Any have any strong arguments why we should/oe should not have women in top positions in the American political sense including presidency. (Pros/cons)
should/ or should not *
Women in positions of power are susceptible to greed, corruption, bribery, partisanship and political influence.
But, so are men, so what are you going to do?
If you are going to use an “or” you don’t need the slash.
And no, no particular reasons either way. Women are subject to the same temptations as men. Some women would be better than some men and vice versa.
Whether women should be in top positions of power depends more upon the individual woman in question rather than any grouping of “women” overall. As has been pointed out, “women” are both as fallible and as honorable as men are. Which is to say, differently, depending on the individual.
However, I do feel that women, as a group, should have the opportunity to try to acheive positions of power if they wish it. Simply because men have this opportunity, it makes sense to also give women equal opportunity for access to the same positions.
Just how is it that women as a group don’t have the opportunity to try to acheive positions of power?
What stands in their way?
Please note that I never said they didn’t. I was answering what I felt was a corollary of the OP’s initial questions. You’re aassuming the negative of my response, but that wasn’t what I said.
Sorry Avalonian, I was confused by what i thought you meant. In that case, I agree with your last post then.
They might menstruate all over important documents!
A country that cannot pass an equal rights amendment without bitterness will not have women in the real positions of political power, including the presidency, anytime soon.
it wouldn’t make all that much of a difference, anyway.
Politics and big business are still dominated by men, so if you want to make it in that environment, you have to become half a man yourself. play by their rules, etc.
Women in big business and politics do not mean a softer approach. They will often be tougher then the men around them, as it’s the only way they’ll get noticed. A woman still has to perform twice as well as a man, to get the same appreciation.
So, unless the quota is really 50/50, women in politics won’t change all that much. Granted, they’ll change a little.
But not enough to make a real impact on this world, and to change the way we’re thinking.
This is going to sound horrible sexists, my apologies from the start. Reasons not to have women in top power positions (ie politics):
1.) I hate the way they sound. I’m sure this has something to do with how I was raised. But when I listen to women politicians talk, I get that “nails on a blackboard” feeling. It always reminds me of my mother telling me to clean up my room and make my bed. I might be unfairly labelling all women, but I just can’t stand listening to them whine.
2.) Men seem to age better than women. As a man gets older, the wrinkles and grey hair are a sign of maturity and wisdom. I think many of us are raised to view older men in this light, but the thought of an older women seems to imply granny-ness.
Those really are the only two reasons. I’ve always wondered what would happen if a woman president got pregnant, but its unlikely that they’d be young enough to do that. Is there a possibility that menopause would cause problems?
I know there hasn’t been a female American president, but do you not have any women in top political positions already?
That is the most misused statement i have ever seen. If you can show proof of this please do.
Margret Thatcher immediately springs to mind.
Golda Meir of Israel (PM)
Indira Ghandi of India (PM)
Gloria Arroyo of the Philippines (President)
Nancy Pelosi is the House minortiy leader.
Condi Rice is the National Security Advisor.
There are (and have been) a number of women governors. Texas had one before Bush.
CA’s two senators are both women (Feinstein/Boxer).
I’m sure there are others.
Given the proportion of women in the population, they seem to be vastly underepresented in prominent leadership positions in gov here in the US of A.
by emackknight
You are unfairly labelling all women because not all of us have whiny voices. I, for one, do not. When I speak, I speak with just as much authority as a man could. I don’t do that annoying make-everything-sound-like-a-question thing, either. And I don’t twirl my hair or engage in other feminine affectations.
The thing that really bothers me is that often times when a woman does not exude the stereotypically feminine idiosyncracies that get her labeled a “whiner” or a “weakling”, she gets labled a bitch or her sexuality is thrown into question. Take Hillary Clinton, for instance.
Some people just can’t take a woman telling them what to do, period. And they justify their hangup by judging them using criteria that men are exempt from.
How many older women have you seen in prominent positions of power? The ones I have seen do not make me think of grannys, but then again, what’s the sample size? I’m sure if the shoe was on the other foot, and women historically enjoyed almost complete dominance of leadership positions–and men were relegated to the sidelines and backstages–you’d probably associate old men with feebleness and decrepitude, and older women with vitality and wisdom. But as history has it…
:rolleyes: