I think so.
2006-08-29 14:11:01 · 16 answers · asked by Isis 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It might be more beautiful : )
2006-08-29 14:46:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends. If a Pamela Anderson type was in charge, nothing will get done since the powers at be will spend all day and night fornicating. If Lindsay Lohan type was in charge, most other leaders will be staring at her assets and then there would be far less wars and problems. Everyone would agree with a woman with such beautiful .. uhm ... assets. If an Angelina Jolie type was there, well .... what can I say. She will just pucker her lips and all other leaders (men and woman alike) will melt like butter and there would be no more disagreement. So you see, it all depends on the type of woman in the end.
2006-08-29 14:56:15 · answer #2 · answered by chatting_za 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it might be more peaceful for another five to ten minutes... We might be more inclined to first want to try to work something out civilly, but once tempers flare forget it. Women can be more nasty then men, and if it's that time of the month there would likely be NO attempt to discuss it, just the thought of annihilating the other *****. lol
2006-08-29 14:21:18 · answer #3 · answered by Indigo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. Would you call Condoleeza Rice peaceful? How about Margaret Thatcher? Women who get in positions of power can be just as ruthless as any man who got there. Also, we've seen women murder, fight, etc. I do think there should be more women in power, but I have no illusions about our relative peacefulness.
2006-08-29 14:19:24 · answer #4 · answered by GreenEyedLilo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Heard of the Amazons? Or Queen Boadica of the Celts? Or Cleopatra? Or Bloody Mary, Marie Antoinette, and others?
Patriarchy, matriarchy....doesn't matter. Neither would be better than the other. It's still a dominist culture either way you look at it.
2006-08-29 14:54:43 · answer #5 · answered by Abriel 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe, because women don't get into fights as much so the world probably would be more peaceful and kind. :-)
2006-08-29 14:21:09 · answer #6 · answered by S(0rch3d 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Women can be too irrational and emotional... It has been confirmed through tests that women focus more on emotion than men...
This link is the study. They were testing who could withstand more pain, men or women, and they found that women did because their emotions are involved.
http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/050706_pain_gender.html
A rational, clear head is required to run things, and if women are too emotional, they couldn't do the job as well. I'm not saying that all women can't handle it, but I'm saying that on average, women Do let their emotions get away.
2006-08-29 14:22:13 · answer #7 · answered by RED MIST! 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
A lot of good men have a good woman standing besides them. Helping guide them. And a lot of times they stand infront her mostly to hold her back from ripping someones hair out. Men seem to loose their cool a lot more and it's war. Woman a less often but then it's nuclear time. Our emotions are greatest asset and downfall.
2006-08-29 14:56:57 · answer #8 · answered by joycie0891 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Women are in charge, men just don't like to admit it.
2006-08-29 14:55:27 · answer #9 · answered by munkees81 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So, at present you believe men are in charge of the world?? Wow, that's a lot of bull.
2006-08-29 14:17:55 · answer #10 · answered by K 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Maybe for the first 3 weeks, but we'd all be nuked by the end of the fourth week.
2006-08-29 14:18:22 · answer #11 · answered by elars1989 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋