in an environment that seeks the balanced input of a masculine and feminine perspective.
What might result from men and women voting in equal numbers is not certain, of course. But if it is true that the two-parent traditional family serves the economic and emotional interests of the family on average better than any other arrangement, then it is tempting to conclude that our national family might benefit similarly if we imitate this successful and tested formula.
At present, elected officials are understandably responding to political sentiments that are not equal at all with respect to gender. With over 7 million fewer males voting than females, the political ideas being implemented are, by definition, disproportionately female.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: You say that politicians are now responding to female sentiments of the voting majority and that a co-equal number of male voters would be good for society by changing that feminine slant to a more balanced perspective. The press has been telling us for the past twenty years that there is really no difference between men and women. Have they been wrong all this time? Besides the obvious physical differences, what are the differences between men and women?
MIKE ASPEN: The only thing I would guarantee to be balanced if men and women were to vote in equal numbers, is gender. Clearly, some change in what you have termed the "feminine slant" would likely occur. I say this because surveys continually show a wide variance between male and female choices of candidates and agenda.
But as to whether or not balanced gender voting would be "good for society", I can only offer my opinion. And my best reasoning tells me that gender balance in voting is preferable to gender imbalance in voting.
Yes, there are differences between men and women that exist beyond just the physical. Arguments that deny this vary from interesting to laughable. But in the final analysis, it is intellectually dishonest for those who greatly influence our culture not to admit at least to the most obvious differences. Well-intentioned arguments claiming gender sameness, regularly lack objectivity and should be politely and confidently dismissed.
Fortunately, however, in order for one to believe that it is not healthy for our culture to have so few men voting, it is not necessary to first prove that men and women are different. It is necessary only to observe that the successful two-parent traditional family has a one-to-one ratio of male to female. If men and women were to vote in equal numbers, our national family might achieve a similar type of success.
One difference between men and women that is not arguable is this: Women do a much better job of registering to vote. I am a man, and I don't enjoy seeing those in my gender perform so poorly. To be honest, I'm a little embarrassed by our willingness to give up so easily.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: What specific advantages will society gain by injecting more men voters into American Politics?
MIKE ASPEN: I like your word "advantages". Perhaps the most important advantage that might accrue to society if more men started voting, would be the increased awareness that gender is the only population demographic that is common to every person. In truth, gender is the least common denominator of population demographics.
I say this because, comparatively speaking, it isn't nearly as important that one is White, Black, Indian, Hispanic, Asian, from the Great Northwest, a college graduate, rich, poor, Catholic, or a high school drop out.
When attempting to determine who we are, it is far more pertinent to first identify whether one is male or female. Instead of warring incessantly about race, ethnicity, class, age, religion or geography, we ought to be focusing on the one demographic we all share (i.e. gender).
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: The League of Women Voters has significant grass roots support. Do you find that men are flocking to your banner?
MIKE ASPEN: Having only been in operation for nine weeks as of this writing, I believe it would be premature to expect for men to be knocking down the doors to join the League of Men Voters at this very early stage. It is my belief that two things will have to be earned before the League can expect for men to flock to its banner: One is name recognition, and the other is credibility.
Gaining large membership will be a slow and tedious process that will require time, effort and monetary resources. Happily, I am able to supply two of these three.
Although I will never lose sight of the importance of soliciting members, the next year or more will likely find me spending more effort on establishing a good reputation for the League, and earning the credibility necessary to attract members.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: The League of Women Voters also publishes voters guides in the various voting districts - do you plan any similar publications on a national or local level? and will you be making voting recommendations based on how good a candidate will be for the interests of men in general?
MIKE ASPEN: Frankly, my first impulse is to give you an absolute "no" answer to this question. But having reached 50 years of life, I have had more than enough experience with "eating my own words". Given that I am now older and wiser, I will instead say that I don't envision imitating the League of Women Voters in either of the above behaviors.
When (and only when) I sense that enough Americans are fully aware of the 7.17 million vote gap between male and female voters, will I attempt to widen the objectives of the League.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: Your stated objective is to make up the difference in numbers between men and women voters. Do you have a time line for doing this and what methods do you intend to use to effect this?
MIKE ASPEN: Women have been out voting men since 1964. It took many years for men to fall apart politically, and it is going to take many more years for them to become whole again. The truth is, even assuming the League of Men Voters meets with enormous success, it is unlikely that men will vote in equal numbers to women in the next 25 years. Overcoming the temptation to give up is where the greatest challenge lies for men.
The League of Men Voters will take every opportunity afforded it to inform citizens as to the extent of the voting gap that exists between men and women. This, more than anything else, will encourage change because I can assure you most citizens are not even aware that women are going to the polls millions of times more often than men.
Our sensible approach of registering family, friends and acquaintances is not going to make an appreciable difference for several years. Substantial change in male voter turnout will only occur when very large numbers of men actively encourage other men to stop using apathy as an excuse for not voting. I believe that many men say they don't care when the real problem is that they just don't have the stomach or discipline to do what is required of a responsible citizen.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: What are the reasons for a lower male turnout at the polls and do you think that your methods will directly address these issues?
MIKE ASPEN: There are many reasons for lower male turnout that our methods will directly address. However, time and space will allow me only to mention a couple: Personally, I'm not thrilled with the sight of watching strangers solicit other strangers to register to vote. I can easily imagine millions of men saying "no thank you" when asked by a stranger to register. Being asked to register by a friend or a relative will go a long way toward getting more men to vote.
One more method worth mentioning in this regard is that the League will attempt to become very visible especially in the months just prior to important elections. We will be everywhere kindly reminding men that they have a weak recent history of voting. Hopefully, men will give us a listen.
CONSERVATIVE MONITOR: Thanks so much for the interview. Are there any final comments you would like to make to our readers?
MIKE ASPEN: I'd like to thank you as well, Bill. It was great fun, and your questions forced me to think harder than I am typically want to do. I appreciate what you are doing at The Conservative Monitor.
In closing, then, I would like to ask your readers to join the League of Men Voters so that they can encourage others to understand the voting duty. Among other things, members will receive an attractive Certificate of Membership and four Universal Voter Registration Forms to keep in their home, their car, or at their place of work.
My friends, you have all said that you wanted to be more involved in some form of community service. The League of Men Voters is absolutely your opportunity to do this in a way that will not take up a great deal of your time. This is the one organization concerned men should all join because, in a very real way, our political survival depends on it. Look at it this way: We now have 'A League of Our Own'. Use it.
