While Robert Murphy, Thomas Woods, Bryan Caplan, Steve Horwitz, and Sarah Skwire are all blogging about whether this video is good for women or bad for women, I find I myself have nothing to say. It sure would be nice if there were more female libertarians. It sure would be nice if there were more libertarians in general.
Or would it?
I began winding down my involvement in the Ludwig von Mises Institute a couple of years ago, and ended my involvement in the Canadian branch when I moved to the United States. There were a few reasons for this. First of all, I am neither an anarchist nor a fan of Murray Rothbard's work. It didn't make a lot of sense for me to make ongoing contributions to an organization that didn't stand for what I believe; and I didn't want people to conclude later on that I am, in fact an anarchist or a Rothbardian.
Second of all, the LvMI struck me as an incredibly collectivist organization. It started to feel like an in-group. Libertarianism doesn't appeal to me for the sake of belonging to a group of people who feel the same way I do. It appeals to me because I have a distaste for groups and want to be left alone with the freedom to pursue relationships with people on a one-on-one basis.
But this is how it is with libertarians, this is how it has always been. They are always debating liberty, they are alway splintering off into factions. First it was the Rand/Rothbard dichotomy, which evolved into the minarchist/anarchist dichotomy, which evolved into the whatever whatever.
Why aren't there more female libertarians? Because women are, for the most part, smart enough not to get wrapped up in a group of people that spend most of their time arguing over who has the most perfect concept of individual liberty. Gimme a break.