English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

the ones that say things like: "Hillary would make a bad presidend because shes a woman, and women are all about emotion. I do not want the president making a rash move just because she is PMSing (and I am a woman). " eww, there are a lot of good reasons why hilary shouldnt be president, this is not one of them. yet they're focusing on that? why? hearing a man say this is bad, hearing a women say it is heartbreaking! what ahappened to femenism and thinking we were JUST as smart as men and just as capable of doing the same work!!:[

2007-10-17 17:55:09 · 17 answers · asked by tara! 2 in Social Science Gender Studies

17 answers

I agree with you completely.

I think we can safely assume that women who say things like that are incapable of controlling their emotions and thinking logically, and they're foolishly assuming all women are like that.

I have shitty vision, but that doesn't mean everyone else should have to wear glasses to drive a car. See what I mean?

EDIT: Forgot to mention that I don't necessarily support Hillary. But if I choose to support her or not support her it will have NOTHING to do with her gender, and that's the way it should be.

2007-10-17 18:09:19 · answer #1 · answered by G 6 · 3 2

so which you swallow the bait and now unfastened face via complaining approximately and publishing her digital mail! human beings hate being judged particularly in the event that they have been absent from college on the morning while 'the thank you to deal with own criticism one 0 one' replaced into taught. you will possibly have have been given a rocket from me too for being gratuitously insensitive yet then it does no longer be a difficulty to me; if human beings can no longer squabble they develop into lots lots worse and the potential required is to have the skill 'squabble' civilly via way of discussion. no it is straightforward to 'discover the money for' vet charges any further than they could 'discover the money for' injuries. i might even stay to tell the tale eggs if my dogs mandatory the vet and that i replaced into in need of the potential to pay for it. Others won't, I lump them in with the 'permit's unload pup till now Christmas' team of losers. And besides, what and the place is an larger inflammatory an infection. Google and Yahoo will grant quite a number of organic solutions if the condition is extra effective defined. and bonafide: My dogs's in demand toy is now a marginally worn on the perimeters squeaker it relatively is formed some thing like a weasel.

2016-10-04 01:49:46 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Insecurity and simply being brainwashed.

Contrary to popular belief women think more logically than men and men more emotionally. The obvious examples lie in the logic of expressing one's emotions rather than letting them fester inside and ultimately be expressed as anger and the propensity of war and violence as the most "logical" reaction to any perceived threat.

It really does sadden me that any woman would think that women are less able because we are more adept at expressing and dealing with our emotions. It's even sadder that considering the lives of of others is also seen as weak.

Men make rash decisions because they are obsessed with proving their strength. Women live in a culture where their emotional state is constantly under question. We rally aren't so stupid as to forget that and let our periods govern our responses.

What frustrates me most is that Sen. Clinton is constantly under fire for being a b!%@h, for being too tough and too emotionally guarded. She is attacked for doing and acting just like any man we would extol as the ideal candidate but because she is a woman it is wrong. At the same time we complain that women can't be president because they are too soft and emotional.

As both a woman and an American it disgusts me enough that men can still be this mind-numbingly stupid. When I hear such sentiments coming from women, however, I really do fear that there may be no hope for our nation. When we can't stand up for and believe in ourselves how can we ever expect any one in our government to do so for us?

2007-10-17 20:00:02 · answer #3 · answered by ophelliaz 4 · 1 1

I live in India and may be I should not talk about USA politics.

But I think Hillary is a bad example for women and women’s movements. People like Vinni Mandela who was bold enough to get separated from Mandela and contest on her own, various women head of states of Asia, who never tried to forfeit their self respect as a woman or depend on their husbands for their political career are better examples than Ms Hillary whose character and conduct during the Monica Lewinsky case gives a rather bad idea about her self respect as a woman and greed for better political career.

Just see these women politicians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prathibha_patil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indira_Gandhi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnie_Mandela
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Hasina

and this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

You guys have only this Ms Hillary as a possible woman candidate in a country like America?

2007-10-18 03:13:22 · answer #4 · answered by ByTheWay 4 · 0 0

I think some women are worried that if Hillary becomes president, they will be encouraged to become more ambitious themselves. That's what Canadian political wives said to Maureen McTeer: "If you have a career, people will want to know why we can't."

2007-10-18 02:13:38 · answer #5 · answered by Rio Madeira 7 · 1 0

Thank you for bringing this up to everyone's attention. That is why we have been stuck with the likes of a foolish President and his government for almost 8 years now. Idiocy seems to be a popular disease. The females you were referring to are so completely delusional, they do not know to what gender they belong any longer. Their existence is dedicated to pleasing men... all men in every possible way they can. I do not consider them women: they are attachments to their man's private parts to me. They are living and breathing examples of the lifestyle left behind by years of progress. They represent 50ies and 60ies of 20th century. Doesn't that sound pathetic to you?

2007-10-17 18:17:15 · answer #6 · answered by ms.sophisticate 7 · 1 2

if she does what she says she can and is a fine example of a president and can pick this Nation up from the crap it is in..then great...

if not...then she is no better than most politicians....

i dont vote..so perhaps i have no say...but i do have to live in this nation. and the decisions that politicians make affect non voters as much as voters.

2007-10-17 20:04:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It truly saddens me when I hear women say such things because there certainly are women who would make superb leaders. (I just happen not to believe that Hillary is one of them.) To vote based purely upon the grossest stereotypes is absurd.

2007-10-18 01:09:18 · answer #8 · answered by Gnu Diddy! 5 · 1 1

Anti feminism is the new norm, women want to be feminine, they want to be taken care of. Its about focusing what ur good at.

2007-10-17 22:58:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Amen to that, sister!!!

It truly is heartbreaking to hear a woman say that. Just goes to show you how ingrained prejudice really is when some women are prejudiced against themselves! So sad.

I agree with you 100%.

2007-10-17 18:00:07 · answer #10 · answered by It's Ms. Fusion if you're Nasty! 7 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers