Why women should rule the world

[SapphosRock]

Interesting article showing the positive response from female leaders to the Coronavirus pandemic. They are literally saving lives while the men (particularly Trump) are in denial and floundering:

[[https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13/what-do-countries-with-the-best-coronavirus-reponses-have-in-common-women-leaders/
www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13/what-do-countries-with-the-best-coronavirus-reponses-have-in-common-women-leaders/]]

imgs.xkcd.com/comics/how_it_works.png

I don't have much patience left for the debate over whether 95% male behavior is exactly equal to 5% female behavior.
It is just one of the myths that we are taught from childhood that affects us negatively throughout our life.

I'm sorry girls have been such consistently "petty" "squabbling" "moaning" bitches in your experience, CurrentBun1981.

Not in my experience so much as what I've read from others. I've been fairly lucky working in a techy role where most of my colleagues are gormless male computer geeks who seem to go bright red when addressed by a member of the opposite sex. 😂

Why does it irk you when people use the president of the United States as an example of toxic masculinity?

He's a good example, but often he's used as some implied example of 'men' as a class. It wouldn't work as favourably if we compared Obama to Katie Hopkins.

To be fair, though, I'm probably insane even dreaming of a remotely balanced response in a thread called 'why women should rule the world'. 🤦🏻‍♀️😂

Paraphrasing Jane Austen:
All the poems and stories are against you, miss.
True, but they were all written by men.

I don't have much patience left for the debate over whether 95% male behavior is exactly equal to 5% female behavior.

I'm not sure what you mean here? If you're talking about sexual abuse stats, I don't understand how they relate to the running of a country. Happy to be educated if I've missed something as I often find I have when reading discussions on here.

"It wouldn't work as favourably if we compared Obama to Katie Hopkins."

Why would anyone compare Obama to a reality tv media woman instead of leaders of nations who are women?

Why would anyone compare Obama to a reality tv media woman instead of leaders of nations who are women?

I'm making the point that Trump is often used an example of a 'male' perspective, when in fact there are many women who lean a similar way like, KH, Lauren Southern Ann Coulter, etc.

It's the way people use a very narrow scope to define a much broader multi faceted reality. It's for similar reasons that we never hear feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers mentioned on here, because she's the 'wrong type of feminist'.

There is definitely a danger of forgetting socialisation in many posts on this subject

It could be that. But if a man observed that men seem to be more inclined to use physical aggression in disputes, wouldn't we take that as a serious observation?

There is a fair bit of psychological material that suggests that women use language where men are more likely to use aggression of another kind, and we can see some similar behaviours in other social primates. And lots of people observe the same thing. Maybe that's not definitive, yes, we could be seeing what we expect to see, but then, that's a fully reversible argument. Those who want to claim that women have no more inclination to any given negative behaviour could equally be seeing what they expect to see.

Just tossing around that people are seeing what they want to is not useful, we could have said that right off to the OP with equal authority as the claim that women would be better leaders on all fronts is clearly not verifiable.

Trump is a weird comparison because he isn't really very similar to any other leader, male or female. A few people have compared him to Putin, presumably on the basis of immorality, but that's about as far as it goes. Putin is nothing if not an effective leader with an efficient administration, and no one denies that he's an intelligent man. That's what makes him scary.

Trump is a disaster as a leader compared to the vast majority of elected leaders, male or female, most of them have more in common with each other than they do with him.

Women are better police officers than men
time.com/4406327/police-shootings-women-female-cops/

Women are better doctors than men
www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/12/19/506144346/patients-cared-for-by-female-doctors-fare-better-than-those-treated-by-men

Looking forward to seeing if the data analysis at the end of this pandemic shows a statistically significant difference in women's national leadership compared to men's.

^Women are better police officers than men
time.com/4406327/police-shootings-women-female-cops/^

You can prove almost anything with studies, so I'm not getting drawn into that.

However, looking at this example there are potentially so many variables. Maybe the women were less likely to use excessive force because they're much less likely to be attacked than a man so hence felt less threatened. Also, it's difficult to accurately reach a conclusion as the whole system was likely already established by men before women joined.

"notably, there was no difference in the amount of routine force reported by gender, only in the use of excessive force."

That police study was from 2013 though. How many female police officers now as a percentage? Maybe, because as the article said, there was a small percentage of female officers that they weren't sent to the same type of jobs as male officers? Maybe they need to conduct a study to look at duties compared with force used, outcomes etc.

"notably, there was no difference in the amount of routine force reported by gender, only in the use of excessive force."

My point still stands.

The person who is statistically 4x more likely to be attacked is probably going to be jumpier. Men are probably inclined to be much more aggressive to other men for several reasons - male hierarchy/dominance and the fact that violence against women is much less socially acceptable ("boys don't hit girls" etc).

Men are probably inclined to be much more aggressive to other men for several reasons - male hierarchy/dominance and the fact that violence against women is much less socially acceptable ("boys don't hit girls" etc).

By this, I mean the suspect (not the policeman) is probably more likely to be violent towards another man.

I wouldn't confuse how women behave in a society designed by men for men, with how women (or men) might behave in a society designed by women for women. I believe it would be a qualitatively different kind of society entirely but one very hard to fully imagine, as products of the current reality that we all are.

The irony of the entire debate is that women will never get to rule the world and design it to suit them because men's testosterone and willingness to commit greater levels of violence for power means that men will always, overall, rule the world. Unless we could get their numbers down significantly by skewing future reproduction so that they couldn't keep barging in and taking over.

As for bitchiness, I'd far rather our leaders sat around and bitched about each other and took a while to get to some agreement than took their country to war as a massive willy wave, killing millions.

Ignoring all the wanking about how women can't possibly be better police than men, back to Trump. Trump is terrifying because he's stupid, belligerent, and in charge of the most powerful country in the world. Putin otoh is terrifying precisely because he's not stupid. He was by all reports an excellent KGB officer and it shows. DH and I have long called him The Patrician, which will only make sense if you're a Terry Pratchett fan - everyone knows that he's ruthless, dangerous, and generally not a nice person at all, but since he's also ruthlessly efficient and great at proverbially keeping the trains running on time a lot of people are willing to put up with the "completely terrifying" part, and those who're not are mostly too scared of him to do anything about it. And if they try, well, ex KGB.

If you're looking for a point of comparison for Putin then Li Jinping would be better. For Trump maybe Bolsanaro.

Xi, rather.

I think you right in pointing out the difference, Kitties.
Those were just the dictators that came off the top of my head.

They all share a lot of qualities too, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't have aimed for or succeeded at being dictators in the first place.

I think the whole concept of leadership is a very male one. In my female utopia I do not need be led somewhere by someone else with an urge to boss me about in service of their own agenda.

Xi, rather

When I first saw that I though "Oh god, not another pronoun"

When I first saw that I though "Oh god, not another pronoun"

One of the few good things to be said about the man in question is that he's unlikely to ever go on a pronoun wank.

Im going back a bit nowbut the titanic wouldnt have sunk if there'd been a female voice asking but why do you want to go this fast? Do you want to break records before you know the route!?!?

I am of the opinion that if women were the sole decision makers in human affairs, there would be no war or famine in the world today.

@KathyBriggs360, on other threads you proudly boast of your actions in publicly bullying your female neighbour. On what planet was that good decision making on your part, let alone supportive to other women?