3 Women Leaders

[Tyrianth]

So you are basically saying that all 3 only got into those positions because there was no other alternatives?

Gender aside, its very worrying when there are no good candidates in any of these countries!

That's pretty much the case of Clinton and May. Don't know enough about Germany to say so for Merkel.

[zenkai]

The fact that anyone cares (good or bad) what sex our leaders are shows we still have a ways to go

[TheMediator]

The fact that anyone cares (good or bad) what sex our leaders are shows we still have a ways to go

~

"Liberal" here, I do think it matters in some cases. Once past menopause I think that cognitively men and women are both pretty similar. However, PC culture has gone too far and people completely discount the influence of hormones on rational-thinking especially in younger people. Anyone with a sex drive can tell you that when you're flooded by hormones it's harder to think rationally about things. Unless we're talking about some sort of castration program for elected officials, there are going to be biological differences in their ability to operate rationally and that's going to have some sway in how a rational entity would vote.

[Jotaux]

I don't think it really matters. I'm sure many would think of Pakistan or India as misogynist countries but they have had women leaders for decades.

[tehealadin]

I don't care that any of them are women, I can see why people will be pleased as it is a sign of changing times, however it is their ability that is of most interest to me. I kind of feel sorry for Theresa may. She isn't the prime minister, she is a female prime minister. I hope we get to a stage where this isn't noteworthy. I suppose this is a step in the right direction on that front.

[Renyo]

That's pretty much the case of Clinton and May. Don't know enough about Germany to say so for Merkel.

As Merkel came into office there were some alternatives, now there is no real competitor. The opposition is weak because she just integrates their views into her politics, so they can't attack her. Additionaly she can't be attacked in her own party because she made sure that all competitors are dealt with and her popularity in the party is just too huge.
Until the refugee crisis the political discourse in Germany was more or less dead because of this.

[Deleted]

~

"Liberal" here, I do think it matters in some cases. Once past menopause I think that cognitively men and women are both pretty similar. However, PC culture has gone too far and people completely discount the influence of hormones on rational-thinking especially in younger people. Anyone with a sex drive can tell you that when you're flooded by hormones it's harder to think rationally about things. Unless we're talking about some sort of castration program for elected officials, there are going to be biological differences in their ability to operate rationally and that's going to have some sway in how a rational entity would vote.

Ehhh, you are to some degree right in that, but then one also would have to consider their diet, weight, smoking, alcohol consumption, their life partner and just their entire lifestyle in general, because all of those can have effects on our rationality.

I mean, an overweight, nothing but junkfood and sugary foods eating, smoker that hasn't smoked for 5 hours, alcoholic, fighting/lost their partner, high blood pressure, low blood sugar person is likely not going to make a lot of rational thoughts

[Toxigen]

Women typically bring more emotion into decision making...which is the further compounded while under heavy stress.

It simply isn't a good idea.

[Tyrianth]

Women typically bring more emotion into decision making...which is the further compounded while under heavy stress.

It simply isn't a good idea.

Not true.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycap.../#649db0284cd3

A far too common perception is that when women are stressed, they become emotional and fall apart , but when men are stressed, they remain calm and clear-headed. If you subscribe to either of these beliefs, you’re probably going to turn to men, not women, when the pressure is on and an important decision needs to be made.

Neuroscientists are finding both of these popular notions are wrong.

First, men aren’t as steady as it seems. Mara Mather, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Southern California, and Ruud van den Bos, a neurobiologist at Radboud University in the Netherlands, independently found that when people are under stress, men become more eager to take risks. They’ve found that men become laser-focused on rewards when their heart rates and cortisol levels run high, even if that reward has only a tiny chance of materializing. When the pressure is on and there’s the glimmer of a highly rewarding outcome, men take gambles, more and bigger gambles than they would ordinarily choose.

Do women under duress feel as tempted? Usually not. Put most women in the same stressful situation, bump up their cortisol levels and ask them to make the same decision, and you’ll see something rather different. Their heads swivel to the risks. Mather and van den Bos found when women’s bodies were undergoing a strong stress reaction, they took more time weighing the contingencies and were more interested in smaller rewards they could count on. Rather than falling apart, women bring unique strengths to decision-making. Women tend to become risk-alert under stress and go for the smaller wins that are more guaranteed.

...

Huston: Research suggests that women don’t rely on intuition more often than men. When most people say, “women’s intuition,” they’re suggesting that women make their decisions based on some inexplicable feelings, on some inner hunch.

But research shows that women are just as data-driven and analytical as men, if not more so. In a sample of 32 studies that looked at how men and women thought about a problem or made a decision, 12 of the studies found that women adopted an analytical approach more often than men, meaning that women systematically turned to the data, while men were more inclined to go with their gut, hunches, or intuitive reactions. The other 20 studies? They found no difference between men and women’s thinking styles. Not a single study, not one, found that women tended to be more intuitive in their decision-making styles.

[TheMediator]

Ehhh, you are to some degree right in that, but then one also would have to consider their diet, weight, smoking, alcohol consumption, their life partner and just their entire lifestyle in general, because all of those can have effects on our rationality.

I'm talking about in terms of moment to moment decision-making, not necessarily moral character. If I'm flooded with testosterone because I just worked out, even discounting that I would be lower blood sugar, my ability to think straight is impaired. Now consider that we have a gender where for periods of time each month, that gender experiences a chemical/hormonal overload that impairs their judgment. That's a factor that needs to be taken into consideration if you're giving them responsibility.

Again, for say, Hillary, that's not really a concern because old men and women are both dried up without nearly as much hormones pumping through their blood stream, but for younger elected officials I think it's worth taking into consideration. I would not be okay with giving the nuclear button option to a young woman for instance, as unfair as that might seem.

Not true.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycap.../#649db0284cd3

I don't think it's a matter of women not being capable, it's more of a matter of consistency of rational thought. Think about how the way the world works in regards to sleep, mental alert, caffeine, etc. Men have been in power long enough that we (humanity) know about the ups-and-downs of cognition as it changes over the course of a day, so we generally don't make decisions with dire consequences while sleepy. The issue is that there isn't that sort of overall societal awareness of how the impairment of cognition in regards to the menstral cycle of women. It's generally taboo to ask a woman if she's on her period for instance, yet no so for asking someone if they're sleepy. We don't trust a tired/sleepy individual to make the most rational decision, why should we with respect to someone whose impaired by hormones?

[Deleted]

I'm talking about in terms of moment to moment decision-making, not necessarily moral character. If I'm flooded with testosterone because I just worked out, even discounting that I would be lower blood sugar, my ability to think straight is impaired. Now consider that we have a gender where for periods of time each month, that gender experiences a chemical/hormonal overload that impairs their judgment. That's a factor that needs to be taken into consideration if you're giving them responsibility.

Again, for say, Hillary, that's not really a concern because old men and women are both dried up without nearly as much hormones pumping through their blood stream, but for younger elected officials I think it's worth taking into consideration. I would not be okay with giving the nuclear button option to a young woman for instance, as unfair as that might seem.

Several of the things I mentioned, have a far bigger influence on the capability on moment to moment decision making, several of them even have direct influence on said hormones. The gender differences is a factor, I am not gonna deny that for a second, but it isn't a factor on its own that should be up for concern without being concerned for several other factors.

[Tyrianth]

I'm talking about in terms of moment to moment decision-making, not necessarily moral character. If I'm flooded with testosterone because I just worked out, even discounting that I would be lower blood sugar, my ability to think straight is impaired. Now consider that we have a gender where for periods of time each month, that gender experiences a chemical/hormonal overload that impairs their judgment. That's a factor that needs to be taken into consideration if you're giving them responsibility.

Again, for say, Hillary, that's not really a concern because old men and women are both dried up without nearly as much hormones pumping through their blood stream, but for younger elected officials I think it's worth taking into consideration. I would not be okay with giving the nuclear button option to a young woman for instance, as unfair as that might seem.



I don't think it's a matter of women not being capable, it's more of a matter of consistency of rational thought. Think about how the way the world works in regards to sleep, mental alert, caffeine, etc. Men have been in power long enough that we (humanity) know about the ups-and-downs of cognition as it changes over the course of a day, so we generally don't make decisions with dire consequences while sleepy. The issue is that there isn't that sort of overall societal awareness of how the impairment of cognition in regards to the menstral cycle of women. It's generally taboo to ask a woman if she's on her period for instance, yet no so for asking someone if they're sleepy. We don't trust a tired/sleepy individual to make the most rational decision, why should we with respect to someone whose impaired by hormones?

Except the person I was responding was saying that women are emotional decision makers, was is false. As the article I posted says, specifically the part I quote, that says out of 32 studies, 12 found women to be more rational and analytical than men, and the other 20 found that there is negliglble difference. So his point is moot.

[May90]

Agreed... although it is worth mentioning that the reason Joan of Arc become so powerful was because of prophecy. The religious Christians in France had prophesised that a virgin girl would lead their armies... she came along at the right time basically! lol

But ofc society hasnt always held women back in the West, its total bullcrap. Here in the UK Boudicea was the leader of the British tribes against the Romans and she was a woman

In a world where there will be more women leaders than men in the top 5 financial countries on the planet its a joke to pretend that Patriarchy exists... this is the norm not an exception.

I would argue that genders were somewhat more equal in tribal times, than after the coming of civilization. In tribes, everything is simple: you are a person, you work for the good of the tribe. Sure, men tended to be hunters and workers, while women were more of housewives - but still, there were very few sexist dogmas, just some traditions. Then, when civilization came with all its complicated law systems, global religion influence and so on, the West became much closer to what we see nowadays in Iran or Saudi Arabia. Joan of Arc, indeed, became influential due to the prophecy; "legitimately", she would have almost zero chance at that. There were quite a few female leaders throughout the history, true, but they were a negligible minority in this regard, and most of the time they were just lucky, like were born to a monarch, or happened to match some prophecy.

Nowadays, it is pretty equal, I'd say. Very few people will like a candidate less because it is a woman; in fact, some will like the candidate more for that - that's basically how Kirchner made it to the presidency, for example. Still though, the fact of female political leaders being present, in itself, doesn't mean feminism is now obsolete.

[Ayla]

I'm talking about in terms of moment to moment decision-making, not necessarily moral character. If I'm flooded with testosterone because I just worked out, even discounting that I would be lower blood sugar, my ability to think straight is impaired. Now consider that we have a gender where for periods of time each month, that gender experiences a chemical/hormonal overload that impairs their judgment. That's a factor that needs to be taken into consideration if


I don't think it's a matter of women not being capable, it's more of a matter of consistency of rational thought. Think about how the way the world works in regards to sleep, mental alert, caffeine, etc. Men have been in power long enough that we (humanity) know about the ups-and-downs of cognition as it changes over the course of a day, so we generally don't make decisions with dire consequences while sleepy. The issue is that there isn't that sort of overall societal awareness of how the impairment of cognition in regards to the menstral cycle of women. It's generally taboo to ask a woman if she's on her period for instance, yet no so for asking someone if they're sleepy. We don't trust a tired/sleepy individual to make the most rational decision, why should we with respect to someone whose impaired by hormones?

Um, what? Let me tell you, not every woman has PMS. In fact, you're more likely to piss me off when I am hungry rather than when I am on my period. And let's face it, men do stupid shit too, like rape women because they're horny. You seem to be under the impression we are going to start a war because we're PMSing, and any woman who would do that would probably never make it far into a leadership role anyways.

[Arenis]

In a society where women can easily become the head of state

Yes becoming the head of a state is so easy.

What.

[TheMediator]

And let's face it, men do stupid shit too, like rape women because they're horny.

Right. And we've structured our society accordingly - we don't have nude women wandering around the White House giving the President a raging erection when he needs to be focused on making decisions. The difference is that discussing PMS / menstrual cycle and how best to deal with it in regards to how it might effect performance is taboo. That's sort of a problem.

[Emode]

May is growing on me actually, she seems quite no nonsense. I liked how she said she was prepared to kill innocents with nukes if she had to, she seems quite strong.

[Ayla]

Right. And we've structured our society accordingly - we don't have nude women wandering around the White House giving the President a raging erection when he needs to be focused on making decisions. The difference is that discussing PMS / menstrual cycle and how best to deal with it in regards to how it might effect performance is taboo. That's sort of a problem.

Riìiiight. Do I need to Periods for Pence you? Let me ask you, did you watch porn or have sex last night? If you didn't, you might not be in the best of minds. Did you ask for a blow job and not get one? Sir, allow me to check if you have an erection, I think you might be too horny to make a decision. Or too sleepy, you shouldn't have morning sex, it impairs your judgement since apparently you admit that being sleepy is bad. And if you didn't have sex recently enough well, maybe you shouldn't be deciding things either.

Or maybe you just need a cigarette, those addictions really effect your judgement.

[Wildtree]

The fact that anyone cares (good or bad) what sex our leaders are shows we still have a ways to go

nothing else needs to be said, nothing else can be said.
/end thread

[Independent voter]

Probably will get free tampons in the lady's rooms now.