different countries respect or consider ladies differently.
in indeia we consider them as maaji.she is potentially strong physically weak and shows lot of care towards others generally everyone in the family excxept for one or two exceptions.this is because of the way they have been trewateds by the society right freom their birth. the few exceptions are also because of the treatments what they experienced during their life right from birth.
in west the ladies arew considoreds adorable but haughty and stubborn they way they react to the society, because of their childhood experience.what iam trying to emphasise is the person in politics,man or woman is not important, the way they lead their life is more important. so the background of the politicians are more important than their sex ,caste ,wealth or heritage. world would be a beautiful place to live in if tolerant, sensible at the same time fair people with lot of human values venture into politics.
2006-09-11 01:32:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by kailash s 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Absolutely, categorically untrue.
An extremist, feminist caricature - not a portrayal of men and women at all. Women are very often vindictive, petty, narcissistic, not at all conscious of REAL dignity, not sure where you live but modesty is hardly a trait most women demonstrate.
Women, when scorned, often go on a "scorched earth" vendetta, simply for the sake of 'getting even'. I've worked with women who are far more arrogant, cruel and impolite than men - by an order of magnitude.
Sorry, your false 'straw man' argument doesn't ring true - from any distance.
2006-09-07 21:00:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Timothy W 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, I do not think the world would be more peaceful if ALL politicians and presidents were ladies; but, I do believe the world might benefit if there were more "ladies" in politics. "Ladies" do bring a different perspective into "politics" than "gentlemen".
Many women have influenced world events:Nefertiti, Cleopatra, Mary, the mother of God, Joan of Arc, Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great, Queen Victoria, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, Princess Diana, Hillary Clinton, Sandra Day O'Connor, Condoleeza Rice.
2006-09-07 22:06:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Baby Poots 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well I have found that Ladies are more arrogant,cruel,impolite, vindictive and vicious than men are when they are being wrong and when it comes to their young. For many years the USA was the only country in the world that their women didn't fight.
2006-09-07 22:21:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its no longer peacefull. yet that's no longer the genuine project, fairly some countries have nuclear guns that we are no longer paranoid of, yet Iran has a reported position that Israel ought to no longer exist and that given the prospect Iran would spoil Israel. that's what scares the U. S., being that Israel is an best buddy. We pursued nuclear technologies and nevertheless do, we are the purely usa to ever drop no longer one yet 2 bombs. So for us to disclaim a rustic no longer our greatest buddy to pursue nuclear is hypocritical and between the justifications we've a demanding time in international family individuals. We also recognize that to bypass to warfare will be a significant warfare no longer in basic terms a low factor conflict like Iraq, with the intention to't in basic terms bomb them to garbage. i do not choose Iran to have a nuclear weapon, yet our significant weapon, our militia we are not prepared to apply, and Iran knows that. I concern that sanctions will purely serve to make Iran extra obdurate and determined contained in the lengthy run. The religous clerics quite run that usa, no longer the life like universal Iranian.
2016-11-06 21:28:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Whatever. Men are perfectly capable of being civilized. Women, however, are NOT as capable of creating firm standards and especially enforcing standards. Women are also much more swayed by what the people around them think, so they are too easily influenced and manipulated into a position. It is the female, cooperative, decision-by-consensus thing (which in its worst state turns into decision by rumor, slander, manipulation, etc)
2006-09-07 20:53:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by goof 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No way. Bcause Lady ko abhiman jyada hota hai.
Ek indira hi kafi thi sabhi Indira banegi to sabhi desh aapas me lad marenge.
2006-09-08 01:34:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Indian K 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
its not like that but do u see what is happening in srilanka and india and pakistan and bangladesh in these places women can change their coutries fortune in a day what abt mynammar. i am not against women to take charge but dont except they be successfull always indira gandhi and sonia gandhi and shiek hasina and benazir bhutto names will be returned in history as miserable rulers and did these coutries develop under ladies
2006-09-07 23:49:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by kota g 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well i dunno bout anyone else but the thought of the world politics bieng left in the hands of females, scares the living daylights outta me, ok i know ur all saying its sexist and possibly u are correct but think on a moment please.......ur asking a human which by nature every 4 weeks has a hormone induced week of giving total greif and shyte to anyone in her firing line. hell what wud happen if bush and blairs female nemesis's where on the rag the week they went to the UN over iraq ?wow.......we'd end up using nukes !!!! lol
2006-09-07 21:05:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Phantom Viper 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
ummm hello come back to earth.women can be just as arrogant,cruel and impolite as men are.just look at condelezza rice.
2006-09-07 21:04:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋