Throw the book at him and then some
1 Like
If they were imbued by nature to be leaders 50% of the time, then that would have happened.
It hasn’t probably occurred more than very infrequently, throughout all of recorded history in every culture.
3 Likes
Do you think that has anything to do with past cultures and societies being far more reliant on physical strength to survive compared to current societies?
Physical violence and the threat is less and less of an issue as the years go by.
No.
I think it is because nature has made males more combative, more domineering, more action oriented, and more willing to just step out and ‘lead’ on their own initiative.
Even in a unit as small as a household, women will defer to the man the overwhelming percentage of the time, If the man is interested in making the final decision. In the situations where he is relatively apathetic, naturally she will make it.
The converse to this is that women are naturally better at nurturing.
100% either way? Obviously not. But typical according to nature? Yes.
I celebrate the difference.
2 Likes
Do you think the current male/female split in power positions under represent capable women leaders, or accurately reflect the number of capable women leaders?
And if they lacked the physicality to back it up, what would have happened?
Not in Saudi Arabia.
I think it’s largely dependent on the culture we refer to
A lack of women in politics within Western Europe? Probably related to biological constructs or a simple lack of interest.
A lack of women in politics within the democratic republic of the Congo or Yemen? Oppression.
If anyone wishes to challenge the notion “women aren’t oppressed in Yemen or the Congo.” I challenge you to come up with that argument. It’d be hard to make given almost the entire population in both regions (whether male or female) are subject to systemic oppression, however women are oppressed within these communities on the basis of gender.
You’ll find practices like female genital mutilation, a VERY high rate of sexual violence, subjective rules imposed on the basis of being female and more being rather commonplace.
Irritating, woke politics dictate western society is equitable to Saudi Arabia, or Chad… But it’s not… There are still societies wherein women are systemically oppressed in brutal and barbaric fashion. But America… Or Australia for that matter don’t represent these societies.
Was gone all evening, so will answer the 3 of you.
Leaders, in the huge majority of situations, are not because they are the largest and most physically dominating specimen in the unit. Even in a criminal or martial environment environment, it isn’t necessary to be the most lethal - if one is a leader as opposed to merely an enforcer.
I would suggest you think of your own lives. Zecarlo was in the military, you other two have been in sports, social clubs, study groups. Leaders were not the most bad ass guys that had to physically beat you, in order to get you to follow.
You younger men have been educated your entire lives that women ‘deserved’ to be 50% of the leaders since they are 50% of population. You don’t question that not all people are mentally capable to be STEM professionals, emotionally capable of nuturing the young, aged, or disadvantaged for a profession, or be physically capable of doing manual labor jobs.
This isn’t just culture, it is nature. Again l state, if women were natural leaders, they would have risen up in the past.
Gotta roll and punch some cows. Side note - the 100 mamas, calves, and juvenile bulls will willingly defer to me. The 3 brood bulls will act agressive and squirrelly (if there is breeding to do). My caution isn’t because they weigh 1700 lbs (mamas weigh 1100 and many have calves). It is because nature has made them the leaders.
2 Likes
Agree with your whole post, but would add this: Simply not as many women are interested in being leaders, engineers, scientists, mathematicians… United Airlines announced that they want at least 50% female pilots by 2030 and i think they have massively flawed logic here. Honestly, i don’t think that many women want to be pilots. There are certainly some, and i think they did what any sensible person with a dream would do: get their education, work hard, and got the job they wanted. MOST women, however, would likely prefer to be a hostess that gets to travel the world for free - without having to go through years of school and years more of flight training (its’ also a shitload less responsibility on your shoulders).
1 Like
This. There is this bizarre assumption that desire for a certain occupation is evenly spread across all demographic groups. Clearly it isn’t. In the Scandinavian countries, which have the most feminist cultures and where women enjoy opportunities seen nowhere else in the world, women disproportionately choose stereotypically female occupations, such as being teachers, nurses, etc., over those traditionally dominated by men. What does it say that, when women have maximum choice, they still tend to choose “female” occupations?
2 Likes
It says that we as a society should free them from historic societal expectations regarding interests and careers and allow them the freedom and latitude to pursue interests and careers of their own choosing without judgement. Same goes for men… Lot of BS social expectations for us as well.
It also says that again, Scandinavian culture is ahead of the pack.
Then, let the chips fall where they may.
It says that we should all strive for a society where women (anyone, really) have EQUAL opportunities and let chips fall where they may.
No quotas, no pushing for more women flying planes, or in STEM fields, or cod fishing in the Norwegian Arctic.
Let them do what they want. Equal opportunities don’t have to mean equal results.
I mean, why so few male nurses? Shouldn’t it be 50/50?
3 Likes
Exactly. This is the very definition of an equitable society, at least as far as gender goes.
These “affirmative action” type policies are meant to speed up our society’s transition to equal opportunity. Good in theory, but AFAIK has yet to be implemented to great success. Too bad.
Within the next 20-30 years I don’t think those programs will be necessary any more.
I think our society has already transitioned to equal opportunity for women. The policies you mention do just the opposite and foment unequality.
3 Likes
Shit, can you imagine if, say, Formula 1 would announce that they want 50% female drivers?
I’m not saying they’re not capable, I just never knew any woman who had any interest in F1.
Again, I’m not saying they wouldn’t be capable if they had any interest. I mean, it’s not like they’d have to parallel park those McLarens.
4 Likes
We have a lack of female septic tank cleaners and we lack women working in the department of sewer maintenance…
Disgusting! Patriarchy in action!
2 Likes
There is a British female test driver in Williams. She has won some female only competitions. The female only competitions had only 8 drivers, so I assume the interest is not big at the moment. Her dream was to drive in F1. Also the CEO and owner of Williams is the daughter of Williams. She has done pretty well.
That is not to suggest that there should be 50 % females in F1. That is to suggest there are equal opportunities. The females do a good job. There is no interest at the moment from more females.
Sure.
In my field (Civil Engineering) there are now more women than ever.
The 2006 financial crisis and subsequent drop in the construction field made so that a single Civil Engineer would be in charge of too much.
Being in charge of several projects, overseing in site progress, managing and leading teams, dealing with suppliers, redacting and submiting proposals…let’s just say can be a bit stressful.
Now, women’s inclination for multitasking is a valuable skill in such conditions. All the ones I worked with were very competent.
So why don’t we have more women in that field? Well, there just aren’t that many who want to.
It’s getting more and more, but it will NEVER be 50/50.
There are dozens now!!