A female president??

[Samantha Red]

I was listening to an American author who had written a book about Hilary Clinton the other day, she is promoting her book over here in the UK and it got me thinking. Paying no disregard to political views whatsoever, what does everyone feel about the generic concept of a woman president? Just imagine that your particular party was fielding a female candidate, would you regard it as a good thing or not.

Obviously the direct comparison for us was Margaret Thatcher, who was stronger than any PM since Winston Churchill.

I would be really interested to know the thoughts of all the fiercely intelligent women on PS

 

[door knob solitaire]

Edited to add....sorry I didn't see that you were asking fiercely intelligent women to reply. Missed that part. I guess the intelligent ones are refusing to play in this land mind field. Yikes...I am not in their league. I am only windy and opinionated. But as dumb as they come.


Whoa...you are asking us to step off a cliff here on Political correctness...literally.

To answer your question, if Maggie were running I would have no problem with it. But since she is not, I say No.

My views are more conservative than most...I am a woman...I respect my gender for many reasons. But I do feel there are places and positions we are better suited. I realize my view may detour women's advancement that has been accomplished. That is not my intention. But there are many things I feel a man shouldn't do either.

This is one example...oh boy...it is going to toss me into the fire with many I am sure. My brother is a fireman. He is a big strapping 6'3 250lb or more fine tuned rescue machine. He can pull a bull from the 10th floor to safety and go back for more. He has a coworker who is a woman...no more than 150 lbs from what I have heard...she is out of breath pulling the hose. Now, if I am on the 10th floor needing rescuing I don't give a darn about women's suffrage or bra burning or who is ahead in the poles...I just want to see a strong capable in shape hero. I find that I feel more comfortable in a man doing that position. I would rather know my brother has some capable coworker who can rescue him if a beam fell on him. I don't want Mabeline going in after him. I want Bruno. I realize this is not exactly what you asked for...but it is how I formed my opinion on who is capable. Not sure how that ties into your question other than to say I don't feel a woman should be a fireman. Or a president of a country.

Oh, I have made my bank president cry before. She may be qualified on paper...business woman of the year for 5 years running...but a wronged bank customer shouldn't be capable of drawing tears. I was capable because she was a women in the wrong position. I don't think my tenancy can draw tears out of a man.

Again just an opinion....but my answer is NO.

§

(if should be noted I am not of her party(duh-as if you needed me to tell you that). I think that is only fair to include)

 

[neatfreak]

In general? Yes. I think women are often much better problem solvers than men and would vote for a woman who had shown honor, integrity, and quick thinking without a second thought.

In this election? No, because I don't think the female candidate meets my criteria above! I won't vote for a woman just because she's a woman. I will vote for the candidate that is most qualified in my eyes, regardless of their sex or race.

 

[KimberlyH]

I don''t believe gender should have any influence on the selection of a president; people should vote based on their belief that whomever they support can and will do the best job possible.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 11/22/2007 7:28:53 PM
Author: door knob solitaire
Edited to add....sorry I didn't see that you were asking fiercely intelligent women to reply. Missed that part. I guess the intelligent ones are refusing to play in this land mind field. Yikes...I am not in their league. I am only windy and opinionated. But as dumb as they come.


Whoa...you are asking us to step off a cliff here on Political correctness...literally.

To answer your question, if Maggie were running I would have no problem with it. But since she is not, I say No.

My views are more conservative than most...I am a woman...I respect my gender for many reasons. But I do feel there are places and positions we are better suited. I realize my view may detour women's advancement that has been accomplished. That is not my intention. But there are many things I feel a man shouldn't do either.

This is one example...oh boy...it is going to toss me into the fire with many I am sure. My brother is a fireman. He is a big strapping 6'3 250lb or more fine tuned rescue machine. He can pull a bull from the 10th floor to safety and go back for more. He has a coworker who is a woman...no more than 150 lbs from what I have heard...she is out of breath pulling the hose. Now, if I am on the 10th floor needing rescuing I don't give a darn about women's suffrage or bra burning or who is ahead in the poles...I just want to see a strong capable in shape hero. I find that I feel more comfortable in a man doing that position. I would rather know my brother has some capable coworker who can rescue him if a beam fell on him. I don't want Mabeline going in after him. I want Bruno. I realize this is not exactly what you asked for...but it is how I formed my opinion on who is capable. Not sure how that ties into your question other than to say I don't feel a woman should be a fireman. Or a president of a country.

Oh, I have made my bank president cry before. She may be qualified on paper...business woman of the year for 5 years running...but a wronged bank customer shouldn't be capable of drawing tears. I was capable because she was a women in the wrong position. I don't think my tenancy can draw tears out of a man.

Again just an opinion....but my answer is NO.

§

(if should be noted I am not of her party(duh-as if you needed me to tell you that). I think that is only fair to include)

Here's the thing about female firefighters. A while back they all went into a tizzy about how there weren't enough women on the squads. There used to be a series of physical tests that people had to take, and pass, before becoming a firefighter. Some women felt that these tests were biased against them. So instead of giving up on being firefighters, they demanded "easier" tests. Firefighting is one of those jobs where only the best of the best should be employed.

In other words, I completely agree with you. Some jobs are better left with men.

Edit: Oh, and my personal opinion is that I wouldn't vote for a female right now. Not because I don't think that our nation is ready for a female, but because I don't think OTHER nations are ready for us to have a female.

 

[justageek]

If there were a female candidate that everyone thought was an excellent representative of his or her political party, everyone would vote for her. I think you''re asking whether or not a female candidate CAN be an excellent representative? And my resounding answer to that is "Yes!" How many of our families have been kept together by a strong woman? What makes a man who can''t take care of his family more suited to run the country than a woman who can -- just because of a sex difference?

And DKS -- you''re not being politically incorrect at all!! But just as there are strong, muscular men and weak, incredibly sensitive men, there are women who cry and women who are tough as nails, and generalizing sex statements is tricky. Your statement about wanting Bruno instead of Mabeline to save you is completely legitimate. But that''s a statement about SKILL, not sex differences. Anyone that''s 150 pounds and out of shape will have more difficulty doing heavy lifting than someone who''s fit and 6''3. Your bank president cried and apparently cracked under pressure, but she got to the bank presidency (hopefully) because she was better than the other candidates for the job, male and female. And, she stays there because she is better than the other candidates for the job, male and female. Her crying means that the bank really doesn''t have a great candidate pool. I don''t, however, think her crying says anything about women in general.

I would be comfortable with whoever is president, as long as they got there by earning it and beating all other candidates, "fair and square".

 

[iheartscience]

Wow. How sad that as women, you don''t think another woman could be the President. I don''t even know what to say to that.

And as for other countries not being ready for the U.S. to have a female president, there are plenty of other countries that have female presidents and leaders.

Christ-this thread is depressing and scary. I knew I shouldn''t have opened it.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 11/22/2007 10:23:35 PM
Author: thing2of2
Wow. How sad that as women, you don''t think another woman could be the President. I don''t even know what to say to that.

And as for other countries not being ready for the U.S. to have a female president, there are plenty of other countries that have female presidents and leaders.

To clarify, I definitely think a woman CAN be president, I just wouldn''t vote for her. True, there are other countries that have female leaders, but I''m specifically thinking of the countries that would like to kill us.
The opinion on this issue seems to be about 50/50 in my social circle. I''ve actually been surprised with how many women share the same opinion as DKS and me. With that being said, I still feel uncomfortable when I admit that I feel that way too!

I hope this thread doesn''t get ugly.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

[TravelingGal]

This thread will get ugly, because even though the OP says keep the political views out of it...it''s about politics. And gender roles. Gunpowder''s there...who''s gonna light the match?

Re: Firefighers, I agree with DKS. I say this because my brother is a cop, and feel the same way. I want someone who did well at the academy to back him up. Some women do well, but not many.

 

[Circe]

No offense intended, but ....

(and, yes, I know that any statement begun with that clause is kind of doomed in advance)

... half of the analogy is flawed, and the other half is bigoted (and I''m not using that as a prejorative, just as an assessment).

I''ll agree with Justageek about skill, and not gender, being the deciding factor for firefighters, and agree 100%. Firefighter, police officer, soldier, etc. - these are physically challenging jobs that need to be decided on the basis of capability, not desire: gender shouldn''t be the *deciding* factor, as there are some women (and some men) who are physically unfit for those positions, but gender shouldn''t be the deciding factor in the other direction, either; it shouldn''t be counted against a potential candidate before all the other information has been weighed. The people at the top need to set a base-line standard and stick to it ... sometimes, PC requirements or quotas intervene, but that''s a flaw in the system, and not a part of the model. It *certainly* doesn''t apply to a democratic process, and it doesn''t really fit as a model for a career in politics. Just to illustrate, would anyone here like to be dragged out of a burning building by a senior citizen with a bad heart? No? Does that mean that we should bar Cheney from office?

As for the second part of the analogy concerning the crying bank president ... I''ve seen people of all kinds of background cry. I''ve also seen people of all kinds of backgrounds behave badly in other ways ... rudely, aggressively, violently, and illegally. Not even going into ethnic or racial background, age or creed, I''d say that the majority of transgressors - and by a LOT! - have been of the male persuasion. Would it be ridiculous for me to use that to extrapolate that therefore, all men most be incompetent and easily swayed? Um ... yeah, it would. It would be chauvanism, and it would be bigotry.

I hope this doesn''t come off as a personal attack, as that''s not what I intend AT ALL, but letting this kind of thing pass makes my brain hurt - not because I''m PC, but because the logical dissonance gets under my skin. No pie in the house, alas ... perhaps a nice glass of merlot instead?

 

[Rhea]

The short of it - yes, a female president.

Then again I moved to the more liberal UK rather than having DH live with me in the Southern US for a reason. Seriously, several Western countries have had female leaders. It''s the best person for the job regardless of body parts they were born with (or had surgery to get).

 

[Selkie]

Yes, I think we can and should have a female president. Or a black one. Or a paraplegic one, or gay one. Whatever. If they are qualified to do what the job requires. So what if some countries can''t deal with a US female president? They aren''t the ones electing or being governed by her. I do not understand that argument, at all. This country has been attacked twice in this century, and both times the president was male. Didn''t stop the nutjobs. They might see it as one more ideological strike against us, but how are we supposed to EVER prove that (often times more violent and oppressive) sexism/racism/bigotry is WRONG in other countries, if we can''t escape it here?

 

[asscherisme]

I think its kinda sad and backwards that it is even a debate whether a woman can be qualified to be president. I 100% think a woman can be an effective leader and excellent president.

As far as not being respected by other countries? As if the US is respected now? Not so much.

I hope by the time my girls are adults, this is not even a question anymore because it will have been done.

And I regard a female candiate representing the party I'm a registered voter for a very good thing. A very very good thing. I'm all for a woman president. I think we are overdue.

 

[E B]

Without going into it, as this could get very heated, I absolutely believe a woman can (and should) be president.

 

[bee*]

Our current president and our president before her, are both women. They have both been fine and I think that it''s great that our president is a woman. I don''t think it should come down to gender at all, whoever can do the job better is the one who I will vote for.

 

[tanuki]

Maybe those who doubt that a woman could be a strong leader should watch the DVD of "Elizabeth I" (the Cate Blanchett version or the Helen Mirren version are both excellent). Times were even harder for a woman to be a leader of a nation in those days as there was absolutely no concept of gender equality in any country that she had diplomatic relations with or even in her own country. But she goes down in history as one of the greatest rulers in English history.

It seems sad that we are even having this discussion.

Particularly on the day that Saudi Arabia handed down a sentence of 200 lashes to a woman for going out of her house without a male member of her family with her and therefore allowing herself to be gang raped by seven men. Her sentence was initially 90 lashes but the court increased it because she had the nerve to complain about it to the international media.

Quite frankly, I don''t give a *** what countries like that think of a woman president.

 

[iheartscience]

I'd like to hear what people would have said if the title of this thread was "An African-American president?"

Somehow I don't think anyone would have written that African-Americans are well suited to certain jobs, but not the presidency. Or that they once made their African-American bank president cry, therefore, African-Americans shouldn't be in leadership positions. Or that other countries just aren't ready for us to have an African-American president.

Those statements sound pretty horrible, huh? Bigotry usually does. Think about it the next time you want to dismiss an entire group of people, whether it's because of their race, gender or sexual orientation.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

A woman president could not possibly be any worse than some of the male presidents we have had. The best man for the job is often a woman.

 

[asscherisme]

thing2of2, had the thread been titled with (instead of woman), african american president, gay president, or anyother type of religion/ethnic group etc, my reply and opinion would be bascially the same as for a woman. I wish that a presdient could be elected on leadership ability and intelligence. I don''t think gender or race etc has an effect on someones ability to lead. And as I said that I hope my daughters will see a female president, I would also be happy for my children to see a president be elected for merit, skill, intelligence, and ability to lead without regard to skin color, religion or gender.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 11/23/2007 9:11:37 AM
Author: asscherisme
thing2of2, had the thread been titled with (instead of woman), african american president, gay president, or anyother type of religion/ethnic group etc, my reply and opinion would be bascially the same as for a woman. I wish that a presdient could be elected on leadership ability and intelligence. I don''t think gender or race etc has an effect on someones ability to lead. And as I said that I hope my daughters will see a female president, I would also be happy for my children to see a president be elected for merit, skill, intelligence, and ability to lead without regard to skin color, religion or gender.

I completely agree with you, asscherisme. And Madam B, so true!

 

[zoebartlett]

I also think that as long as a candidate is qualified, it shouldn''t matter whether the candidate is a male or a female. As others have said, if "female" was replaced with "African American" or something else in the title of the thread, I would hope that the response would be the same. I do think that a woman could be a great leader of our country.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 11/23/2007 9:02:28 AM
Author: thing2of2

Those statements sound pretty horrible, huh? Bigotry usually does. Think about it the next time you want to dismiss an entire group of people, whether it''s because of their race, gender or sexual orientation.

Um. Yikes. Obviously you are pretty passionate about this.
I was going to try to defend my reasoning, but I really don''t think it is worth it. The odds are against me in this thread.
I apparently insulted you with my opinion, and now you''ve insulted me by indirectly calling me a bigot. Truce?

I''m sure that as the election nears a lot more political threads will be started. There''s already like 3 in the around the world forum. I think this thread is already out of hand, however it is not up to me to judge. I''m think I''m going to ignore these types of threads in the future...hopefully.

I''m pretty outspoken. I just think in this day and age you''re better off not discussing politics. Too hot a topic!!

 

[Blenheim]

I have absolutely no qualms about a woman/non-white/non-Christian/non-heterosexual/etc president -- I just want whoever''s best for the job.

 

[HollyS]

As long as it is not Clinton or Pelosi or Oprah.

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 11/23/2007 8:24:22 AM
Author: tanuki
Maybe those who doubt that a woman could be a strong leader should watch the DVD of 'Elizabeth I' (the Cate Blanchett version or the Helen Mirren version are both excellent). Times were even harder for a woman to be a leader of a nation in those days as there was absolutely no concept of gender equality in any country that she had diplomatic relations with or even in her own country. But she goes down in history as one of the greatest rulers in English history.

It seems sad that we are even having this discussion.

Quite frankly, I don't give a *** what countries like that think of a woman president.

I agree; it shouldn't matter but I guess it does since we are even debating it.

 

[CrookedRock]

As much as I would like to go on about my opinion. The only thing that I keep thinking is how amazed that a thread like this even exists in a forum like this!!! Really sad...

 

[HollyS]

Date: 11/23/2007 3:25:26 PM
Author: CrookedRock
As much as I would like to go on about my opinion. The only thing that I keep thinking is how amazed that a thread like this even exists in a forum like this!!! Really sad...

I'm not quite sure why you think this is sad.

Reasoned discussion has always been one of the pathways to change and growth; and I don't think anyone has really been unreasonable on here at this point. Debate and discussion are certainly preferable to hording one's opinion and being certain that you and you alone are right. (That's the "proverbial" you, not you personally.)

It is not okay to assume that, because we are women, we would of course support a woman running for the presidency. I would never vote for the first woman candidate just because she is a woman. There will be a woman capable of this job at some point in our future. Not today. There is no viable candidate today. When there is, she will need to have the strength of character exhibited by (for instance) Margaret Thatcher or Golda Maier. She's out there right now, somewhere. We will have a female president in our lifetime; I would prefer that we not elect her in 2008.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 11/22/2007 3:35:55 AM
Author:Samantha Red
I was listening to an American author who had written a book about Hilary Clinton the other day, she is promoting her book over here in the UK and it got me thinking. Paying no disregard to political views whatsoever, what does everyone feel about the generic concept of a woman president? Just imagine that your particular party was fielding a female candidate, would you regard it as a good thing or not.

Obviously the direct comparison for us was Margaret Thatcher, who was stronger than any PM since Winston Churchill.

I would be really interested to know the thoughts of all the fiercely intelligent women on PS

This topic is heated but I honestly don''t think that''s a bad thing. I''m sure we all have different opinions on this matter, but I still think it''s an interesting topic.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 11/23/2007 11:20:40 AM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 11/23/2007 9:02:28 AM
Author: thing2of2

Those statements sound pretty horrible, huh? Bigotry usually does. Think about it the next time you want to dismiss an entire group of people, whether it''s because of their race, gender or sexual orientation.

Um. Yikes. Obviously you are pretty passionate about this.
I was going to try to defend my reasoning, but I really don''t think it is worth it. The odds are against me in this thread.
I apparently insulted you with my opinion, and now you''ve insulted me by indirectly calling me a bigot. Truce?

I''m sure that as the election nears a lot more political threads will be started. There''s already like 3 in the around the world forum. I think this thread is already out of hand, however it is not up to me to judge. I''m think I''m going to ignore these types of threads in the future...hopefully.

I''m pretty outspoken. I just think in this day and age you''re better off not discussing politics. Too hot a topic!!

Luckystar, I began the other political threads (Joe Biden and Who do you want to see as our next president?) simply so discussions could be started on who we support and why. I like learning more about the issues the candidates are debating about, as well as the candidates themselves.

 

[CrookedRock]

Date: 11/23/2007 4:07:42 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 11/23/2007 3:25:26 PM
Author: CrookedRock
As much as I would like to go on about my opinion. The only thing that I keep thinking is how amazed that a thread like this even exists in a forum like this!!! Really sad...

I''m not quite sure why you think this is sad.

Reasoned discussion has always been one of the pathways to change and growth; and I don''t think anyone has really been unreasonable on here at this point. Debate and discussion are certainly preferable to hording one''s opinion and being certain that you and you alone are right. (That''s the ''proverbial'' you, not you personally.)

It is not okay to assume that, because we are women, we would of course support a woman running for the presidency. I would never vote for the first woman candidate just because she is a woman. There will be a woman capable of this job at some point in our future. Not today. There is no viable candidate today. When there is, she will need to have the strength of character exhibited by (for instance) Margaret Thatcher or Golda Maier. She''s out there right now, somewhere. We will have a female president in our lifetime; I would prefer that we not elect her in 2008.

I never said that I only I was right, and that was why I was reserving my opinion. I just always felt that that the women in this forum are strong intelligent women, and to hear some say that they would never vote for a woman saddens me. Argentina, for example, just elected an amazingly intelligent, not to muntion beautiful, woman as their president.

I completely agree with your second paragraph on voting for the right person for the job. In no way, shape, or form, do I think that the current female candidate is nearly qualified for the job. I would never vote for someone just because of gender. I will always vote on who is best suited for the job. So having said that, I think you mis-guessed what my opinion was... I do hope to see a female president in my lifetime, and I truly think we will, but hopefully not next year!