|
Post by parson on Feb 7, 2008 7:59:01 GMT -5
Maggie, obviously, did a great service to her nation, as well as the world.
Historically, it has been in the make up of men to chart the course, blaze the trail, build, lead, & defend nations. I believe this to be because they are better equipped to fullfill those particular roles.
The differences go to the very core of who we are as men and women; hormonal, physical build & strength,responses to different issues of life.
If I have any understanding of what the office of President involves, than some of these differences, in my opinion, do matter.
I think that the fact that we have to look at thousands of years of history to find a Margeret Thatcher evidences that she was something out of the ordinary.
I simply do not see historical, traditional, vitally necessary roles of women as subordinate.
And, the last 2 paragraphs of my above were tongue in cheek. This is the www. I know that once I put something out there it invites other views.
Will try to stay out of cave today. Maybe get in touch with softer side.
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Feb 7, 2008 13:34:33 GMT -5
Of course parson. We knew this already. We're all getting cabin fever and have nothing better to do than quibble over every little thing that goes through our heads.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Feb 7, 2008 19:29:33 GMT -5
For your sake, Parson, I wholeheartedly hope that one day you get to know women who lead others and blaze trails with their lives so you can put this idea to the test and, hopefully, bury it forever where it should stay due to its inaccuracy and harm to women in society who are every bit as capable as men of doing everything they can do in terms of achievement. There are plenty of strong, capable, and intelligent women who are leaders and innovators out there, and I am so glad that every one of them that I know has come into my life. I still don't know where you get the idea that women are somehow not as capable as men of leadership and achievement as a result of their gender, and apparently you don't either because you still haven't articulated your reasoning (namely how hormones, physical strength, and differential reactions to situations--whatever that means, as you haven't defined it yet--have any impact on a woman's ability to lead and achieve in society). Please come out of whatever cave you are in--and this time, look around enough to notice the many women who are just as strong, capable, and intelligent on average as any otherwise equivalent man.
|
|