English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If women had the final say politically, I personally think there would be more dialogue going on than bombs being dropped everywhere.

2006-08-08 06:20:55 · 14 answers · asked by Jazz 2 in Society & Culture Other - Society & Culture

14 answers

pffff to poster above "waging war every 28 days", if it were me I'd take a break to my room and cry about what the men did to the world for so long. :) I don't think one sex dominating any scene is healthy. I would hope for a healthy balance between mens agressive and dominating nature and the womens emotional and supportive nature. So I am weary of either sex having full autonomy.

2006-08-08 06:26:21 · answer #1 · answered by Mariah 3 · 2 0

I don't think it would be much different really, Maggie Thatcher was in charge when Britain aquired Nuclear weapons for the first time, and went to War in the Falklans, and any female politicians I've seen speak the same langauge as the men. In cases where women are involved in revolutions they're sometimes seen to be much more hardcore and zealous than the men. For example in the Irish war for Independance, while a majority of men supported the treaty which brought an end to the war, a vast majority of the women's organisations rejected it and vowed to continue fighting.

2006-08-08 13:08:18 · answer #2 · answered by Nuckpang 1 · 0 0

There isn't many precedents to go by.

Of course, there was Margaret Thatcher in the UK. I'd say she didn't really have the usual female touch. She was tough and aggressive rather than being gentle and supporting. I guess she had to be that way back in the late 70s in order to rise to the top of a male-dominated world. Some people liked her and some people didn't.

There was also a woman president of Pakistan back some years ago. I don't know much about her but she was eventually ousted.

Of course, there's currrently a woman chancellor in Germany. We'll have to see how she goes.

2006-08-08 06:37:16 · answer #3 · answered by McDuff 2 · 0 0

I don't. Because we R not strong like men R. I think that when it would come 2 being president or V.P we would fail. Senator and gov. is OK. 4 us but, we couldn't take on as big of a job as that. Whoever is president don't try 2 blame them 4 the bombs because Bush didn't do it. My Mom is over in Iraq right now and it's tough but, if Bush hadn't issued us 2 go over there than the fighting would have never stopped.

2006-08-08 06:29:18 · answer #4 · answered by Steven's Girl♥ 5 · 0 0

Yeah I agree but there would be a female tony blair or george bush that tries to take over the world, at some point

2006-08-08 06:26:23 · answer #5 · answered by Osh Aka Oisinmagic 3 · 0 0

I dont think the world would be much different if women had the final say politically. They would still be ones that act too rashly, or take bribes, etc.

2006-08-08 06:27:17 · answer #6 · answered by Crystal L 3 · 0 0

There's only been one female Prime Minister, and Thatcher ballsed this country right up, enough said.

2006-08-08 06:34:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Two words, Maggie Thatcher, nuff said

2006-08-08 06:25:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think it would have been worse, for a women to take powers or have their say
women are not practical even though they are strong in heart...

2006-08-08 06:25:18 · answer #9 · answered by Captain Cool 2 · 0 0

Lets see... Right now our politics are mostly male and look at the world around us. I say let women rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It can't get any worse anyway.

2006-08-08 06:28:01 · answer #10 · answered by Justyna K 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers