Page 6 | The world has tried men in charge and look what they have done

Eaglemom · 2023-11-02T23:06:02+00:00

AIBU... if the world was run by women it would not be in this fucking mess. Children’s and women’s lives would be worth more than land or grievances. Young men would not be groomed for war and aggression. What the hell are men doing to this earth?

Goodornot · 04/11/2023 13:52

Memememestillme · 04/11/2023 11:07

Or Queen Victoria. Empire anyone?

Mary I aka Bloody Mary. Henry VIIIs first daughter. She was a tyrant. She wanted to restore Catholicism and her regime's persecution of Protestant dissenters led to hundreds of executions for heresy.

It simply isn't true that females are always more benevolent rulers.

Coffeerum · 04/11/2023 13:55

Well the female leaders in recent memory have hardly been a shining example have they.
Margaret Thatcher?
Theresa May?
Arlene Foster??
Liz Truss?

Abhannmor · 04/11/2023 14:45

I'm afraid Queen Elizabeth I is not an exception @DysonSphere . She had her childhood teacher tortured on the rack . Twice. Once might be some administrative error......

DysonSphere · 04/11/2023 17:30

Abhannmor · 04/11/2023 14:45

I'm afraid Queen Elizabeth I is not an exception @DysonSphere . She had her childhood teacher tortured on the rack . Twice. Once might be some administrative error......

😧

Oh no! Well that's me shot down in 🔥 🔥

I always thought she was though only when necessary.

User135644 · 04/11/2023 19:47

Wellhellooooodear · 04/11/2023 10:59

Are we glossing over Liz Truss? Not to mention the likes of Priti Patel and Suella Braverman. We need real people in charge, those who didn't attend an elite public school and actually understand and give a shit about people. It won't happen though.

Theresa May, Nicola Sturgeon. Margaret Thatcher.

Like them or not, there's a lot of bad legacies left behind there. Although May was treated harshly she ran a truly dreadful election campaign in 2017 which lost the Tories their majority when Corbyn was the opponent. May and Amber Rudd also leave questionable legacies behind as Home Sec (Windrush for example).

Badbadbunny · 04/11/2023 19:55

Coffeerum · 04/11/2023 13:55

Well the female leaders in recent memory have hardly been a shining example have they.
Margaret Thatcher?
Theresa May?
Arlene Foster??
Liz Truss?

I raise you....

Diane Abbott
Suella Braverman

Not looking good for female politicians really is it?

ThinWomansBrain · 04/11/2023 20:03

Great idea, let's get Liz Truss back - that went so well.

Esmeralda94 · 04/11/2023 20:12

Despite the wars/fighting I think men's natural competitiveness has likely been the foundation of many of our great medical/technological innovations, which have saved countless lives.

Men fight but they also collaborate much better than women, which is proven by lots of studies. Collaboration is key to progress. Given the squabbling/nastiness on here compared to men's forums I'm not sure we'd be any better.

Esmeralda94 · 04/11/2023 20:17

DysonSphere · 02/11/2023 23:27

No basis for this belief. As for more respect for women and children, I don't believe that either, I've had female bosses be incredibly prejudicial and inflexible as regards my maternity rights. I've never had the same problems under a man. We've seen Nicola Sturgeon supporting male rapists in female prisons. We've seen Teresa May assert she'd happily push a nuclear button if she had to. We've seen the introduction of super brothels with an associated increase in under-age sex trafficking in Germany whilst Angela Merkel was PM.

It just doesn't work that way. You don't necessarily get better government if the person in charge is a woman, anymore than you do if the person is a different ethnicity etc. People are people.

I fact, my personal view is most women in power tend to bend over backwards trying to be manly i and are liable to overplay their hands in order to prove themselves.

Queen Elizabeth the 1st might be an exception.

It's interesting what you say about maternity support and I've noticed the same. There was a big thread on it a year or so back and lots of posters mentioned that female bosses won't support women unless they make the same sacrifices they did, which hinders progression of women's rights. I suspect part of it may be bitterness - "why should she get it all without making the sacrifices I did?"

Esmeralda94 · 04/11/2023 20:22

Comparing the few women who made it into prominent positions to the pasty white dick swinging mediocre men who have ruined the planet is absurd.

I agree. Sharia Law would be much better.

Fishcycles · 04/11/2023 20:46

I don’t think it’s fair to look at a few individual women as examples, when they’re operating within a patriarchal system. A female Prime Minister doesn’t mean we’ve lived in a matriarchal society.

The question for I’d like answered is - for the people who have voted YANBU what would you like to see in an ideal world? Minimum 60/80/100% of female MPs? Similar for other key roles like judges etc?

AdamRyan · 04/11/2023 21:28

I'd like to see senior women listened to and taken as seriously as men, instead of what we heard at the covid enquiry this week.

A 50% quota for some things would be good. For example university places. 50% male, 50% female places on every course, intra-sex competition for places. Rather than a "meritocracy" where men inevitably come out on top. Employers could do similar for apprenticeships and grad schemes. This would mean a better gender split coming out and hopefully that would feed through into more women in positions of power.

I'd like to see equal parental leave rights for both sexes with mandatory leave for men. That would hopefully help even out the burden of children across both sexes and give more women the time to pursue avenues to power.

I think politically we (in the west) should move to consensus based politics - less presidential, more PR. That would give less opportunity for power crazed megalomaniac men to get in power and do stupid things (Trump!) I don't think its coincidence that one of the most successful female politicians ever seen came from a country with a PR based system that required forming coalitions (Merkel).

Troubador10 · 04/11/2023 22:10

AdamRyan · 04/11/2023 21:28

I'd like to see senior women listened to and taken as seriously as men, instead of what we heard at the covid enquiry this week.

A 50% quota for some things would be good. For example university places. 50% male, 50% female places on every course, intra-sex competition for places. Rather than a "meritocracy" where men inevitably come out on top. Employers could do similar for apprenticeships and grad schemes. This would mean a better gender split coming out and hopefully that would feed through into more women in positions of power.

I'd like to see equal parental leave rights for both sexes with mandatory leave for men. That would hopefully help even out the burden of children across both sexes and give more women the time to pursue avenues to power.

I think politically we (in the west) should move to consensus based politics - less presidential, more PR. That would give less opportunity for power crazed megalomaniac men to get in power and do stupid things (Trump!) I don't think its coincidence that one of the most successful female politicians ever seen came from a country with a PR based system that required forming coalitions (Merkel).

On the university places point, how would that work on courses where there are significantly more applicants of a particular sex for a particular course, so 50/50 can’t be achieved without either reducing the number of places massively, or excluding some persons of particular sex in favour of a less qualified person of the opposite sex?

AdamRyan · 04/11/2023 22:14

excluding some persons of particular sex in favour of a less qualified person of the opposite sex?
This is what would happen, except noone would be "excluded" because of their sex. The males results and the females would be decoupled and irrelevant to each other.
Universities could set a minimum standard and run a smaller course if there were not enough applicants of one sex to meet it.

Troubador10 · 04/11/2023 22:15

AdamRyan · 04/11/2023 22:14

excluding some persons of particular sex in favour of a less qualified person of the opposite sex?
This is what would happen, except noone would be "excluded" because of their sex. The males results and the females would be decoupled and irrelevant to each other.
Universities could set a minimum standard and run a smaller course if there were not enough applicants of one sex to meet it.

Interesting. Thanks.