Recently, AOL ran a poll to see how people felt about the possibility of a female president. 43% of the people polled felt we were not ready.
Now, it did not ask if we are ready for a Martian President. Or an Orangutan President. But a female president...as if we were polling some species not yet recognized for its ability to walk upright or better yet, walk and wave at the same time. I mean c'mon. I've seen the Miss America pageant. Women have been walking and waving in perfect coordinated fashion for years. And they do it in high heels. And they want world peace. Are you hearing this George?
Now I don't know about you, but I'd simply prefer a president that doesn't wave to Stevie Wonder across a crowded room. As a member of the male gender, I find this a bit embarrassing.
There is criticism that a woman wouldn't be tough enough. That she needs a jolt of testosterone to handle the job. I work with a lot of women. And for one week out of the month, they can send any man cowaring under his desk, shaking in fear. This would be the week to negotiate the tough contracts. And a woman president would only get better with age. I'm sure you've heard of menopause. Send an army of menopausal women to North Korea. They would beat Kim Jon Il over the head with his own nuclear weapons.
And lets face it fellas. A good woman can get a man to do anything. And with 94% of the world's leaders men, I smell world domination. The only thing left to consider is who? Who would be the best candidates? Let me know your thoughts on the subject.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
What I find most horrifying about your posting is that, at first glance, I wouldn't have thought anything about seeing this survey. I've grown up in a world, an environment, that seems to have trained me to overlook how differently women are treated. I missed the time that women were punished for being women. Or so I thought. Until I got to your point about how ridiculous the survey was, it didn't even occur to me that I should have been offended by it. And, as you know, I am a very opinionated, outspoken person who finds issue with all sorts of things. The fact that this, in particular, seems "usual" scares me to death. How many other things are we programmed to accept without even realizing we are accepting them
I really never looked at it from that point of view. But you're right. Women make up 50% of this race we call human. It's time to exercise your power!
For Kay:
You have confirmed my suspicious. Woman are smarter than men. I'm a man so it took me longer to figure it out. Glad you stopped by.
The world, or at least our part of it, is not ready to take this step. Compassion for those countries less fortunate or foreign policy made for the good of humanity is not for our lifetime. There's always going to be a bigger richer fish in the "pond" that will dictate how things are going to be.
To anonymous: Deciding that compassion for others or that the good of humanity is not for our lifetime is to accept the apathy that governments count on to further counterproductive and personal agendas. As long as the people are warm and happy in their homes, we can go on waging war, buying arms and propogating destruction. Is it not our responsibility as the people of this planet to say no to this in every way we can?
Yes it is our responsibility to make the world a better place. And change starts with the individual. We have the freedom to live as we choose, say what is on our minds, believe what is in our hearts and the expectation to act out within the established laws of our land. It is the individualls decided course that makes the difference. But that may or may not create global change.
Yes, this is to an old post, but the topic is relevant. This comment is for Kay who said: "women = higher percentage in law, in phd programs, in admission to mba programs, and in all college programs." I'm appalled. Why would we want those kind of people in leadership?
Just because numerous worldwide studies by women and men alike have now proven
* that women blow past men in management capability and style,
* that boys are being left behind by girls (around the world) in just about everything
* that boys are more frail at birth and die 7-10 years earlier than women,
* that any pre-teen girl or old woman (and many in-between) can fairly easily whip a male their own age,
. . . none of this means females are the primary sex. Only the primary sex can be leaders. And that is measured by size, not those other things.
We all know that men (as a whole) have more brute strength, can more easily pee up walls, and can probably beat women in football. What other proof do you need? C'mon kay, wake up!
So, by default, men are more qualified to be leaders. When did we ever stoop to thinking that the brighter, more effective, more inherently powerful, more stable, more trustworthy, and just plain more capable among us should lead? What a monstrously destructive idea! Men have known all along that such thinking is dangerous, that such traits are "girlish," and that competing with women in such things would be as unfair and foolish as which sex is best equipped to bear a child.
Woman president? Ah Phooey. Next you'll be saying women should be allowed to vote! Oh, sorry . . . I mean, yeah, . . . they did that and look what happened. In less than a century they have started embarrassing men by surpassing them in nearly every field men have said is important to them.
Except football.
This post is by Philo -- an ancient philosopher who knew where women belong. philo_judaeus@hotmail.com
Post a Comment