Only if women held office then the world would be alot better off...but what about?

Question

If this were true why has women in powerful positions always started wars? Catherine the great or Maggie Thatcher to name a few have started wars

Answer 1

Baba Yaga: So you're saying it's justified for a woman to behave as barbarically as a man has in the past simply because - "men have been doing it for so long, now it's the woman's turn," or some other illogic?

Just another example of radical feminist rationale, turning justice into justification, thus excusing an act committed by a woman simply because men have done it before.

Oh, and claiming that you have a history degree doesn't impress me: if it's an undergrad degree, it doesn't give you enough background. If it's a graduate degree, you're too specialized to credibly cover both English AND Russian history.

Baba Yaga - So much for our search for the truth: I attack your argument and in return, you attack me. You have no idea whether I have an education or whether I have a life, so I think you need to get that chip off your shoulder and start being intellectually honest.

Answer 2

Wars are not generally based around gender traits, any attempt to make them so usually revolves around some hang up that the author of such a theory has. A proper analysis of conflict in International relations usually involves analysis from neorealist theory, that is to say a rational attempt by states to maximise their security (look up neorealism in wikipedia or Kenneth Waltz's classic book Theory of International Politics 1979 or Joseph Nye's Understanding International Conflict) by seeking relative gains. Conflict can also be seen from an International Liberalist approach, where the lack of interdependence between states may make conflict more likely. The lack of liberal democratic norms which are more conducive to cooperation and compromise rather than conflict is another explanation of conflict, especially with regards to the democratic peace theory. In any case the possession of ovaries or testicles is irrelevant. PS. The Falklands War was in 1982 not 1983.

Answer 3

I don't think it is necessarily true at all. Women and men are all individuals. Just because someone is one gender or another it neither means they think like everyone else in their gender nor that have different personality traits.

Earlier tonight I saw a reference on this site to a study done in Wisconsin that found the intellectual and personality differences between men and women have, for the most part, nothing to do with their gender.

Humans are humans. What I think may make the world better is to have in power only people who are decent, well adjusted, and extremely intelligent individuals. THAT is what would make a difference.

Answer 4

I don't think the world wouldn't be terribly different than it is with men at the helm: my guess is that even this generation will probably never know.

Margaret Thatcher did NOT attack Argentina in 1982. Get your facts straight: the Falkland Islands were attacked by Argentina in an attempt to annex them. Argentina was experiencing profound economic troubles at the time and the attempt to take the "Malvinas" was designed to draw attention away from internal political matters. It was the military leader, a General Galtieri who attacked: the British defended,

Also, it's a little bit silly using Catherine the Great as an example, don't you think? She was only behaving EXACTLY as her male counterparts at the time were. Same thing goes for Elisabeth I. Don't forget it was the Spanish king who sent their Armada up the Thames in 1588: another 'macho man' going down in GLORIOUS DEFEAT, and beaten by an Englishwoman!

EDIT:
You need to look at each case individually: I doubt that sex or gender woul play a significant role in predicting/explaining leader behavior.

Developed world:
Gro Harlem Brundtland-Norway - stable politically, one of the most peaceful countries on the face of the earth. A paragon of virtue.
Angela Merkel- Germany - stable politically, in modern times one of the most peaceful countries on earth
Developing World: unstable politically, fraught with uncertainty

My point is that there are sooooo many variables - apart from the sex of the leader - to take into account that anything said is mere speculation and as such has no validity or basis in fact: it cannot be proved or disproved. No offense but a a timewaster, really.

YES GABE, surely what I have written constitutes "radical feminist rationale" - get a LIFE, get an EDUCATION. I can't help it that I got the education, and you DIDN'T. You are evidently intimidated by educated, strong women...you made NO attempt even to answer the question here and it's clear why (empty vessle). Instead, you took advantage of this 'opportunity' to spit venom from your soapbox and crank on in impotent frustration about the women who intimidate you so very much. You contributed zilch - except for the whining and blaming - which tells us more about your own psychological make-up than it does anything else.

EDIT:
I forgot about Golda Meir who sucessfully defended Israel during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war ("Yom Kippur) This coordinated, multi-national attack (of course initiated by men) in the end provided Israel with more territory coming out than they had coming in!

Answer 5

I think the world would definitely be different if a majority of women held office. It's hard to say exactly how it would be different, because right now all governance is based on a male system. Presumably, the whole system could look different if females held the majority of offices.

I personally think there would be a stronger emphasis on health care (who knows, maybe the United States would even get health care for everyone!). Maybe there would also be fewer wars; males are more aggressive than females and commit more crimes, including murders, than females. Don't try to argue otherwise, this is a fact.

You name a few women leader who have started wars (although see the above answer on Margaret Thatcher). They are probably a small percentage of the total number of women who have held office. Benazir Bhutto, former PM of Pakistan, Gro Harlem Brundtland, former PM of Norway, Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, Khaleda Zia, former PM of Bangladesh, are examples of women leaders who didn't start wars! Your example doesn't prove anything.

I'm not saying that women would automatically be better world leaders than men, but there is no reason they shouldn't be as good. All attempts to argue otherwise are indicative of a latent fear and hatred of women if you ask me.

Answer 6

It is not true, it is just a feminist line that is feeded to us to accept women in positions of power over competent men. You can be pretty sure if we will have a lot of women in positions of power, there will be ONE man who will reign this country through them like a king.

Answer 7

Women don't like to be reminded of women like her. Or Cleopatra. Or many other women of history who have started or continued wars during their reign. And they don't like being told that women encouraging their men to fight on their behalf are just as guilty, if not more so, then the men they send off to fight. Just because the women aren't personally doing the killing doesn't absolve them of any responsibility concerning it.

Answer 8

cause their CRAZY