In any election, why we give more importance to lady candidates ?

Answer 1

Because the path for women to even be in a candidate position requires much more work than it does for a man. Women typically aren't taken as seriously, are far more scrutinized/criticized/discriminated against, and are often less respected by their peers.

A woman in a government seat has had to endure a heck of a lot to get there in the first place and typically are strong and incredibly hard-working people. Women in these seats pave the way for gender equality as well. If you look at women's suffrage movements in any country, minority rights are not typically far behind. The balance needs to be shifted to represent the actual population of any given country and it is safe to stay that a government full of "stiff white men" (or whatever color) is not representative of the majority.

Answer 2

I don't believe we're giving more importance to female candidates, but if you feel that way it's maybe because we've never had a female president before, and for the first time in our history there are serious female candidates that can become president of the United States. Personally, I think Hilary Clinton would make a great job.

Answer 3

The media: tv, newspapers, magazines, radio, gravitate to any woman, "lady" who aspires to "political" prominence because a "ladies" place has been, and still is conceived as "taking care" of the home, a husband, and any children she may have had. Notice, I say, "children she had", not children her husband had anything to do with.

Historically, many "ladies" have exerted "extreme prejudice" on the politics of the world. Cleopatra was, and is, still considered to have had a "mind-boggling" effect on world events. Catherine the Great was monumental in developing the Russian Empire. England's monarchy has Queen Elizabeth I to thank for their rule. Thanks to Wallis Simpson, a "lady", Edward the VII, abdicated to his brother, and Queen Elizabeth II now reigns. If not for Wallis Simpson, Edward, a German sympathizer, might have brought England to support Germany. That event would have certainly altered history. Golda Meier served her country admirably as Prime Minister, as did Margaret Thatcher for England.

The world, namely men, are suspect of any woman wanting to have anything to do with "politics". Perhaps this is an "Adam and Eve" thing. Biblically, woman was the cause of the downfall of mankind; but the most revered person in Christianity is Mary, a woman, the Mother of Jesus.

Why do you think the U.S., or any other country, affords more important to "lady" candidates?

Answer 4

I have wondered this myself. While it is the media and not the population that generally assigns importance, it is still an interesting question. I don't believe that breasts qualify someone to be a better, or worse politician (or CEO, or plumber, etc.). While progress cannot be achieved by ignoring biology, equality cannot be achieved by advancing people on the merits of their sex, either. It's a delicate balance.

Answer 5

(always wanted to say this) Elementry my dear watson, it basic sterotypicality, we believe women are weaker than us in all fields, in reality they have the upper hand in many. We also believe that Women are more honest & sinless than men. Women are seen as mothers & a symbol of good (statue of liberty is a women, all ships are named after women). Basicly they are falsy considered the underdog and the odd one of the bunch, they shouldn't be there, and as we all know, contraversy creates cash.

Answer 6

Because ladies are more honest than men and not sick of sex. So I wish Mrs. Clinton as president than Mr. Clinton.

Answer 7

Ummm because we need more women in politics.

Answer 8

We don't. The media sometimes does.

Answer 9

Your not making any sense sir, what are you talking about - structure sentence properly please.