• tim wood
    9.2k
    At times it seems to me that our colloquys on politics sometimes - often - take on a Dante-esque aspect as we chew each other up. That started for me a train of thought that seems both curative and restorative, i.e., good to reflect upon. It strikes me to let it stop at this station to see if anyone cares to get on.

    Women heads of state, in whatever form. I find I cannot think of a bad one, and those I think of seem to me great. At first thought three come to mind. Queen Elizabeth, Australian PM Julia Gillard, New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern. And there are more than a few. Before 1900, though, they're almost certainly Queens or Empresses.

    Ambrose Bierce observed that a Queen is "a woman by whom the realm is ruled when there is a king, and through whom it is ruled when there is not." Maybe, but they all seem to have done good, and done it well. Add to the list?
  • frank
    15.7k
    Katherine 2 of Russia, Hatshepsut of Egypt, Empress Dowager Cixi of China
  • Frank Apisa
    2.1k


    Bierce was a genius.

    I have written a couple of published op ed pieces that advocate for requiring each state here in the US to send one male senator and one female.

    Females, in general, seem (at least to me) to do a better job of "running" things.
  • B G Upadh
    9
    I have no understanding or data about how to be they run a country better, But through my study on women, i am very much sure if women is in the driving seats of the human civilization, we would not have any of the world war or less current conflicts.
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    May I welcome you to TPF! And what a great way to start!
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    I have written a couple of published op ed pieces that advocate for requiring each state here in the US to send one male senator and one female.Frank Apisa

    An excellent idea! Probably needs an amendment, though. But the states severally could do it each by itself. Somehow I don't see NJ as being first, though.
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    In the OP I neglected to add an invitation for added comment. No doubt I can google, but would you add your take?
  • B G Upadh
    9
    Thanks, i have been long looking for a discussion forum like this. Lets see what good it can be for me.:smile:
  • Frank Apisa
    2.1k
    Somehow I don't see NJ as being first, though.tim wood

    Neither do I.

    And I don't think California is ready for that either.
  • Hanover
    12.8k
    I have written a couple of published op ed pieces that advocate for requiring each state here in the US to send one male senator and one female.Frank Apisa

    I think we should have a biological male, biological female, trans male, trans female, asexual, fluid sexual, homosexual man, heterosexual female, homosexual trans female... from each state. We'll need a lot more chairs. We might need one person of each race, sex, gender, nationality, and region too. Gonna need a lot of chairs.

    Anyway, big thumbs up for the idea!
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Helen of Troy and the Trojan War :chin:

    Women are good, good enough to start a war.
  • A Seagull
    615
    Women are good, good enough to start a war.TheMadFool

    I remember seeing a cartoon long ago of Golda Meir and Indira Ghandi, each with a machine gun in her hands, with the by-line : "Women's work is never done'.
  • I like sushi
    4.8k
    I don’t quite follow your line of thinking here?

    For starters wars and conflicts around the globe have dramatically decreased over the past century. You’ve made a sweeping statement that has no supporting evidence.

    Men tend to be more aggressive (speaking statistically - but the difference isn’t huge). So that would possibly back up your claim. Given that there have been very few women leaders and that currently we’re living in one of, if not the, most peaceful period of modern history (last 500 years or so) I don’t see how this indicates women would’ve made any significant difference if they were in positions of leadership or not - Thatcher still went to war and so did Elizabeth I, but that isn’t a true reflection of who they were only the problems they were faced with in the times they lived.

    If you have, as you say, ‘no understanding or data’ regarding how women run a country in anyway different from a man (if you had the data it would only represent a small slice of reality) and then say you’re ‘very much sure’ either way seems a little preposterous don’t you think?

    I don’t honestly think having men or women in leadership makes any significant difference, yet during our current time it does have a societal impact on countries where equal opportunities are not currently present. In the far future I doubt anyone will care much about whether or not their leader is male or female, and I think that attitude is fairly well established in many modern societies already.
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    Helen of Troy and the Trojan War :chin:
    Women are good, good enough to start a war.
    TheMadFool
    *sigh* so clever. in the same way wood starts fires, yes?
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    *sigh* so clever. in the same way wood starts fires, yes?tim wood

    :smile:
  • Frank Apisa
    2.1k

    Thanks. And thanks for the spoof, too. I got a good, and much needed laugh at it this morning.:smile:
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.