ForumsWEPRFemale President?

70 13479
Mycal101
offline
Mycal101
307 posts
85

Do you think the U.S.A will ever have a female president ? If they ever do I hope for their sake its not Sarah Palin. Also I am glad in Australia we dont have politicians that stupid. I think Michelle Obama would be great

  • 70 Replies
Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,831 posts
1,120

Wow, when did sexism towards men become acceptable? Women are just as likely to make rash decisions and decisions based on emotions.


-_-
You have not worked out that the best woman would be chosen to be the President. As such, she would be all of the good things I listed and more. Plus, I am not being sexist. One needeth only look at our history;
The invention of beer (liquid gold to many men)
The countless wars, feuds, invasions, takeovers, etc, all started by men
The giant count of men/women leaders
The fact that often, it's the women that try to calm men down when they're angry about another man.

As such, I do know that there are women not like this, and men who are not prone to their counterparts' follies. But, as a majority, we see more women getting stunning grades, getting into good universities, and less men.

But hey, shall we bring out the remarks about women being vain? If you want. Jealousy? Only as much as men.
Skyla
offline
Skyla
292 posts
800

The fact that often, it's the women that try to calm men down when they're angry about another man.


Hardly a fact, women can instigate fights between men or mend them. It depends on the woman. Which brings me to:

You have not worked out that the best woman would be chosen to be the President. As such, she would be all of the good things I listed and more.


Again, this is in an idealistic society. A person can use manipulation to win an election. Politics and voting depends on mass psychology, politicians win others over to their side to vote for them, through campaigns and whatnot.

As such, I do know that there are women not like this, and men who are not prone to their counterparts' follies. But, as a majority, we see more women getting stunning grades, getting into good universities, and less men.


It should be illegal to make such sweeping generalizations. In an equal and fair society, I would reckon that men and women are equally likely to accomplish your list.

The countless wars, feuds, invasions, takeovers, etc, all started by men


Because women weren't allowed in the position of power to start them.
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,370 posts
24,370

That just means the ones that do make it are better, because the barriers to entry weed out more of the less-skilled women as opposed to men. I believe both sexes are able to perform well in politics, but more unskilled male politicians get into politics than women. With that in mind, we can see how it's easier to mistake women for being better politicians.


Isn't that what I said....Gosh...
Jefferysinspiration
offline
Jefferysinspiration
3,184 posts
2,380

woman also are very caring for their family. and often do not want to have a full time job but rather work part time.

this is 1 of the biggest reasons why there still are not much female "leaders". it's to much work for them. they are not willing to sacrifice as much as man do.


Not going to lie, i skipped over every comment just to respond to this.

Who exactly are you to judge the capabilities of a woman in power? How can you possibly decide that it is too much work for a woman? What about women in politics that just aren't &quotresident"? What about women who are right up there in the army, whos job is full-time, and takes much more than your average male "mechanic".

Not all women want to work part-time, or be mothers or bake. Shouldn't be so sexist.
Skyla
offline
Skyla
292 posts
800

Isn't that what I said....Gosh...


Lol, sorry. I thought you were still saying women in general were better politicians, not just the few that shine through.


Not going to lie, i skipped over every comment just to respond to this.

Who exactly are you to judge the capabilities of a woman in power? How can you possibly decide that it is too much work for a woman? What about women in politics that just aren't &quotresident"? What about women who are right up there in the army, whos job is full-time, and takes much more than your average male "mechanic".

Not all women want to work part-time, or be mothers or bake. Shouldn't be so sexist.


It's funny you skipped the comment before the one you replied to, which argued women are better than MEN. I think the modern fascination with feminism is taking a toll on the public. It's become perfectly acceptable for one to state women are better than men, but the other way around is met with shock, disgust and horror. Now that reaction is reasonable but it should go both ways. I was interested in feminism in that women and men are EQUAL. It seems, however, that the feminist agenda's modus operandi is to stigmatize male talent and exalt female talent. "Shouldn't be so sexist."
Skyla
offline
Skyla
292 posts
800

Double post, sorry.

Wanted to clarify that I DO agree with what you're saying, I just think you shouldn't have been so quick to jump at it, ignoring the post preceding it.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,722 posts
20,765

Really? That old "All republicans are sexist" thing? Sarah Palin, a women who showed many of the things Republicans liked, was a vice president candidate. The women the Republicans will vote for is a Republican women. The women the Democrats will vote for will be a Democrat. America will probably have one in the future, the second a competent one decides to run as a republican/democrat.

I know that there are women in the Republican camp, and I never said all republicans are sexists, even though I apparently made it sound that way. Though I would use M. Bachmann as a better example and not Palin; Palin was just a nice toy, and accessorily is as much 'man' as her colleagues.

Sure enough there are women in politics, they're not excluded; and I think a woman as a presidential candidate would have support from politicians, republic or democrat. The problem is that being a woman would cost her many votes from the people, making it improbable she would beat a male counterpart except if she was clearly better than him.
partydevil
online
partydevil
5,169 posts
4,380

Not in the U.S.
Lots of women there live by themselves and take care of their kids, with no husband. Many women work full-time, women often sacrifice more then men.

i never said ALL woman.
The only reason there are so few women leaders is because men don't like voting for women. And that is the only main reason. Without men's weakness in voting, you'd have a woman as the President

yea you believe your fairy's go on...
btw what you just said it utterly BS.

"men do, at the expense of their health, their safety, and sometimes their lives. Men earn more money than women because they make more sacrifices to make money, not because of "discrimination.""
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,830 posts
415

The countless wars, feuds, invasions, takeovers, etc, all started by men

As far as I remember, some woman was greatly involved in assassination of ceaser.
I think her name was cleopatra
Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,831 posts
1,120

As far as I remember, some woman was greatly involved in assassination of ceaser.
I think her name was cleopatra


:O
OMGEEEEEEEEEEEE

Now, let's look at men who instigated death;
Alexander the Great
Julius Caesar
Henry the VIII, as well as nearly all the other English, French, Swedish, Danish, Dutch, Spanish, and Italian kings who were in charge of wars, feuds, invasions, attacks, etc.
Hitler
And the list goes on.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
3,675

And the list goes on.


The list goes on because there have been far more male leaders in history than female leaders.

The problem is that being a woman would cost her many votes from the people, making it improbable she would beat a male counterpart except if she was clearly better than him.


This mostly. There are people who simply don't want a woman in office. I don't think it would matter for certain groups of people whether or not they held similar ideals or belonged to the same party.
Skyla
offline
Skyla
292 posts
800

This mostly. There are people who simply don't want a woman in office. I don't think it would matter for certain groups of people whether or not they held similar ideals or belonged to the same party.


Yes, but this goes both ways. There are some who do want a woman in office and might vote solely on the fact that she possesses a vagina. For both sides, the attitude towards women isn't the best reason to vote, obviously.
Jacen96
offline
Jacen96
3,113 posts
5,600

Think about this, if a woman did run for president, both sides would probably end up calling the other sexist,

"You're just not voting for her because she is a woman."

"You're just voting for her because she is a woman."



p.s. What about the queen who messed up france and got her involved in the hundreds years war.

(supposedly one woman messed it up so another could save it(joan of arc).)

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,722 posts
20,765

p.s. What about the queen who messed up france and got her involved in the hundreds years war.

Queens weren't exactly elected for their presidential qualities, my friend, so I don't see a consistent link to this topic. Besides there were some really bad kings too. Not a great difference.
thebluerabbit
offline
thebluerabbit
5,354 posts
1,525

how is it helpful to compare males and females. its obvious females werent allowed to do pretty much anything then cook in many places during history. obviously the amount of males who did anything both good and bad is bigger.

Showing 16-30 of 70