It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's Time For a Woman President. Or Is It?

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
I have been pondering this issue quite a lot lately and more so because of the almost given inevitability of a female Clinton in the big office. The question being why do I keep hearing that it's about time we have a woman at the helm? What's the reasoning behind this line of thought and is it going to be any different than a man in the chair?

I highly doubt it. And so on to my reasons as to why I say this.

Women are not immune to corruption so what makes them a better fit? Quite frankly, women are just as prone to greed, lies, corruption, murder, violence, psychotic tendencies, blood-lust and any other negative traits that their counterparts possess. And why wouldn’t they be just as capable of these traits? They’re human right?

I have seen it here on ATS, the MSM and in the real World where some actually believe that a woman should be President because it’s all about equality or a woman is more prone to peaceful outcomes. The one that gets me are those that want a woman Prez. because we’ve had a black man finally take the seat and the next MUST be a woman so that all people have been represented fairly.

Forget the gender issue here because if women want to be recognized as equal to men then we have to look at the entire human being as just that, human. Not man vs woman. And doing so we have to give equal acknowledgement to both sexes being human with all it entails. Many like to argue the point that women are the softer sex with a higher leaning towards compassion, love, empathy etc but it just isn’t so.

Let me give a few examples of our so-called softer sex in positions of power:

1. Susan Rice: Rice blatantly lied about the State Department failure to prevent the Benghazi Massacre. This is only one instance of course.

2. Kathleen Sebelius: She is guilty of violating the Hatch Act and using her official capacity to help get Obama re-elected.

3. Maxine Waters: This Congresswoman funneled millions of dollars to a bank in which she and her husband held shares. The House Ethics Committee made the controversial decision to clear Waters of wrongdoing (no surprise that corruption and scandal plagued the investigation).

4. Janet Napolitano: Most Americans support border control. They believe it is the government’s duty to prevent illegal immigration. The United States Secretary of Homeland thinks differently. Last year she gave blanket amnesty to almost one million illegal immigrants with one stroke of her pen.

Hillary Clinton: Sorry but there just isn’t enough space to list her criminal doings and quite frankly if I have to list it, you haven’t been paying enough attention.
More here: www.returnofkings.com...

One comment caught my attention here:

Women and men in politics are equally corrupt, equally vile, equally stupid, EXCEPT:
There is one difference between men and women in politics. Men care for and protect women and children. Men are programmed by a million years of evolution to automatically unconsciously make sure that they care for women and children.

So if men run the government, they may totally screw up, but they will always eventually make sure that women get a decent deal.
Women on the other hand don't care about men one bit. Men's welfare doesn't even appear on their radar screen. It's like a dead zone. Women only care about women and children.

So if you have a lot of women politicians, it is a mathematically inevitable that those women will relentlessly vote more and more benefits to women. Men politicians will ALWAYS go along with them, because men can't help it, they are programmed to help women first.


Quite the statement and if looked at it from a human point of view it’s addressing out most basic DNA programming as male and female.

We can also look at an issue that I have touched on in a few other threads but never expanded upon. And that is when we finally get a woman in the chair will we have one that will want to do exactly as her predecessors, act the same, make the same decisions. Basically try to not stand out as a woman but as a President. Or...will she want to shake everything up because she is the most powerful person in the World AND a woman? Will she make decisions with the intent of proving herself capable as a woman leader? And will these decisions be sexist?

Something else to ponder: “Edward Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire." In it, this 18th century historian, a contemporary of Ben Franklin, remarked that women rulers in the ancient world shared a common flaw - they took matters of state as personal. In other words, they could be influenced emotionally.”

But let’s take a look at another angle:


“In a study examining 157 countries over a nine-year span researchers from Rice University in Houston, Texas have determined that female politicians in democratic governments are less likely to be corrupt.
Justin Esarey, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Rice, aided by Gina Chirillo, program assistant for the Central and West Africa team at the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs in Washington, D.C., studied female leaders from 1998 to 2007 in "'Fairer Sex’ or Purity Myth? Corruption, Gender and Institutional Context".


The study cited recent research indicating lower perceptions of corruption and lower evidence of corruption involving female politicians. This disparity seemed to stem from stronger pressure on women to conform to the status quo, according to Erasey.
The researchers stated that female politicians are consistently less corrupt than male politicians in institutions that stigmatized corruption.

But the study theorized that females in government are more likely to participate in corruption in situations where it is more expected or condoned. Esarey found that female politicians were equally likely to engage in corrupt behavior as males in autocracies.” occrp.org...

So, more likely to be corrupt in a situation where it is expected or even condoned? What is that saying about a man or woman in the most corrupted chair in the World? No difference whatsoever. Women will be exactly the same POS leaders as men have been. This makes a lot of sense to me as I mentioned the human condition. We are no different when it comes down to holding a position of power.

Again, I went further than I intended in writing this but I wanted to hear from others as to whether or not we are in for the same or worse with a woman at the helm. Personally, I believe that sex does not matter if we have an actual human being in the chair. Good or bad, corruptible or not. It’s all the same when it comes to power as power corrupts over any gender. It just may manifest itself in different ways but it’s all the same in the end.

The last point I wanted to make is that although I believe evil is gender neutral, Hillary is evil incarnate regardless if she were man or woman. She is NOT the person we need in that seat but unfortunately she has been groomed for it for a long time now and I see no other outcome. Sadly for the World this is the PERSON that will have her finger on the WORLD DESTRUCT button and with her personality and proven penchant for madness, we are in for Hell on Earth with Hillary...Female or not.

But what can I say? I’m just a man.

Jude11



edit on 13-3-2015 by jude11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
A woman should only be given a position if she is capable of it. The exact same should be applied to men. I don't agree with quotas or forcing a woman into a position simply for 'equality'.

And yeah, i agree. Hillary Clinton is the spawn of Satan, lol. People think previous Presidents have been bad? Oh boy, just wait until Hillary gets in!



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Some good points there...

Some I disagreed with...


But nevertheless...

I'd assume a female President would be much more likely to sanction and drop allegiance with Saudi Arabia...



Which, as a policy, could be an election winner for male or female to be honest.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

I would say that comment is off base, to say women just don't care about men? Wonder where they got that from.

I don't think hillary is the answer, would much rather see Warren before her.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

I think it's time for a woman president... but her name isn't Hillary.


Seriously, though, gender matters not. I would not vote for a person because of their gender any more than I'd vote for them because of their race.

A lot of generalizations can be made about women, as your post shows, but (another generalization) people who make it into a position to be seriously considered for president of the US are probably as corrupt as the men before them.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
One word...

"Thatcher".

She may have been a Brit but she still deserves to be on your list and went down in history for being comletely out of touch with the working class.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Personally, I think the reason some people say it's "time for a woman" has do with a woman having the capacity for greater compassion.

The problem seems to be, the higher a woman rises in politics, the more compassion she seems to lose.

So, until a woman is able to get up there, with compassion in tact, no, it's not time.


Because goddess knows we have a serious ability for wrath as well.......
And would need the compassion to balance it.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
If you guys massively vote for this liar there is something wrong...

Yet, her bilderberg backers make no secret of the fact they want her in office, so I'm actually kinda sure it'll be her anyway, unless a really huge opponent steps up



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   
It's time for a decent honest president! I don't care if they call themselves republican or democrat or independent. I don't care weather they are male or female!! I don't care if the are white, brown, yellow, black, or heck they can be green with purple poka dots for all I care! Just give me someone who isn't bought off by the corps and can get through one speech without lying through their teeth!



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   
It is time for a competent President that is actually concerned about the country.

It doesn't matter what color, gender or sexual orientation they might be.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Merkel seems to be doing a damn fine job in Germany.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: jude11

Estrogen vs Testosterone absolutely affects a person's value system. You cite women who have done horrible things but think about why there are so few women in the position to do those horrible things. It's a culture that rewards aggression and belligerence, acquisition at any cost if it means a trophy or status symbol is to be gained.

When the man's game allows for only greed and aggression to succeed, it's usually greedy aggressive women who will compete. The game needs to change and with more diversity we bring with the players, the quicker it will do so.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:14 PM
link   
'We Came, We Saw, We Murdered CAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW' ....That Hitlery Clinton? Her becoming president? I think I would see that as a sign of the apocalypse.

As female, I'll get a lot of flack for this but hey, someone has to tell the truth. Although I believe that each person should be judged on their own merits... 98% of the females I know/have met/have seen are wayyyyyyy too emotional to be in charge of the U.S. Military.

Some world leader makes fun of their hairstyle or something else irrelevant, and somewhere down the road, that leader is going down! ; p
edit on 13-3-2015 by Rhiannon because: well I put an arrow thingee in and for some reason everything I wrote after it didn't show up... weird eh? One of these extra DIV



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: jude11

I think it's time for a woman president... but her name isn't Hillary.



Now that I can agree with.


Jude11



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo
When the man's game allows for only greed and aggression to succeed, it's usually greedy aggressive women who will compete.


Excellent! And that indicates that the GAME needs to change to attract compassionate, open-minded, non-competitive PEOPLE, regardless of their hormones.

Not something I think will happen in my lifetime. Warren, while I don't think she's greedy, can certainly be aggressive. And when the men are aggressive, it's a noble trait, but when a woman is aggressive, watch out! Because she'll get the reputation of being a major bitch!

Trust me. I know!



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: jude11

Estrogen vs Testosterone absolutely affects a person's value system. You cite women who have done horrible things but think about why there are so few women in the position to do those horrible things. It's a culture that rewards aggression and belligerence, acquisition at any cost if it means a trophy or status symbol is to be gained.

When the man's game allows for only greed and aggression to succeed, it's usually greedy aggressive women who will compete. The game needs to change and with more diversity we bring with the players, the quicker it will do so.


Don't get me wrong. The only reason I cited those women is for a thread showing that women can be the same as men when it comes to the tendency to be corrupt or just plain evil.

I see absolutely no difference because when it comes down to it, power corrupts humanity and we are all members of that team.

jude11



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
It is time for a competent President that is actually concerned about the country.

It doesn't matter what color, gender or sexual orientation they might be.


Well said and on point with what I am addressing.

MvF is not going to get us anywhere close to where we need to be. The same as BvW.

It's the substance and not the dressing that we need.

jude11


edit on 13-3-2015 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
America needs a Leader...

I dont care what sex or party.

People under 30 have no idea what it is like to have a Leader.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Personally, I think the reason some people say it's "time for a woman" has do with a woman having the capacity for greater compassion.

The problem seems to be, the higher a woman rises in politics, the more compassion she seems to lose.

So, until a woman is able to get up there, with compassion in tact, no, it's not time.


Because goddess knows we have a serious ability for wrath as well.......
And would need the compassion to balance it.


Women capable of wrath? Say it ain't so!


Jude11



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
It's time for a decent honest president! I don't care if they call themselves republican or democrat or independent. I don't care weather they are male or female!! I don't care if the are white, brown, yellow, black, or heck they can be green with purple poka dots for all I care! Just give me someone who isn't bought off by the corps and can get through one speech without lying through their teeth!


That's what most people want but it'll have to be someone from another universe because history and current events prove there is no such person, at least not one willing to lead this country.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join