Women ruling thw world? Watch

High VOLTAGE
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
So i've been hearing this a lot lately 'If women ruled the world (as in ruling countries) then they would do better than men because all men are inherently violent and aggressive'
I think it's utter stupidity, your gender does not matter, what matter is your morals and ethics. There have been good male leaders and bad male leaders. There have been good female leaders and bad female leaders.

Look at some of the war warmongering women in positions of power today e.g. Merkel and Clinton.

Discuss.
6
reply
icancount23
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Yeah man, they can't even play to 5 sets
10
reply
Strawberrycayk
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3


Women already rule the world. (Apparently)

Edit: It was a joke -.- Lighten up people, jheeze.
7
reply
WillowLeaves
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
I've also heard this: "If women ruled the world, there would be no wars, just a lot of countries not talking to each other". I don't think this is actually true, but it shows that each gender has certain traits that are seen as negative and not cooperative. Furthermore, I don't think women ruling the world would make that much difference. For example, Madeleine Albright had a famously cold blooded reaction to the "collateral damage" associated with US troops - so arguably, since she's a woman, she should have been really sad and negative about it. On the other hand, we saw what the 1938 appeasement of Hitler did and how it turned out to be futile - and yet all the people involved were men, so arguably they were supposed to launch straight into attack mode instead of appeasement? I think both genders make mistakes because ultimately it comes down to individuals and small groups making decisions, not the stereotypical mass of all the gender traits. The world would probably be different now if women had always been in power but I doubt it would be any better.
0
reply
High VOLTAGE
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#5
(Original post by WillowLeaves)
I've also heard this: "If women ruled the world, there would be no wars, just a lot of countries not talking to each other". I don't think this is actually true, but it shows that each gender has certain traits that are seen as negative and not cooperative. Furthermore, I don't think women ruling the world would make that much difference. For example, Madeleine Albright had a famously cold blooded reaction to the "collateral damage" associated with US troops - so arguably, since she's a woman, she should have been really sad and negative about it. On the other hand, we saw what the 1938 appeasement of Hitler did and how it turned out to be futile - and yet all the people involved were men, so arguably they were supposed to launch straight into attack mode instead of appeasement? I think both genders make mistakes because ultimately it comes down to individuals and small groups making decisions, not the stereotypical mass of all the gender traits. The world would probably be different now if women had always been in power but I doubt it would be any better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF-U1M3_oWk

The video above sums it up quite nicely.

And yeah the world would probably not be better off, because once in power it doesn't matter what gender you are, power will turn you corrupt eventually.
0
reply
User414413
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
I don't necessarily think it will be better but women are generally less aggressive and violent than men, this isn't because of biology (might play a part considering effects of testosterone and aggression) but socialization. I don't really think it's fair to merely proclaim gender doesn't matter when we live a society where we assign gender roles and one of these gender roles is being caring/loving and that's commonly assigned to women.

Here's a evolutionary biologist who lays out why women rulers would lead to less war. http://www.afww.org/BiologicalDifferences.html Not sure if I agree with it but it's relevant and interesting.
0
reply
rad_student
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
I don't necessarily think it will be better but women are generally less aggressive and violent than men, this isn't because of biology (might play a part considering effects of testosterone and aggression) but socialization. I don't really think it's fair to merely proclaim gender doesn't matter when we live a society where we assign gender roles and one of these gender roles is being caring/loving and that's commonly assigned to women.

Here's a evolutionary biologist who lays out why women rulers would lead to less war. http://www.afww.org/BiologicalDifferences.html Not sure if I agree with it but it's relevant and interesting.
I have just been using researched stats to show that women are more aggressive than men at http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...1#post38670691.

"286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600." Or look at high no. of DV between lesbians - biological or women can't be together elsewhere as well?; compared to gay/straight wo/men.

The biggest killer of offspring is 'women acting alone' (not father alone or F+M together), so the father invests/sacrifices for women & children. Taken from your link "She makes clear that women are aggressive beings, that they create dominance hierarchies and defend them. And most remarkably, women under a variety of social and physical pressures will abandon or even kill their offspring, something almost never seen with other primate females.iv"
Also from your link "for many male primates, including men, social stability is not as high a priority as it is for females" - that's because the higher the status the better the chance of mating with a desirable female & having offspring. I think 80% of world's women reproduce, but is it 40-50% of men; i.e. if their status is no good like genetics or ability to provide then their genes die with them; that's how this gynocentric society developing. Women get the men to act violently, they love the control - u know pick a fight with a guy & get bf to fight it out (choosers & competitors).
0
reply
User414413
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
(Original post by rad_student)
I have just been using researched stats to show that women are more aggressive than men at http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...1#post38670691.

"286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600." Or look at high no. of DV between lesbians - biological or women can't be together elsewhere as well?; compared to gay/straight wo/men.

The biggest killer of offspring is 'women acting alone' (not father alone or F+M together), so the father invests/sacrifices for women & children. Taken from your link "She makes clear that women are aggressive beings, that they create dominance hierarchies and defend them. And most remarkably, women under a variety of social and physical pressures will abandon or even kill their offspring, something almost never seen with other primate females.iv"
Also from your link "for many male primates, including men, social stability is not as high a priority as it is for females" - that's because the higher the status the better the chance of mating with a desirable female & having offspring. I think 80% of world's women reproduce, but is it 40-50% of men; i.e. if their status is no good like genetics or ability to provide then their genes die with them; that's how this gynocentric society developing. Women get the men to act violently, they love the control - u know pick a fight with a guy & get bf to fight it out (choosers & competitors).
Doesn't really show women are more aggressive than men because you are only factoring one output of aggressiveness i.e. within the context of relationships. Would give more thorough answer but tired as fuaaaaarrrk.
0
reply
Dark Horse
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
This has to be the worst idea ever. Trusting the welfare of all to one of these illogical and volatile creatures? Pffftt.
2
reply
rad_student
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
(Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
Doesn't really show women are more aggressive than men because you are only factoring one output of aggressiveness i.e. within the context of relationships. Would give more thorough answer but tired as fuaaaaarrrk.
If not involved with others then ALONE? You mean women beat themselves up less or their environment, or suicide? What factors do you mean?
(>70% suicide is by male BTW)
I was just linking your link with real life examples of aggressivenes - I thought I was going to disagree with the link, but I thought it disproved you.

Actually I already mentioned Gynocentric, i.e. (Wiki) placing female human beings or the feminine point of view at the center of one's world view. You see for milleniums women have been placed as the most important thing for a town/city's survival (look at all the health checks that women get, hence die later than men). Some women already suffer from apex fallacy, if more were in charge...? When you think of equality it will means the focus will be on equal outcomes with positive discrimination when women don't do well, if men fail then its tough u r not good enough.

There will be more female benefits & female spaces, expanding from female-only gyms, etc. Women view men as disposable appliances, as what can he do for me. I could see masculinity being demonised with feelings of men r more violent, then laws passed based on these gut feeling etc. especially on rape & men only needed for their labour & sperm. I think Sweden is mainly ruled by women judging by what's happening there. Ultimately power corrupts.

I'm going to sleep now, feeling sick wake up for 12!
0
reply
freddy2222
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
(Original post by High VOLTAGE)
So i've been hearing this a lot lately 'If women ruled the world (as in ruling countries) then they would do better than men because all men are inherently violent and aggressive'
I think it's utter stupidity, your gender does not matter, what matter is your morals and ethics. There have been good male leaders and bad male leaders. There have been good female leaders and bad female leaders.

Look at some of the war warmongering women in positions of power today e.g. Merkel and Clinton.

Discuss.
i have heard some big bussiness women say on the apprentice that they dont like to get lots of women in groups as it is bad for business due to in fighting.
1
reply
Historophilia
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
I really don't buy the whole idea that "if women an the world there would be no war" thing. For a start plenty of female leaders take their countries into war or engage in some sabre rattling.

Margaret Thatcher took Britain to war, Indira Ghandi took India to war with Pakistan.

And today, look at Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, not sure you could call her un-war-like.

Personally I'd rather not have the world run by either gender, I'd rather it was run by both together.
2
reply
Historophilia
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by robin22391)
i have heard some big bussiness women say on the apprentice that they dont like to get lots of women in groups as it is bad for business due to in fighting.
No offence but genuinely competent and successful business people don't go on the apprentice. The so called business people who go on these shows are a joke.

I'd take anything said by these people with a large spoonful of salt.
0
reply
Miraclefish
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 years ago
#14
Clearly the person who wrote this hasn't seen women thumping seven shades of something out of each other over a lad outside the local 'nitespot' at 3am...

Both genders are equal. In their ability to create wonderful, inspiring and trusted leaders... and utter cretins.
3
reply
High VOLTAGE
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by Miraclefish)
Clearly the person who wrote this hasn't seen women thumping seven shades of something out of each other over a lad outside the local 'nitespot' at 3am...

Both genders are equal. In their ability to create wonderful, inspiring and trusted leaders... and utter cretins.
LOL no i haven't but i agree women can be just as bad as men, if not worse. I'm the one being told that they are peaceful and caring and would turn the world into a pretty little place.
0
reply
rad_student
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
(Original post by High VOLTAGE)
LOL no i haven't but i agree women can be just as bad as men, if not worse. I'm the one being told that they are peaceful and caring and would turn the world into a pretty little place.
Really, who is telling you? Do u think they r either academically or worldly knowledgeable? Is it just a group having fun, or being idealistic/fantasy?
You are not wrong, but u r not equally right for the reasons given above by others.
0
reply
fordfiesta
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
What must be remembered is that the socialisation of gender (although there are slight biological influences, citation pending) leads men to feel they need to be more aggressive and assertive, with women more loving, caring and passive. However, under a sort of 'matriarchal' society, the whole dynamic of these gender relations would be edited. Thus, the stereotypical view of women would not exist in a matriarchy. Therefore, it is illogical to suggest that war would be prevented in this scenario.

To agree with another post above, you could hardly call Argentina's female president a pacifist...
0
reply
Kiss
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 years ago
#18
(Original post by Strawberrycayk)


Women already rule the world. (Apparently)
Nah.
0
reply
Kiss
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 years ago
#19
(Original post by Strawberrycayk)


Women already rule the world. (Apparently)
Nah.
0
reply
Busby_Babe
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 years ago
#20
If women ruled the world they wouldn't declare war on their enemies, they'd just go to the UN behind their back and ***** to all the other nations.
2
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (10)
6.71%
They might tell the bully (16)
10.74%
I don't think they'd understand (27)
18.12%
It might lead to more bullying (55)
36.91%
There's nothing they could do (41)
27.52%

Watched Threads

View All