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

Are women brainwashed to believe they are only good for Playboy or making babies?

Seems like many women(even men) are catty towards each other and cannot accept females as authority figures.
Cause if that wasnt the case there would have been at LEAST 1 woman President in America by now.......since the year America, land of the free and equal was born.

Over 200 years of "free and equal" and no woman President yet? hmmmmmmmmmmmm interesting.

And for those who are slow and will point out that women havent had the right to vote until recently...........THAT's exactly my point. It isnt free and equal then..... is it?????

2007-12-07 01:18:47 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Family & Relationships Marriage & Divorce

tykisha.........there are more women than blacks...simply because women include blacks, asians, whites, minorities etc,.

2007-12-07 01:30:36 · update #1

kelly...no. this is not the first time ever that a woman has run for president in america.

2007-12-07 01:41:02 · update #2

scott....did C average Bush ride on his father's coattails?

2007-12-07 01:50:16 · update #3

18 answers

Many women leaders effectively ran their countries.Examples: Mrs.Golda Mayer of Israel; Mrs Indira Gandhi of India; Mrs.Aquino of Phillipines......
and, some are very effectively doing great job in the same field as in Germany; New Zealand; Shri Lanka quite a good number in European countries and in the rest of the world.
Mrs.Benazir Bhutto was very effective P.M. of Pakistan earlier.
I don't know why citizens of the USA is sceptical about female leadership.Why do they utter the phrases like ..."equality in jobs", "equality in Society just like men" , and so on?
Am I wrong if I say that US mind is not open ......and it is hypocritical?When an Islamic Country like Pakistan could elect a Female Prime Minister long ago, why is it that the Us citizens find their women are incapable of doing the same?

2007-12-07 01:51:36 · answer #1 · answered by bikashroy9 7 · 0 1

this united states of america has under no circumstances been loose and equivalent! The south became wide-unfold for slavery yet those interior the north have been bringing over 40,000 slaves a 300 and sixty 5 days and at one factor have been exporting interior of sight individuals to the west indies to function slaves. If we quickly forward to extra moderen cases, eastern individuals have been placed into concentration camps with out any information that there became a choose for it or maybe nevertheless Germans weren't. If we've been fairly equivalent, why do human beings pay into Social protection except they are employed by way human beings in a central authority interest and then there's a separate retirement plan that we, their employers don't have get admission to to? Why is it unlawful so you might face outdoors a polling place and pay human beings to vote the form you choose and yet a lobbyist can bypass to Washington D.C. and pay human beings to vote the way they choose? If a democracy is a symbal of being loose and equivalent why are there 11 different international places that have extra effective well-being care, extra effective educaional opportunities, and a extra effective techniques-set to life so a strategies as adjusted actual earnings - all constitutional monarchies - we've not had a woman president yet we've not for some years had a president that became no longer the two democratic or republican so i've got faith the respond isn't a rely of intercourse yet of corruption of a equipment which became meant to be extra effective and has no longer lived as much as the expectancies of our forefathers. we've the potential to develop into plenty extra effective and probably it fairly is time we provide a woman a huge gamble with the aid of fact we easily can no longer do any worse than we are doing now.

2016-11-14 18:27:35 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Free and equal did not apply to women until the 1920s, when women like Susan B. Anthony pushed for equality.

It is true that women should be entirely equal now, but equality always takes a great deal of time. Women are much closer to equal than in years past, but have a long way to go to true equality.

As for a woman president, there have been few women even willing to take the chance. While Hillary Clinton is running now, I have to admit that I do not trust her or like her. On the other hand, if Elizabeth Dole ran for president I would vote for her in a second.

Take care,
Troy

2007-12-07 01:26:56 · answer #3 · answered by tiuliucci 6 · 1 1

You are, of course, correct. A woman can do just as good (or poor) of a job running our country as a man.

However, that doesn't mean that just any carpet bagging woman riding her husband's coattails can do it.

As I tell my young daughters: It is something that will happen in their lifetime. I have no doubt by the time my children are my age, they most defitnitely will have witnessed at least one woman and one "minority" race in the White House.

Is our country "free and equal" as you ask? No, absolutely not. But that is what we strive to be.

2007-12-07 01:45:54 · answer #4 · answered by scott_v1963 5 · 0 0

You know, as a male, I would be willing to vote for a woman. Just like any man running for office, it isn't about how they look, or what type of chromosomes they possess, it is about what they believe in, and what they are going to do as the leader of the free world.

If you ask me, the woman who is trying to be nominated right now is too far on the left to be a good president. I wouldn't vote for her if she was a man.

Same goes for those men who are completely right winged, I wouldn't vote for them either.

I am looking for someone with common sense, who is not going to continue to spend the taxpayer money like there is no end to it. Personally, I think the guy we have in office now sucks! That is my opinion.

2007-12-07 01:28:25 · answer #5 · answered by . 5 · 4 1

Yeah, it sucks that a woman hasn't been President yet. But after the option to do so, it isn't anyone's fault. Any woman can choose to be President - she just has to work towards it. I was all for voting for Hilary since 7th grade, but her views don't match entirely up to mine. I prefer Kunich over them all - not because he's a man, but because of his views, opinions, and beliefs. It all depends on personality and what they want to make out of the country.

2007-12-07 01:25:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Looks like the white males that have run the country to date have consistently made a complete mess of things. Catty, get real! Those guys have picked more fights than Don King.

I don't think Hilary Clinton would make a good President but there are PLENTY of highly qualified women / mothers that would bring a much more level headed and compassionate state of mind to the Presidency.

2007-12-07 01:24:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

The reason why "Man" hasn't let a women run the usa is because the fear of being showed up, and this is also the first time ever that a woman is running for the office.

2007-12-07 01:36:24 · answer #8 · answered by kelly 5 · 3 2

I really do worry when I see what kind of shows and stuff little girls are watching right now. Most of them depict the girls as spoiled brats who only care about their clothes and their makeup. It's kind of sickening and I worry about young girls not having any kind of head on their shoulders as they grow up. Women are mainly sex symbols today...and it's sad.

2007-12-07 01:30:29 · answer #9 · answered by ashley b 2 · 3 0

Look around you. Everything you see was conceived, designed, built, and tested by a man. Yes the current president sucks, but the logic that because the current president is a man so that must mean women would make better presidents is just retarded thinking

2007-12-07 01:27:08 · answer #10 · answered by Joey 2 · 3 4

fedest.com, questions and answers