Women in Politics

[spot]

Diuretic;514996 wrote: Oh and if you wear socks with sandals don't even think about posting in here.That's just plain unfair, and I know perfectly well who told you about it too.

I tried thinking of anything a male politician could do that a female one would simply wimp out on, and my memory dredged up a possible example. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Byron Low Tax Looper:

Knoxville News-Sentinel (Tennessee) 20th October 1998: 'Low Tax' Looper to run unopposed; Burks' slaying leaves void in Senate race

Because of the slaying of Sen. Tommy Burks, a man facing corruption charges will apparently have no opponent for election to the state Senate on the Nov. 3 ballot. Putnam County Tax Assessor Byron "Low Tax" Looper won the Republican nomination to oppose Democrat Burks without opposition in the Aug. 6 primary while facing a 14-count criminal indictment plus a $ 1.2 million civil lawsuit filed by a former girlfriend.

Looper, who did not return phone calls Monday, has been accused of reducing tax assessments in exchange for campaign contributions. In the lawsuit, Terry Guess of Cookeville alleges Looper forced her to have sex, caused her to become pregnant and "used the power of his office to fraudulently transfer ownership of her home to his name."Byron didn't end up winning the State Senate race. He's serving a life sentence instead since it turned out he'd murdered the incumbent himself, presumably in the hope that he'd clear his way to office if he was the only remaining candidate in the election.

That, I suggest, is not how a woman would have organized her political career.

[spot]

Diuretic;515020 wrote: BTW spot - I am beginning a "koan is innocent" campaign.Jesus, mate, that is so much the wrong end of the stick! Strewth!!

[koan]

Diuretic;515028 wrote: Koan!!!! Help!!!! Spot's channelling again!!!!!

Waddya mean "channelling who?" Sounds like he's channelling Bazza McKenzie, Crocodile Dundee and our cricket team. Yes, the blokes team why do you ask?


I'd say you had him on the run with your own uncanny ability to see the socks and sandals right down to the colours! I'm still giggling.

Yes, I'm innocent. From head to toe.

I encourage that thread you suggested.

As to the question of the thread, women who wish to enter typically male dominated professions and who wish to succeed on a high level, overdevelop their masculine side. In business, I dread the female VP. They are whores of Satan. I find successful men much more relaxed and capable of compassion than a women in a position of power.

[RedGlitter]

I'll take a woman president almost any day...but it won't be Hillary, that's for sure.



As long as the woman in question can do her job without having to act like a man, we'll have little problem. It's when they have to pretend they're partners in the good old boys' club that trouble starts. See: Hillary.

[Accountable]

RedGlitter;515186 wrote: I'll take a woman president almost any day...but it won't be Hillary, that's for sure.



As long as the woman in question can do her job without having to act like a man, we'll have little problem. It's when they have to pretend they're partners in the good old boys' club that trouble starts. See: Hillary.
*whistles* :yh_clap Standing O!! :yh_clap *whistles*

[Lulu2]

Any woman who's been in management within a large organization knows you DO have to play by the mens' rules, because THEY WROTE THE RULES! And any woman who ignores this will not succeed.

It's easy to stand back and think "Oh, I'd never do THAT!" Chances are that you would, if you wanted to be perceived as a team member and as an effective manager.

Now--is it possible for women to bring a unique perspective and touch to management (and I'm going to include politics here)? Of course!

There's an old management book about why women don't always find their way easily into management/politics and its premise is that women didn't grow up playing football and other team sports. (Things are changing in that area, and I know it, but this book was written for women who were first entering management when affirmative action programs opened many doors.)

Men who play football know that, sometimes, it's all about the win and nobody cares if someone cheated--as long as they got away with it and the game was won. Men who play football know that, often, you WILL cooperate and strategize with someone you genuinely don't like, because you both want to win the game.

Men who play football know that a team member who talks about "feelings" and who cries when being appraised unfairly will be dropped from that team--and rightly so.

A friend and I were chatting about the common ancestors we share--chimps and bonobos. Chimps, being male led, are in the middle of a constant struggle for dominance among those males. (Sound familiar?) Bonobos, being in a female hierarchy, are usually living much more peaceful lives. Perhaps we need to tone down our "chimp" instincts and take another look at the bonobo?

Women, as bearers of new life, would be far less likely (in my opinion) to engage other women in warfare. Women, who've grown up with lesser physical capabilities (IN GENERAL) are much more likely to take a collaborative approach, rather than a physical one.

I believe statistics've shown that females develop and use linguistic skills far more adeptly and often than males. (Look at the troubles we have with interpersonal skills..."WHY WON'T MEN TALK TO US?" :-5 Etc.) That fact alone makes me wish the UN was staffed completely by women because there'd be less shoe-banging and more moving toward peaceful solutions.

The media and public opinion are always so hard on women in politics...accusing them of "acting like men." What the hell does that mean? Being firm? Playing the game? What are they supposed to do...bake cookies?

Once we have enough of them in the job, they can slowly and carefully create new rules. Until then...they'll never survive if they don't "wear the suit."

[abbey]

Diuretic;514996 wrote: Did Maggie Thatcher have a pair?

Of pearl earrings I mean.
Dunno,:-2

But she certainly had a pair of balls.

[Lulu2]

So--what exactly IS it which offends people to the point that they complain about a woman "acting like a man?" I'm quite serious in this question.

Lyndon Johnson was apparently a rather skilled politician who managed his career well enough to become Vice President. If Nancy Pelosi did EXACTLY the same things old Lyndon did....would she be criticized? Why?

(I'm deliberately not bringing Hillary Clinton into this, as she's obviously unpopular with some people here. If you can use her as an example without launching us into a "HATE HILLARY' thread...please do.)

[Lulu2]

Thanks, Diuretic. (Good topic, by the way.)

Women in my organization were sometimes criticized for wearing "power suits," in an effort to fit in with "the boys." And yet, we all knew that people who think seriously DRESS seriously, in order to be TAKEN seriously!

Honestly, I think this "don't act like a MAN" business puts women at a real disadvantage...we're either "too tough" or "not tough enough."

[Lulu2]

(I always thought so, too! Perhaps it hides deeper feelings?)

[Accountable]

Gerald Ford made it to Speaker of the House (I believe) by using his political power and persuasion with a softer touch. Maybe that's how we (society) would expect a woman leader to act.

[Lulu2]

How about this idea? A woman uses the same approach as a man as she moves toward a different goal?

[Accountable]

Lulu2;515910 wrote: How about this idea? A woman uses the same approach as a man as she moves toward a different goal?
While remembering everybody's birthday?

[guppy]

I know this will not be popular but as long as it is men who go to the front lines and give their lives i do not want to see a woman president.....i think it should be a man.....always

[Lulu2]

Not DELIBERATELY!

[koan]

I rebel against this idea that all women are innately nurturing. It just isn't true. What is spoken of as "womanly" qualities is the gentle, compassionate side that is identified with woman. There is also the conniving, plotting bitch. Women are capable of both. Men use their networks to get ahead and women use their own. Both sexes can be devious and cruel. Women just look better in makeup. They hide their hideous dark side.

The game of politics, or big business, can not be played without a strategy. It is because of the double standards that still exist that women must become tougher to survive and make it. The ones who rise to the top are more capable of heinous acts than most of the men. It's what I've seen. Find me one exception and I'll tell you she's an exception.

[Nomad]

Find me one exception and I'll tell you she's an exception.

__________________

Mother Theresa

[koan]

Nomad;515983 wrote: Find me one exception and I'll tell you she's an exception.

__________________

Mother Theresa


Let me guess. She secretly ran Microsoft?

[Nomad]

koan;515984 wrote: Let me guess. She secretly ran Microsoft?




The game of politics, or big business, can not be played without a strategy. It is because of the double standards that still exist that women must become tougher to survive and make it. The ones who rise to the top are more capable of heinous acts than most of the men.





The Catholics are political and big business

[koan]

Nomad;515993 wrote: The game of politics, or big business, can not be played without a strategy. It is because of the double standards that still exist that women must become tougher to survive and make it. The ones who rise to the top are more capable of heinous acts than most of the men.





The Catholics are political and big business


She was after the sainthood all along. She knew how to play her cards.:wah:

[Lulu2]

"The ones who rise to the top are more capable of heinous acts than most of the men."

And what stitistics prove this rather specious statement? Have there been polls or records kept?

Any woman who rises to a high political or business position has struggled with the same issues men do and has possibly had to overcome additional difficulties with prejudice/suspicious eyes cast her way. I hardly think the capability of HEINOUS ACTS is automatic or even probable, unless you presume that's a job requirement for anyone in such a position.

[Lulu2]

(SNAG? What's a SNAG?)

There's ALWAYS the schadenfreude when women or even newcomers are involved. Look at what happened to Hillary Clinton! She was doomed by public opinion before she even got a chance...still is, actually.

"Uppity" women...they've replaced "uppity" blacks.

[Lulu2]

" a simpering, sooky, quasi-male who is sucking up only to get laid - "

++++++++++++++ Say no more! That's a horrifying image....

I hope it's NOT a gender thing, but it'll take awhile to see, won't it? I'm still waiting for examples of these "heinous" acts performed by women who've risen to the top.

[BabyRider]

guppy;515937 wrote: I know this will not be popular but as long as it is men who go to the front lines and give their lives i do not want to see a woman president.....i think it should be a man.....always
It's damn popular with me, Guppy. If that psycho bag Hilary gets ANOTHER 8 years as Prez, I'm moving the hell out of this country.

Her or any other woman.

[Lulu2]

I'm interested in your reasoning, BabyR! You're a strong, capable woman...why would you object to another strong, capable woman taking the reins of the Presidency?

[BabyRider]

Lulu2;517134 wrote: I'm interested in your reasoning, BabyR! You're a strong, capable woman...why would you object to another strong, capable woman taking the reins of the Presidency?
Because a huge percentage of women are NOT strong and capable. They are emotional, reactive, and one good swat of PMS would have some goofy broad hitting "The Button."

[Lulu2]

Well....in the first place, any woman likely to be elected President would probably be past the hormonal surges, assuming they really exist. But, seriously, your view is that physically and emotionally, men are more capable of making important decisions than women?

[Mystery]

Unfortunately, I can't remember the original basis for what I'm about to put here, but there was a "study" (I have that in parenthesis, because I use the term study loosely) that comprises basically one or two questions regarding how men and women handle the problem of "the greater good". One of the questions goes something like this...

Imagine you were president of the US and your child was abducted. Terrorists have this child, and their demands are that you release 10 other terrorists or your child will perish. What would you do?

The overwhelming answer provided by women was that they'd do what it took to get their child back. And of course, the commander in chief has to consider the good of his people above all else.

That says to me that emotion plays too big a part in the life of a lot of women. Hell, I recognize just how much emotion plays a part in my own.

Once again, I apologize for not knowing the source of this, as it was something included in a lesson from one of my psyc classes last year (I have a prof that loves to push that men vs. women card)

[koan]

Whether we like it or not, there are differences between the world that women live in and that of men. Studies have looked at differences in the brain centres when processing various information or thoughts and others focus on social interaction or mental processing of events. Whichever direction you approach it from, men and women live, work and play differently.

This thread seeks to determine whether women would be better in leadership roles traditionally held by men. Better presumably in the sense of bringing a greater sense of well being to the society or business to which she is the leader. There is this idea that women are more compassionate, empathetic and/or sensitive to the needs of others than men are. This is just the stereotype of how women are socially conditioned. It is very loosely based in reality when considered an innate quality. If we are talking about changing the current structure of society then we must abandon our other preconceptions as well. Ideas of introducing a matriarchal type hierarchy in politics is absurd within a system designed by and for men. The entire political system would have to be restructured to reflect how women would have built it. But that is not an idea worth pursuing as I think the consensus is that we want women and men to live together, not one ruled by the other.

So now we have to look at how women have reacted to their increasing power within the formerly oppressive society. For that we must look at the present and the new breed of woman that we have produced. One of the big, pressing issues in our schools and workplaces is bullying. The school bully was classically seen as the large, thickly built and dumbish boy who would physically beat on other boys. Female bullies went undetected for a long time. Female bullying is much subtler and it has become apparent that it happens on a larger scale and often to a much greater degree than the social terrorizing employed by men. The attention being directed towards the conniving and atrocities of women, especially towards their own sex, is not a backlash phenomenon. Teen suicide and the occasional murder have convinced society that we do, in fact, have a problem. This is not a behaviour exclusive to the female but it does happen on a concerning level.

Lulu wanted some supporting studies for my opinion. I offer various professional opinions and findings from the article "My boss, the bitch"



Melbourne psychologist Evelyn Field says women bully just as much as men do, "but because more bullies are managers and more managers are male, more bullying is done by men. But you certainly get a lot of bullying from women and sometimes they behave more aggressively than males."

...

In her recently released book, Catfight, which explores female competitiveness, US author Leora Tanenbaum found that "working women are expected to be aggressive and masculine. Worried about being perceived as a mediocre or incompetent worker, many women go out of their way to prove they are not too emotional or passive, and can be more aggressive and demanding than any man."

She points to groundbreaking research undertaken in the '70s, which she says is still relevant today. The researchers — psychologists Graham Staines, Carol Tavrid and Toby Epstein Jayaratne — coined the term "Queen Bee" to describe a token woman at a high level in a corporate environment.

Based on questionnaire responses from 20,000 women, they found that "the Queen Bee who is successful in a male-dominated field identifies with the male colleagues who are her reference group, rather than with the diffuse concept of women as a class . . . (she) thereby disassociates herself from the fundamental issues of equality for women, while reassuring her male colleagues that she is not of that militant ilk."

Tanenbaum also found that professional women were often hardest on their own sex.

"Many professional women confess they prefer male rather than female supervisors. They complain that women at work refuse to share power, or withhold information, or are too concerned about receiving credit for every little thing they accomplish, or are cold toward underlings (male and female alike). In such complaints they use the word 'bitch' a lot," she says.

...

Evelyn Field said female bullies were often more subtle in their behaviour than their male counterparts. "Women are usually less physical, they would use techniques such as excluding others, over-supervising and controlling and verbal abuse."

Ricky Nowak, a workplace communications training specialist and head of the company, Confident Communications, says women's bullying is "often quieter, behind closed doors, over the phone, via curt emails, or through giving their staff a sense of . . . (being overwhelmed), for example: asking women with families to stay behind when they don't really have to do so."

Nowak runs leadership groups for professional women and says she has had many disclosures from women admitting they had bullied their colleagues.

"It was behaviour such as intimidating others, standing over them, giving colleagues the silent treatment and so on."

...

Tim Field [prominent British anti-bullying campaigner] believes the stereotypical view of men as aggressive and women as nurturing often prevents the female serial bully from being seen for what she is: "A sociopath in a skirt."

[Accountable]

*setting my Tivo*