The Manipulation of Women in Socio-Economic America!

Even though we've seen progress through laws, social movements, and increased awareness, manipulation still exists, and it can be a bit more subtle these days. Here's a closer look at some aspects of this reality: influential men in politics, media, and entertainment continue to shape stories about what women “should” be in their roles, bodies, voices, and worth. These narratives can sometimes exacerbate feelings of dependency or self-doubt, inadvertently reinforcing systems of power in the process. Gender pay gaps, unequal promotion opportunities, and subtle coercion (like favors in exchange for advancement) show how power is often leveraged to control or exploit women’s economic standing.

Emotional and Psychological Manipulation at interpersonal and institutional levels, such as gaslighting, silencing, or portraying women as too emotional, irrational, and assertive, continue to be tools used to undermine their credibility and influence. Male-dominated institutions often shape policies involving women’s bodies, rights, and reproductive choices. This control is indirect but profoundly impactful; it manipulates autonomy under the guise of protection or morality.

That said, women are also more aware and empowered than ever to challenge and expose these dynamics; from #MeToo to movements for equal pay, reproductive justice, and representation. The manipulation continues, but the resistance and consciousness have become just as powerful.

Throughout history, the way powerful men have influenced women has often been more about control than gender itself; controlling stories, identities, and futures. Even though the faces of power have changed over time, the underlying mindset remains the same: dominance depends on maintaining inequality, and manipulation is often its subtle tool. At its heart, manipulation doesn’t always shout or force; it frequently hides behind acts of guidance, protection, or love. Whether in politics, religion, or media, influential men have long presented themselves as protectors of women, while subtly shaping the boundaries of their freedom. When a system measures a woman’s worth by her obedience, beauty, or service, it doesn’t just limit her; it also persuades her to accept her own confinement.

This manipulation doesn’t come from strength but from a deep-seated fear; fear of women’s autonomy, intelligence, and collective strength. When women own their minds, they’re harder to control than those who doubt themselves. That’s why manipulation often begins in the realm of belief. What is shaping women to learn to value, what makes them feel guilty, and what they believe they deserve? You can see this play out today in many ways: in workplaces where women are told to tone it down, in media that markets empowerment as something to buy, and in politics where women’s bodies are seen as battlegrounds for morality. Although the tools have changed over time, the goal remains the same: to maintain power in the hands of those who have always held it, thereby preserving the status quo.

Something has shifted, and it’s truly inspiring. The silence that once hid manipulation is breaking apart. Modern women can now see through illusions, speak their truths confidently, and take charge of their own stories. Movements advocating for equality and justice are more than just protests; they’re influential acts of philosophical resistance, a bold refusal to be shaped by fear or flattery. Ultimately, the way women have been manipulated by those in power highlights more about the fragility of that power than about women’s weakness. It reveals how deeply society fears proper balance and how freeing it can be when we call out deception. When women recognize their full potential, the structures of control start to fall apart. What was once manipulation becomes exposed, and what was once silence turns into revolution.

 

Was the 2024 Election Rigged?

    I've been curious about the results of the 2024 Presidential Election and the differences between the popular vote and the electoral college. I wondered why no one really challenged the final count—especially since Trump, back in 2020, claimed it was rigged. It appears that Electoral College members from Red States followed orders quite blindly, likely out of fear of the consequences. Meanwhile, the Blue States split their votes, favoring the Republican nominee. Trump secured the popular vote with about 49.8%, which always puzzled me because the margin wasn’t overwhelming—many people didn’t vote at all, possibly influenced by the presence of a woman candidate or political biases. I imagine some support from the Free Palestine Movement might have been influenced by their reaction to Biden and Trump. Ultimately, though, it seems we got the result we expected.

    I came across a fascinating article in Forbes, written by Ron Schmelzer on September 25, 2025, discussing how AI models behaved similarly to voters during the 2024 election. Researchers from MIT and Stanford monitored 11 of the world’s top large language models (LLMs), including GPT-4, Claude, and Gemini. These models weren’t just answering questions—they engaged actively in conversations during four critical months of the 2024 presidential campaign. Over the course of the study, more than 12,000 structured questions were asked nearly every day from July to November 2024. It's a pioneering and comprehensive examination of how these AI models behave during real-world democratic events. The results? These models are more than neutral observers; they tend to react, sometimes show inconsistency, and can even be influenced by public narratives, even when they ideally shouldn’t be. 

    This indicates that chatbots can be easily influenced, not only by the questions people ask, but also by what they recall from previous conversations. However, the study couldn’t test chatbots with memory, mainly because it would have been too costly, as they would have needed thousands of accounts for the experiments. This highlights broader concerns about how models might drift over time due to their personalization. A chatbot with memory could become more biased simply by recalling past interactions, which could reinforce earlier impressions and amplify the effects of how prompts are written. 

    Reflecting on all this, it’s hard not to feel that these advanced technologies like LLMs and chatbots might have influenced the election’s outcome. I also think Trump and his party were aware of this, as he even mentioned once that he might have rigged the previous election. He's still closely connected to Elon Musk, who has developed AI systems such as Grok and xAI, and recently announced a deal with the government to allow federal agencies to use their chatbot for a small fee. Meanwhile, the Russians had their own chatbots and knew how to potentially sway Trump’s leadership for their own benefit. Social media helps connect the dots, leaving voters unaware of what’s really happening. Don’t forget about the voting machines, which can also cause issues with laws for redistricting and vote suppression. Currently, voters face numerous challenges and uncertainties. Who can we really trust? Big brother is watching us

Should There be National Concern about Voting Machine Irregularities Before the 2026 Election?

Absolutely, yes. Understandably, many people are concerned about irregularities or vulnerabilities in voting machines as we approach the 2026 U.S. elections. There are several ongoing issues and risks—some are being addressed, while others still require attention. I’ll share my thoughts about what I researched and found, discuss the risks, outline the steps being taken, and highlight what still needs our attention. 

Current Status of State Voting Machines

1. Aging Equipment

·      Many voting machines in the U.S. are old — often over 10 years old, in some cases even older — and have surpassed their expected lifespan. Older machines tend to be more difficult to maintain (spare parts may no longer be available), more prone to breakdowns, and often run outdated software that may not receive security updates. ([Brennan Center for Justice][1])

2. Security Vulnerabilities & Software Threats

·      There have been documented reports of attempts to access copies of voting system software illegally. A letter from computer scientists expressed concerns that these breaches could pose significant risks to election security. ([Colorado Public Radio][2]) 

·      Some machines come equipped with features such as wireless connectivity or older, unsupported operating systems. While these can offer convenience, they may also increase the risk of security vulnerabilities. ([Brennan Center for Justice][3]) 

·      Even when vulnerabilities are identified, such as with Dominion systems, investigations—including those by Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)—have not uncovered any evidence that these flaws were exploited in significant national elections in the past. However, their presence still highlights a potential risk. ([The Washington Post][4])

3. Human Error & Operational Issues

·      Sometimes irregularities are less about malicious hacking and more about mechanical failures, calibration errors (e.g., touchscreens mis-registering selections), mis-scanning, delays, or mismanagement. These may not change outcomes, but can harm confidence and create logistical headaches. ([Brennan Center for Justice][3]) 

4. Disinformation & Trust Erosion

·      Even if there's no clear evidence of large-scale manipulation, it's important to acknowledge that suspicion, claims of fraud, and distrust can still be quite significant. Sometimes, even small irregularities can be amplified through social media and political discussions, making them appear more significant than they actually are. ([AP News][5])

What Is Being Done?

·      Some jurisdictions are replacing obsolete machines or planning upgrades. ([Brennan Center for Justice][6])

·      There are calls from experts to mandate more uniform security standards, require post-election audits, improve paper trail verifiability, etc. ([Center for American Progress][7])

·      There is increased scrutiny by federal agencies (like CISA) and state/local election officials for vulnerabilities and risk mitigation. ([Brennan Center for Justice][8])

All are dependent on who is holding the power in the current government.

What Are the Risks? What Remains to Be Solved?

1. Funding & resources

·      Upgrading machines and putting in stronger security and audit systems does require some investment. Often, local jurisdictions struggle to allocate sufficient funds for these improvements. Additionally, there's sometimes confusion about whether the state, federal government, or local authorities should cover the costs. ([Brennan Center for Justice][9]) 

2. Uniform standards and oversight

·      Security and audit protocols can vary significantly from state to state and county to county. Some areas might not have robust post-election auditing or transparency measures in place. ([Brennan Center for Justice][6])

3. Maintaining the Voters’ Trust

·      Even if machines are technically secure, it's important to remember that public perception truly matters. Minor errors, glitches, or delays in counting can create doubts, especially in close races. That's why staying transparent and dependable is so essential.

4. Emerging Threats

·      As technology continues to evolve, so does our vulnerability. Concerns include machine learning, supply chain attacks, and insider threats. Exciting new research, such as the application of adversarial machine learning to tabulators, highlights how even minor vulnerabilities can, under specific circumstances, significantly impact outcomes. ([arXiv][10])

Ensuring the integrity of election results is vital to supporting our democracy. Even infrequent failures or irregularities can have significant political and social consequences, especially in closely contested states. Being proactive and prepared can save us from much higher costs later on when issues arise. Keeping voter confidence strong is essential; even small irregularities or the perception of them can discourage voting or lead to distrust in the process.

[1]: https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/defend-our-elections/election-security/voting-machines-infrastructure"Voting Machines & Infrastructure | Brennan Center for Justice"

[2]: https://www.cpr.org/2023/12/05/voting-experts-warn-of-serious-threats-for-2024-from-election-equipment-software-breaches "Voting experts warn of 'serious threats' for 2024 from election equipment software breaches"

[3]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/americas-voting-machines-risk "America’s Voting Machines at Risk | Brennan Center for Justice"

[4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/05/28/dominion-voting-machines-cisa-review "No evidence of exploitation of Dominion voting machine flaws, CISA finds - The Washington Post"

[5]: https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-technology-d6bf92f594343d7a489d40394e56e2a1"EXPLAINER: Threats to US election security grow more complex | AP News"

[6]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/americas-voting-machines-risk-update "America’s Voting Machines at Risk – An Update | Brennan Center for Justice"

[7]: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/election-infrastructure-vulnerabilities-solutions "Election Infrastructure: Vulnerabilities and Solutions - Center for American Progress"

[8]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-system-security-and-reliability-risks "Voting System Security and Reliability Risks | Brennan Center for Justice"

[9]: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-machines-risk-2022 "Voting Machines at Risk in 2022 | Brennan Center for Justice"

[10]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14582 "Busting the Paper Ballot: Voting Meets Adversarial Machine Learning"

Here’s a clear and detailed risk assessment for voting-machine irregularities as we approach the 2026 election. This highlights what’s likely, considers worst-case scenarios, identifies the principal vulnerabilities with examples, evaluates their seriousness, and offers practical priorities to minimize risks. I’ve included the key sources supporting these critical points.

While it's essential to stay aware of national issues, the most significant problems tend to be minor glitches, delays, and incidents that can erode trust, rather than central nationwide manipulation. The country has made considerable progress over the past decade, with more than 98% of votes now recorded on paper, though some hurdles persist. These include aging equipment, inconsistent audit standards, limited funding, and the ongoing challenge of disinformation. Additionally, there's concern about the current administration seemingly using the Judicial Branch for its own purposes.

Keep in mind, your vote truly matters. It’s your chance to have a say in shaping your community, your state, and your country. Remember all those who fought, marched, and sacrificed so we could have this right. If long lines, doubts, or distractions come up, don’t let them stop you—your participation makes a difference. When you step into that voting booth, know that you’re not just voting for yourself, but for a better future for everyone. Your vote counts, and your voice is so important!