Let's let women rule the world.

[ClintonTyree]

Seriously. First of all, I'm a heterosexual male. I don't think we men have done such a great job. Ever since The Church saw fit to demonize women, men have ruled this planet. We have taken it to the brink of disaster and I think the time is past due to relinquish control to the feminine side of nature. I'd like to hear opinions from others concerning this. Your thoughts?

[Iverson]

1. provocative

The world would probably be a better place than it is now, but it would be better still not to encode sexism at all. Trying to figure out which gender is "better" is a binary trap.

[dbt]

4. Binary Trap or not,

We males have made a sorry mess of this planet. Let the women run things for a few thousand years and then we'll compare track records.

:hurts:
dbt

[ClintonTyree]

5. I'm not saying better........

I'm saying equal. We've had the ball thus far, let's let the women have their turn. I'm positive the result would be far better than that which we've shown.

[Iverson]

10. I get you, but ...

... I'm not sure that my meaning (binary trap) was very clear, so let me go in a different direction.

Do you see how a decision to "let" women rule the world presumes an either/or dichotomy and also continues to locate the real power in men as a class? This is something that you've mentioned twice now, once in the title and once in a reply.

I know a lot of people who would say that that merely places women on top in a phallocentric view of the world. I don't want to get too heavy into theory this early in the morning, but I suspect that the transformation that you and I would like to see goes much deeper than gender-based behavior and either/or structures.

[ClintonTyree]

11. I see your point.............

and yes, that remark in itself was sexist. Mea culpa.

[KC]

2. Strange

Some of us were talking about the same thing at work yesterday and I basically said the same thing..we've had nothing but men as Presidents and look at where we are today and the situations we're facing..it's a disaster.

KC

[Yupster]

53. You really think the USA has done that badly?

Really?

[Speed8098]

3. 46 year old white male here

and I couldn't agree with you more.

I've been saying it for years.

[Spentastic]

6. Having Seen

Margaret Thatcher ruin my country first hand I assure you that some women are equally capable of waging war and being facists as any man.

Working together is the key.

Additionally I'm not entirely sure that "The Church" conveys the situation accurately.

[ClintonTyree]

14. But where did Thatcher..............

learn her trade? From men. With whom did she primarily deal with on the world stage? Men. Was she always trying to "out man the man"? I'm talking about woman to woman interaction. Generations of women learning from each other and dramatically changing the tone of government. I'm just trying to get a feel of what it would be like if the power in the world was weilded entirely by women, as it has been almost exclusively dominated by men thus far.

[Spentastic]

21. There may be some truth in that

However what you seem to be saying is

"Let's let stereotypical perfect women rule the world."

I'd assert that there's no such thing. In order to rule this world you have to act in such a way as to render your gender unimportant.

[Tommy_Douglas]

37. Oh come now...

I'm all for equality but this idea is rather silly. I mean power corrupts does it not?

The best case scenario is for us to vote for the individual that displays the most brains and heart, and there you'll find a great leader.

[shaman]

7. The problem with women is...

most have forgotten how to be feminine. They have been playing the game so long, they've sold over to the masculine way of doing things. A woman in power who emulates a man is no better than what we have today.

We need more leaders who are balanced between the masculine and the feminine. I'm not talking in appearance or in the bedroom, in talking in the mind and heart. That's what I'd like to see running the country or the boardroom.

[MissMillie]

23. People need to learn how to be good "people"...

... and stop focusing on what makes a good "man" or a good "woman".

[Forkboy]

8. Let's start with some of DU's women

that's a government I'd like to see.

[ikojo]

9. A woman here...

I don't think the gender of the ruling class has any bearing on what is or is not done. I think it's the whole system structure that needs to be changed. Look Margaret Thatcher was PM of England and she was as reactionary and right-wing as Reagan. Golda Meir was PM of Israel and yet there was no Palestinian state established under her watch.
Madeline Albright was secretary of state and when asked about sanctions against Iraq causing the deaths of thousands referred to that as collateral damage..not exactly female compassion there. She was more interested in protecting and propping up the system than in the effects of draconian sanctions.

[marley]

12. Let them ?

"let" women rule the world ? I guess this implies that they are not capable of taking control themselves ?

[ClintonTyree]

15. See above reply

[newyawker99]

22. Hi marley!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[G_j]

13. 'circular' paradigm?

The 'feminine' approach that would really change things is not hierarchical in nature, thus the paradigm would need to change also. Picture decision making in a circle as opposed to a top-down pyramid.

[ClintonTyree]

18. Correct...........

again, I've clarified my position (I think) above.

[salmonhorse]

16. As a practical matter it is a 50/50 split however...

...and while it goes without saying that after having been key in the creation of this world; it is a different matter having to "rule" it without an understanding of what it has taken to, in a very practical sense, "build" it as in: scraping landscapes, cutting bedrock, taming wild rivers, clearing endless fields of stone and (The Warrior Goddess notwithstanding) fighting wars real or imagined.

Otherwise...it's a great idea and a notion that I endorse in full ~

[izzie]

17. Only if we get rid of the ones that really try to out do men

I thought the womens movement was going to add to the country not get women put down and alot to act like men when they act awful

[marley]

19. I immagine there...

would be no difference in the end. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. If women held all the power they would end up ruling like men. For me the worlds problems are due to human nature, not because of the faults or virtues of either sex.

[izzie]

24. Yes you are right on this and I was not thinking good on my first post.

That is a problem in its self but it is just human nature really.

[spooky3]

20. Your good intentions and faith in us are much appreciated...

but as a woman, I would prefer to see women have the same opportunities to succeed or fail at politics as men, and minorities as well as non-minorities. Certain individuals from each of these groups will be strong enough to rise above the system and to improve it in the process, and we would all be better off for it.

[Rowdyboy]

25. How about a constitutional amendment...

to require that only women be allowed to run for or hold office from 2010 through 2032? Think how the country would benefit...the economy will soar, budgets will be balanced, and peace will prevail. That way redistricting will be done reasonably in 2010, 2020, and 2030. Partisan tensions would return to a rational level.

As a 49 year old male, I'd support it in a moment. My working career involved many professional men and women. Sucessful men are often loners striving for individual sucess; sucessful women are uniters who work to find workable solutions to problems. I'll take a female boss in a heartbeat.

[Muddleoftheroad]

27. Bigotry

Picking someone JUST because of gender or race or anything else that they have no control of is bigotry.

[noiretextatique]

yeah...that's why all the *viable* presidential candidates are

white men...right?

[JohnKleeb]

46. Thats true noiret

Call me crazy but Ive been told that part of the reason why DK doesnt have a chance is because his last name doesnt sound "American". Its really unfortunate that one's name should hold him or her back, if we cant elect a guy with a Slavic name here in 2004, many years after the great civil rights legislation, that means I guess my generation wont even live to see like a woman or minority president. Thats real sad honest imo, that one's ethnic background, race, or gender should hold them back. It should never be about that.

[noiretextatique]

47. not it shouldn't...but it is an ugly reality

unfortunately. rich, white men with "american sounding names" continue to benefit unfairly because our country has operated mainly for their benefit...since its inception. and so it continues.

[Muddleoftheroad]

62. DK

Actually, his problems are he is too far left for most of the nation and his name is too long to fit easily in a headline space. Bush, Carter, Ford, Reagan, et al are shorter names and get used more in headlines which gives more name recognition.

[Muddleoftheroad]

61. Women are half the voters

THEY get a say. If they want to run a candidate or 100, that is their choice.

[noiretextatique]

45. dupe nt

[Stuckinthebush]

26. Hmmmm...

Kay Bailey Hutchison?

Anne Coulter?

That Eagle Forum Woman?

While I like your sentiment, I think that what we need is intelligent, compassionate people to "rule the world", not self-centered, psychopaths whether they be men or women.

[pippin]

28. well said Stuckinthebush!

[lumpy]

29. Sure, Condi Rice could lead the pack

with Coulter the prime minister. Give us a break. Women can be just as corrupt as any man.

[noiretextatique]

48. unfortunately, the proportion of women in positions of power

doesn't give us much information to make fair comparisons. one could argue, as i would, that people like rice and coulter are icons precisely because they are defenders of the status quo...or worse. this is why the its more likely that a *viable* female presidential candidate will be right of center, or worse...like margaret thatcher.

[Yupster]

54. I think Phyllis Schlaffly

would rule over them all.

[msmcghee]

30. Interesting question . .

As a transgendered person I have had the gift of being able to see and appreciate much of the world from both sides - masculine and feminine.

From my perspective, I believe both male and female qualities are equally necessary in human endeavors. It's not that one is better or worse than the other. What has happened is that society as a whole has shifted toward the warlike male values and away from the nurturing female values. For civilization to advance these need to be in balance.

Women, tied to their male partners for survival through procreation, are following the same path as the men. Would you wish that Ann Coulter were in office. She could be. There are many wowen today who would gladly emulate her.

This happens periodically in history. In the words of Dr. Leonard Schlain (The Alphabet vs. the Goddess) we are undergoing a mini-reformation. The values of zealots - war and hatred and killing are becoming the norm. Nurturing, caring, cooperation and other feminine values are all declining because the only way to overcome the hatred is by becoming better at war and killing than they are.

Both sides of human nature must be turned back toward the betterment of society - toward a positive sense of community. But if history is any indicator then this will only happen when we have spent ourselves in a final violent flurry of hate and war - and the few survivors rise from the ground to see the vast fields of dead family, friends and enemy - only then will the world see the utter stupidity and waste of their folly - and right itself again.

(Wow, I think I should have stopped after that first cup of coffee.) :donut:

[CBHagman]

31. For all that I enthusiastically vote for males who espouse liberal agendas

...I would have to say that I've often simply grumbled, "The women should take over!" Most of this feeling springs from the fact that women are so underrepresented in most positions of power (i.e., among CEOs, the executive branch of our own government, legislatures), and on top of that, I see many sorry excuses among the men. Look at our own country, where a suprising number of talentless, lazy, and/or not particularly intelligent men are held up as ideal candidates.

For example, despite George W. Bush's lamentable resume, he easily won the (weak) governorship of Texas and then finagled his way into the White House and has since been treated rather tenderly by the press, for the most part. Can you imagine a woman with a lousy record in business getting away with so much?

So I'm all for bringing on the women, as long as they're not Maggie Thatcher clones.

That said, I like to remind myself that a great many wonderful leaders were/are GUYS, too -- Cesar Chavez, Thurgood Marshall, FDR. Really, the problem we face currently is mainly that of unblushing greed and devotion to afflicting the afflicted and comforting the comfortable. Witness Rick Santorum's comment that making women coming off welfare struggle a little wasn't the worse thing -- this while claiming to be a good, compassionate Catholic. In a civilized society, Santorum would be jeered clean out of the Capitol. Instead he holds tremendous power.

It's a sick situation, and I'll ally myself with anybody -- male, female, transgender -- who takes on dismantling it.

[smirkymonkey]

32. I have also thought that this might help

make the world a kinder, more cooperative place, as women are less driven by ego and less inclined to have to prove that they are "right", meaning not backing down when they realize they are headed down the wrong path.

However, I then realized this would be a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. Pardon the cliche, but until there is a "paradigm shift" that values feminine as well as masculine (not necessarily male/female, but the qualities of both principles) most women who come to power will have become very much like their male counterparts after having experienced the process through which one attains power in this world.

I think that there needs to be a critical mass of the worlds people that values peace, cooperation and diplomacy over war, destruction and "power".

[msmcghee]

33. Yes, that's right.

Both genders (and those in between) are all capable of good or bad.

The world is currently embracing the worst qualities of humanity - hatred, war, killing, etc. The RW (in all nations) is the vehicle and home for those who see the world through that window of violence and intolerance. It is not their opinion at work here - it is their world view, supported by a whole range of powerful memes, often tied to fundamentalist religion. These are emotional, not logical connections - almost impossible to change once embraced.

They can not change that world view. They have become infected by those powerful memes. They can only infect others with those memes - or attack those who resist them. That's how it works.

They will see pleas to try to cooperate to solve problems, to turn away from their violent path of destruction - as tricks from the left and a weakness, to be destroyed. Just take a walk through the threads at FreeRepublic to see this in vivid detail. Although only a few would claim membership in FR, millions of Americans now keep their TV's tunes to Faux evry hour of the day - absorbing those memes because they now feel so good and support the hate memes already implanted.

Again, it's not their reasoned opinion at work, something that could be discussed and debated rationally - it's how they see the world emotionally. Like a virulent infection it will continue to spread - as it has been - until environmental forces overcome it. i.e. probably by killing off most of it's hosts along with millions of other innocent humans.

[msmcghee]

34. A note on memes.

For clarification, I use "meme" to mean an idea or concept that is held in common by many members of a group (or society) - whether or not that idea is labeled with a symbol or catchy name.

And by idea - I don't mean a logical conclusion. These are primarily emotional responses to collections of ideas.

I think that is the essence of memetics, that part that can be seen at work in society. The labeling and symbolism of memes is interesting and important, but secondary in that it only makes them easier to communicate and inject into other's minds.

Karl Rove has been so successful at his job (so far) because he is a master of memetics - at spreading the emotional attachment to the *Bush administration and the neo-con PNAC world view through the electorate.

Also, of course, because 9/11 created a huge well of emotional currency in the electorate. It's much easier attaching your memes to strong emotions that already exist than trying to drum up new emotional attachments for your product - as all good marketing people know.

[Clete]

35. Four thousand years ago before the Bronze Age,

there is evidence that women did. They lived in agricultural communities, worshiped a Mother Goddess, and there was very little evidence of warfare. Some of the communities remained undisturbed for a thousand years.

As soon as men learned to use bronze and tame horses, things changed. Warfare became rampant as peaceful communities of agricultural people were conquered, looted and burned. The archaeological record is there for those who want to look at it. Men became rulers and women property.

So maybe it is time for a change again?

[nolabels]

38. That is hypnosis’s

Frankly taking many fields of science into account rather than getting into group think of certain currents sometimes leads to better understanding.

Extrapolating from history for making a conclusion to highlights one view does not always lead to better understanding. Biology and Jane Goodall might have a different take

http://www.janegoodall.org/chimps/social.html

If you see a lot of similarities there don’t blame the monkeys

There also have been many books pointing out that Women and Men do the best work in social structure working as a group. The underlying deficit society has to deal with is subduing the Alpha(male and female) with the most efficiency while not extinguishing its drive. Do we really need more alpha females or just a more equitable society?

[Clete]

39. I agree that an equitable society would be best.

It's not going to happen though until strong women take over and hand their balls back to the likes of Arnold. As a woman myself, I know we aren't all as gentle and peace loving as men would like to portray us as, however, the majority of men will not give an inch of power until women take it forceably. I think a period of female dominance would be immensely good for the planet to rebalance the inequality between the sexes.

[msmcghee]

40. It would be great if that were possible.

But history shows that once they get the bit in their teeth - the forces of violence, intolerance and hatred continue to spread until some great calamity occurs.

Males - who are emotionally designed through evolution to embrace these emotions and live their lives by them - are less likely, not more likely in times of crisis to relinquish their power to women who may try to pull them back from the brink.

[nolabels]

44. Me being a male, but sensing a certain amount of machismo in this post

Would like to point out in the give and take of relationships mostly opposites attract and even expectations can put a different hue on things. There are so many things happening so quick in the modern world that it is hard to grasp which and where things are rolling.

One of the most difficult things for a male to admit is a weakness of his perception that his armor is not up to snuff. Many men that do in casual atmospheres are quickly dismissed by both sexes, where a woman doing such is depicted as normal and sometimes even uses such tactics it to draw attention. Like the man that drives all over town because he to embarrassed to admit he is lost and needs directions. The bad thing happens if he is with his wife. She might harangue him to no end if she is with him and finds out he is doing this much later during the drive.

Alpha's often like to accelerate crisis in certain way to put them in the driver’s seat, that's why I let my wife drive. I get to keep my nose in books while we go places. I don’t have to pay a lot of attention to her, keeps her mind focused on the road, and gives the kids something to talk about, discussing if driving like a crazy person really is a good ideal.

Btw, My wife likes to drive and hates the way I drive, so actually I am trying to make peace by doing this, and she does like to brag that she has never been in an accident in twenty + years of driving so I guess it’s safe and sane

[shaman]

49. no victims here

Here you've very correctly described the masculine and feminine essence.
Feminine - "Some of the communities remained undisturbed for a thousand years." She is full of creative potential, but unable to change by herself. She lives on, but stagnates. She does not evolve.

Masculine - "Warfare became rampant as peaceful communities of agricultural people were conquered, looted and burned." (Everyone sees this a bad. I'm sorry but it is necessary.) The masculine essence tares down the status quo in order to make space for something new. He provides motion and change (doesn't have to be war, but that's what we do here).

Both forces work together to evolve the world. currently the masculine essence (in both men and women) is driving change throughout the world. It is easier to look at this time as a place where space is being created to have more feminine come in. Be patient it will take time.

[Yupster]

55. As an anthropology student, this interests me

any links I can look at?

[Clete]

57. Probably, but I don't have them, however,

there are books by Marija Gimbutas, an anthropologist, whom I am sure you are familiar with. I also like to look in the old mythologies that pretty much indicate that all those evil women starting with Eve in our culture were once some ladies to be contended with, so the men or priestly castes that told the stories subsequently made sure that women were the root of all evil, but I am sure you know that too.

I know that it doesn't fit in with the present views of things, you know back to the patriarchal stuff. I personally am with Marija, so flame if you like.

[Yupster]

59. Very interesting - thanks

I found this interview

http://www.levity.com/mavericks/gimbut.htm

At first reading, some things were very interesting -- others I'll have to read a lot more to be convinced.

[bloom]

36. I'm down with that.

How are we going to get the men to stop?

:D

[Yupster]

56. Well 53 % of the voters are women

if they wanted to, they could elect whoever they wanted.

[Shyriath]

41. Awwww...

But I wanted to rule the world! I was drawing up plans for provincial borders and everything! I had almost decided on an imperial capital! I was gonna be "Shyriath the First, Emperor of All Humanity, Lord and Master of the Earth, Destroyer of Idiots and Protector of Small Furry Animals"!

More seriously, though, it would be cool if nothing else. Not only would it be fair, it'd also be interesting to see what happened differently.

[msmcghee]

42. LOL, it's the "Protector of Small Furry Animals" . .

. . part that would doom your campaign for world dominance.

To get anywhere with this bunch you should claim to be the destroyer of all things weak and beautiful. They'll make you King in short order.

[DrGonzoLives]

43. No

How about actually working toward equality, working to eliminate gender stereotypes (for both sexes) and getting rid of ingrained sexism in our culture?

In case you hadn't heard, tyranny is tyranny regardless of who is in charge.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

50. they already do, silly

Read "The Invisible Hand of the Matriarchy" - if you can find a copy of this top-secret book!

[salmonhorse]

51. Whoop, there it is ~

The hand that rocks the cradle. The revolution; any revolution of any worth for that matter, starts at the breakfast table let there be no mistake.

[9215]

52. I thought they already did?

:evilgrin: :bounce:

[SuffragetteSal]

58. if Bush keeps sending our young men to war

you may get your wish sooner than you think.

[DarkPhenyx]

60. Women don't do a better job really.

Look at the great female leaders of history and they were pretty much like their male contemporaries. Violent, duplicitious, power hungry.