I really don't mean to offend men in general, but I can't help but look at all the havoc going on in the world, past and present, and not say that it has predominately been manifested by men.
Would women make this world a better place? I don't know, but it seems to be that the men aren't doing too good of a job.
Not to mention the affect of the almighty penis has played. Empires have fallen, presidents have scandaled themselves, clergymen have fallen from grace, pedophiles prey on our children and women. All because men can't control their zippers?
Would there be less war and more compassion for people in general? Would it be a safer more economically sound society in general?
Again, men, I am very aware of the wonderful men that are out there. Great ones and heroes. I mean to offend no one personally.
2006-11-06 11:56:57 · 25 answers · asked by Paige2 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
There isn't any way you could put that many women together in one endeavor and have them get along productively. I give it 48 hours before the first skirmish.
2006-11-06 12:01:24 · answer #1 · answered by Norman 7 · 7⤊ 4⤋
i might vote for a female (i'm female-i'm thinking greater how men might answer this question.). i wouldn't in any respect vote for a female basically because of the fact they're female-how might that improve the clarification for feminism if a woman finally have been given into workplace and did a terrible interest? It amazes me a number of the international places that many human beings evaluate 'in the back of the cases' culturally, who've had female leaders (Pakistan is the 1st that includes recommendations-i understand there are others.), yet many human beings are admittedly no longer waiting for that step.
2016-10-15 11:17:27 · answer #2 · answered by staves 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not. When women get mad at each other it never gets better. They stay pissed for a long time. Catfights are great to watch, but I doubt they would be on an international scale.
They first and best thing you could do would be an absolute worldwide separation of church and state, including tax breaks. This would solve most issues right away. Make it a serious crime to mix the two, and the punishment would be death by slow torture, after a week of public stockade (with spitting, urination, etc, allowed and encouraged), and apply it to the entire family of the offender. All executions would have to be broadcast/published on all media for the duration.
Things would shape up in a great big hurry.
2006-11-06 12:28:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
It could be but I doubt it. It is a debatable matter to say Britain was better off under Margaret Thatcher although I think she was competent. Indira Gandi did not make much difference to India.
Benezir Butto certainly failed in Pakistan.
The key is balance. We need hard masculine logic countered with womanly insight. Give an equal voice to everyone.
2006-11-06 12:12:54 · answer #4 · answered by flugelberry 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Don't apologize for your opinion's or idea's. They are well thought out and supported brilliantly. I do agree with you, but I have a feeling even if I didn't.....I would appreciate your points and walk away with a different perspective! Bravo!
The only thing I can add.....is this:
In my opinion,
The only reason women are not ruling the world right now, is because we are the one's who carry, birth, often times nurse, and raise our children. We can not trust the men to do this, because we've already seen what they can do with the rest of the world....so that is where our priorites have been....in the home. If they weren't, I suppose there would be no civilization at all. Of course, there are some men who are exceptions to the rule, so don't go getting your panties in a bunch gentlemen...I'm sure you're all super!.... uh hmmm.
2006-11-06 12:05:09 · answer #5 · answered by LoveBiologist 3 · 6⤊ 4⤋
What would be a woman's response to the terror attack Flowers and a stern warning. Lets not forget that our good friends the Muslims view a woman as sub-human. I don't think its a good idea.
2006-11-06 13:46:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe, but have you ever heard of Catherine the Great? Yes Virginia there are women like Catherine. Some women make their world better and some are "Catherines'"
2006-11-06 12:31:16 · answer #7 · answered by longroad 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
there are pros and cons of it so u cant just say that women would be better qualified. the only way to find out is if we had a lot of women be president. and that would take a while.
2006-11-06 12:02:40 · answer #8 · answered by le 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Why not?
Women are tough, intellectually, emotionally, & even physically in some cases. Women are not War starters, like men are, women are more sensitive to issues that concern everyone, and I think definitely a well qualified women who ran for president is someone I would consider voting for.
2006-11-06 12:00:41 · answer #9 · answered by Blondie* 4 · 8⤊ 4⤋
Women can be just as incompetent and ill suited for the job as any man can. You are sadly mistaken if you think a woman would look at issues any differently than a man would. Women like you make the rest of us look bad and it is also single sided thinking such as yours that will keep a woman out of the high office.
2006-11-06 12:01:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋
Yes, 23 days out of the month.
2006-11-06 11:58:58 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋