I think it’s a very good thing that there are more and more women presidents/prime ministers around the world.
What I’d like to know is if there has been a distinct difference in the way these women govern, as opposed to the way the men govern, or, more subtly, if there are trends that seem to pop up when women are in power.
I don’t think that women should “rule the world,” but if they did, I think they’d do a better job than men. I got to thinking about this a lot more recently when I read about a psychological study that showed more men got pleasure from watching someone suffer, and women…I forgot the rest, maybe I should look for a cite before I dig a whole.
I just think the more women counterbalancing men the better.
To clarify, the main question is whether there are trends that show up in different countries when women are in power? or is it just business as usual?
Thatcher’s reign was IMO the most ‘masculine’ for decades, if not centuries. Woman though she may have been genetically, [ul=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2091200.stm]this is how fondly many people remember her.
As I understand it, men tend to be drawn towards domination and sex, women towards cruelty. For example, a male murderer who hates you will kill you; a female one will kill your best friend or a relative, but leave you alive to suffer. A man will molest a child; a woman will skin the kid’s pet rabbit alive in front of the kid while saying “You’re next !”, or feed the kid broken glass.
Bottom line : There are nasty people of both genders. At most, the difference is one of style, not morality. I doubt that women will do any better than men, or worse for that matter.
-falacious fungibility is never an asset.
-you cannot discount the effects of culture upon gender.
-nor can you ignore the non-random selection process of political contenders.
I don’t think that “women” should rule the world any more than “men” should, nor do I assume that someone’s X or Y chromosomes make them who they are to the exclusion of everything else… I thought we were working at getting over sexism, not simply switching the labels/values around?
I do think that qualified people should “rule the world”, regardless of whether or not they have dangly bits or not.
Personally I’d rather have, say, Thomas Jefferson in charge than Countess Bathory, rather have Joan of Ark lead an army than King Pyrrhus, rather have a philosophical conversation with Jesus than Ramtha, etc…
Agreed that a cite would be helpful. I saw a news article about this and there’s one crucial nuiance that you’re missing: that the study showed that men experienced more satisfaction than women when someone received deserved suffering. In other words, men approve of justice - not mere sadism.
(usual disclaimers about trends, exceptions to rules, etc, etc.)
This is, of course, just a smattering of cites… but as should be obvious, women and men aren’t fungible entities.
It may, however, be a valid question to ask “In the global population [sub]2006[/sub], would a randomly picked woman have a better statistical chance of displaying qualities which we believe to be good for leadership?”
Obviously, that’s a far cry from asking who should rule the world.
Admitted, the question was badly posed, but I agree with you. What I’m asking more or less if there are certain trends (lower/higher unemployment, more/less social benefits, lower/higher defense spending, different diplomacy).
I’ll also admit that I don’t think there’s much difference between men and women (aside from anatomy). I think the difference comes from at least the first 8 - 10 years of a childs life (if not his/her whole life) of being told, “You’re a _____________ and this is what _______s do.” There those who break the mold – boys who act like “girls” and vice versa – but I believe it’s largely an act, playing a role.
I feel much the same way about racial “differences.”
What I want to know is how this realized role-playing translates into the political field. If there’s no difference, fine. I’m just curious.
But that’s the point. To a degree, there are biological factors, which in turn vary in degree individual to individual. Beyond that, the culture itself effects development. So, if, for instance, we were to begin teaching our children that “Women are the better sex to have in power and should rule the world,” we’d probably see more girls grow up having imprinted the Alpha Female role.
So, I guess, my point is that to a degree it’s both a self fulfilling prophecy and a self-augmenting system. Hence my use of the General Semantics-esque use of the sub tag with a date and non-elemental language.
I still believe that the best focus would be individuals, but if you’re interested I’m sure we could work up some rough statistical figures for women in various cultures and sub-cultures (and sub-sub-cultures… and sub-sub-sub-cultures).
Women are often just as stupid as men, and from my experience, are more prone to petty squabbles and backbiting. I’ve never seen them as more effecient than men in the business world, which I think is comparable to politics. (You have to be able to get along with others to get things done in either sphere.)
Nor do I think women would do a better job than men at governing the world, because the same problems would still exist. Poverty and greed can not be eliminated by government intervention, and those two issues are what cause most of our troubles.
Power corrupts women just the same as it does with men. Anyone who’s ever had a woman as a manager can tell you they can be just as tyrannical as men, and in my experience, more apt to use their power to get revenge in personal disputes.
That depends on what you consider the mold, therefore on what you consider “acting like a boy”. Apparently, the female mold includes the following:
girls don’t like RPGs.
girls don’t read comic books.
girls don’t like action movies.
girls are distinctly uncomfortable giving orders to men.
girls don’t like “hard” sciences.
girls don’t like science fiction.
girls don’t become engineers.
girls just wanna have fun.
girls want to get married, have children, and make those children the center of their lives.
Oh, and in some countries, “girls like soccer”, but in others, “girls don’t like soccer”. :wally
But you know, I never just went and decided to do a lot of things I wasn’t supposed to do It’s not an act, it’s just me and if people who insist in thinking in terms of molds have problems fitting me… gee, so SO-RREEEE!
I’ve been told I’m a “surprisingly good boss” :dubious: by people who thought I wouldn’t be able to give orders to guys. Does that mean I’d make a good President? Not necessarily… Will I vote for a party only because they have more women than others? Nope. Do I follow female politicians more closely than men? Yup They’re role models, not so much for me as for the people judging me; seeing more women in positions of power do a good job makes it easier for people to let other women achieve power, which happens simply when people are judged on “results” and not looks.
I already admitted the question was badly placed. What I was really looking for were trends…but oh well. I think I’ve been proved wrong or out of place or all of the above.
Nava, I wasn’t saying any of that. BTW, my sister’s an engineer. She’s also the most direct, determined, and demanding person I know.
You forgot what went before that quote.
By the “mold,” I was saying the molds that people create by saying what boys do and girls do. There are people who break those molds, that, as I said, I don’t think exist aside from the fact that people have them drilled into their heads.
I think the “kinder and gentler” thing is largely a myth when it comes to women in groups and with power. I have worked in 3 female dominated workplaces. One was Ok but fairly aggressive. The other two were so aggressive and cruel that it was shocking and it was disturbing to me as a male because I didn’t know how to deal with that type and level of aggression. I didn’t go in expecting that but have since heard that many other people have experienced the same thing. I don’t where the idea that women will sit around in groups and discuss things in a polite, egalitarian way comes from.
Years ago I read an interesting book call You Just Don’t Understand, about ( among other things ) the difference in male and female communication styles. The book talked about this situation, and claimed that what actually happens is that women get together, and everyone sits around agreeing with the dominant female. IIRC one woman is quoted as complaining “Women all want you to be mirrors of them”. It’s easy to see how someone who wanted to could misinterpet such behavior as egalitarion.
It’s not an act, it’s just me and if people who insist in thinking in terms of molds have problems fitting me… gee, so SO-RREEEE!