Can women be great leaders? Has there ever been one?

[Ginger]

[Ginger]

[publicduende]

There are cases that a man or a woman is given a high-flying career with NO real merit or skills, as in the case of politics here in the Philippines wherein actors and actresses gets elected to office due to their popularity and not because of their ability to fulfill a politician's role. Also in some rich families wherein being an heir or heiress automatically means you are future ruler of your business empire, even if you are severely unqualified in terms of merit and skill.

Oh yes, of course, we have a lot of great examples of the above in Italy, too! Silvio Berlusconi is a prime example of what happens when a creepy old man with a penchant for underage girls is given the power to get part of his harem elected to parliament. So no doubt that happens, in a few cases. We also have the usual cronyism where friends pull other friends in positions of power and high remuneration because of "services or favours" rendered to them, their lobby or family.

However, I still believe the vast majority of management-level people in private company are recruited with some degree of merit in mind, and that obviously applies to women.

[publicduende]

If I were to fall in love with a woman of another race and bear children, I would make sure to find an environment that is accepting of them. America, despite promises, does not seem to be the place. I may marry without falling in love though. That is how marriage has been throughout history. With arranged marriages, love can come later. I'd just choose someone who makes sense logically and also someone I could feel myself falling in love with eventually. It's a gamble, but it is safer for social/economic reasons.

It's your life and you're free to make whatever choices you wish for your love life. However, let me say it's kind of sad to hear of such cynical views on long-term relationships from a 21 years old. I can clearly see, from your the quality of your posts, that you have the intellectual maturity of a man 10 years older or more. It also seems clear that you bear a few scars from failed or hurtful human relationship, and you're using rational arguments to justify the desertification of your emotional life. It could be because of past issues, or it could have come out of a conscious choice of yours.

You shouldn't marry without falling in love. That's a recipe for disaster on all counts. Go to the Philippines or Indonesia, hook up with random girls and, being the young, cute and gentle man you are, you will be overwhelmed by the human contact. Yet, being in love involves a massive emotional component that you're simply discounting here. You could try a relationship for a few months hoping to eventually fall in love, but the consecration of such a "tentative" relationship via marriage is probably too far.

Let me reiterate. There's no arrogance in my words. You're a top guy, and you still have your entire life to discover the world, the luscious jungle of male-female relationships and you will definitely feel love at some point of your life, perhaps more than once. Just, I would advise, spare your marriage bullet till the moment where logic meets "the reason of the heart" (as Pascal defined them), where calculation meets love.

[abcdavid01]

Hmm...

[Cornfed]

Can I at least ask you, as a proxy question, what job would you do to feel fully empowered and validated as a man?

Obviously I don't require anything from the ZOG to validate me as a man, but we are talking about the perception of females. Since females have no concept of justice or fairness, they have no choice but to judge people on the basis of outcomes. If the ZOG provides the females with a large income for not much effort or skill outlaid, they will think that earning a large income is no big deal and regard men who are handed less money than them as complete losers. Similarly, women are loyal to the men who control the resources they use. If most of your wife's income comes from the ZOG, and the ZOG can simply steal the rest from you, she will regard the ZOG as her real husband rather than you. This is why the regime has created so many BS admin "jobs" with such inflated salaries for women. You might be able to use your pimp hand to control her, but it would be an uphill battle.

[Cornfed]

There are cases that a man or a woman is given a high-flying career with NO real merit or skills, as in the case of politics here in the Philippines wherein actors and actresses gets elected to office due to their popularity and not because of their ability to fulfill a politician's role. Also in some rich families wherein being an heir or heiress automatically means you are future ruler of your business empire, even if you are severely unqualified in terms of merit and skill.

That is the tip of the iceberg. In the West there is massive discrimination against men and huge aggregate percentages of women are given bogus jobs where they are paid a king's ransom to do practically nothing. This is because the policy is for women to be married to the government rather than individual men, so it is necessary to elevate women to a higher income level than their male peer group. Since women like to marry up in terms of income, this greatly reduces the pool of men they consider marriage material.

[publicduende]

Can I at least ask you, as a proxy question, what job would you do to feel fully empowered and validated as a man?

Obviously I don't require anything from the ZOG to validate me as a man, but we are talking about the perception of females. Since females have no concept of justice or fairness, they have no choice but to judge people on the basis of outcomes. If the ZOG provides the females with a large income for not much effort or skill outlaid, they will think that earning a large income is no big deal and regard men who are handed less money than them as complete losers. Similarly, women are loyal to the men who control the resources they use. If most of your wife's income comes from the ZOG, and the ZOG can simply steal the rest from you, she will regard the ZOG as her real husband rather than you. This is why the regime has created so many BS admin "jobs" with such inflated salaries for women. You might be able to use your pimp hand to control her, but it would be an uphill battle.

The only uphill battle I am facing here it try to make sense of your words. I mean, syntactically they're perfectly formed sentences. It's just the meaning of what you're saying I can't get to understand. Nothing of the above, not a single statement, has any correlation whatsoever with what I have seen, heard, felt and experienced about women. Sure, some women might be attuned to judging men based on their incomes, or some other artificial proxy for material success. But...ALL of them? Come on man, you need to grow up and look at the world with objective eyes, not with the inner eyes of your paranoias.

Plus you still haven't answered my question on what (non-ZOG, I supposed, by the way what does it stand for? Zionist-something...?) job you would consider worthwhile, for yourself or a man who would earn your respect. I think you never will.

[abcdavid01]

Hahaha, nice one publicduende. It funnier because you're being perfectly honest.

See, this is why I make exceptions. I just don't trust women as a group to have voting rights because I think they're too insecure and emotional. That doesn't mean the exceptions can't be as good leaders as men if not better.

[abcdavid01]

If I were to fall in love with a woman of another race and bear children, I would make sure to find an environment that is accepting of them. America, despite promises, does not seem to be the place. I may marry without falling in love though. That is how marriage has been throughout history. With arranged marriages, love can come later. I'd just choose someone who makes sense logically and also someone I could feel myself falling in love with eventually. It's a gamble, but it is safer for social/economic reasons.

It's your life and you're free to make whatever choices you wish for your love life. However, let me say it's kind of sad to hear of such cynical views on long-term relationships from a 21 years old. I can clearly see, from your the quality of your posts, that you have the intellectual maturity of a man 10 years older or more. It also seems clear that you bear a few scars from failed or hurtful human relationship, and you're using rational arguments to justify the desertification of your emotional life. It could be because of past issues, or it could have come out of a conscious choice of yours.

You shouldn't marry without falling in love. That's a recipe for disaster on all counts. Go to the Philippines or Indonesia, hook up with random girls and, being the young, cute and gentle man you are, you will be overwhelmed by the human contact. Yet, being in love involves a massive emotional component that you're simply discounting here. You could try a relationship for a few months hoping to eventually fall in love, but the consecration of such a "tentative" relationship via marriage is probably too far.

Let me reiterate. There's no arrogance in my words. You're a top guy, and you still have your entire life to discover the world, the luscious jungle of male-female relationships and you will definitely feel love at some point of your life, perhaps more than once. Just, I would advise, spare your marriage bullet till the moment where logic meets "the reason of the heart" (as Pascal defined them), where calculation meets love.

Actually, another part of the reason I'm overly practical about this is because of women's biological clock. My mother didn't want kids initially, so my parents waited until their thirties to start a family. My dad wanted more kids, but regretted not being able to. He told me to give him grandkids, more than he was able to have. I know guys are typically able to get younger women (my sister's boyfriend is like seven years older than her), but I'm pretty touchy about it. Once that window's closed for a woman it never opens again. It would be great to fall in love and get married, but marriage to me is more of a duty. Having experienced love before, and it having been seven years since, I can suspect how rare it really is. So it just doesn't make sense for me to bet on love and expect concerns like family to work out. Not if I'm playing it safe anyway. It's an odd position to take as a modern day Westerner, but there's a lot of historical precedent for it in many cultures.

[Cornfed]

The only uphill battle I am facing here it try to make sense of your words. I mean, syntactically they're perfectly formed sentences. It's just the meaning of what you're saying I can't get to understand. Nothing of the above, not a single statement, has any correlation whatsoever with what I have seen, heard, felt and experienced about women. Sure, some women might be attuned to judging men based on their incomes, or some other artificial proxy for material success. But...ALL of them? Come on man, you need to grow up and look at the world with objective eyes, not with the inner eyes of your paranoias.

My statements are a bit like saying "Women have ovaries". Of course it goes without saying that there are some entities we would likely define as women who don't have ovaries, don't disrespect men who make less money than them etc. but they don't detract from valid generalizations that are in fact defining features of most women. Hysterically refusing to accept valid generalizations is the hallmark of the intellectual lightweight. If I'm giving you new information that explains the policies of the regime and the resulting high divorce rate etc. then clearly I'm doing you a favor.

[abcdavid01]

...but the question is if they can make good leaders. The answer is yes. I wouldn't bet on it, which is why I don't favor women's voting rights, but I wouldn't mind a female leader as long as she's competent.

[publicduende]

The only uphill battle I am facing here it try to make sense of your words. I mean, syntactically they're perfectly formed sentences. It's just the meaning of what you're saying I can't get to understand. Nothing of the above, not a single statement, has any correlation whatsoever with what I have seen, heard, felt and experienced about women. Sure, some women might be attuned to judging men based on their incomes, or some other artificial proxy for material success. But...ALL of them? Come on man, you need to grow up and look at the world with objective eyes, not with the inner eyes of your paranoias.

My statements are a bit like saying "Women have ovaries". Of course it goes without saying that there are some entities we would likely define as women who don't have ovaries, don't disrespect men who make less money than them etc. but they don't detract from valid generalizations that are in fact defining features of most women. Hysterically refusing to accept valid generalizations is the hallmark of the intellectual lightweight. If I'm giving you new information that explains the policies of the regime and the resulting high divorce rate etc. then clearly I'm doing you a favor.

OK I have written this elsewhere. Perhaps taking undue advantage of his curiosity about all things Italy, I have virtually coerced a well-known member of this forum (you can guess who he is) to embark in a few very long chats about the social and dating scenes of US and Italy. I feel I have learned more insight about US society, girls and their attitudes from him in the past 3 or 4 days than over the rest of my life.

You could say I don't agree with you on a lot of stuff, but you can't say I am mentally lazy so as not to pay an effort to understand where you're coming from, where you have a generalist or a specialised judgment on women. Well, I now know better than before. A lot better. I understand and sympathise with you. Yet, no amount of bitter reality checks on the state of US women can afford the kind of sexist generalisations you and some of you guys lavishly lie on this forum. When enough is enough, it's not for me to say, because I have never lived in the US and my direct exposure to US women has been limited (although. it could be argued, UK women could be a reasonable proxy).

Yet, it's not your judgment on AW I am attacking. It's your judgment on all women as if they were some connected intelligence from outer space, a-la Invasion of the Body Snatchers, conspiring against malekind, I tend to vocally criticise.

Women have ovaries and are subject to their menstrual mood swinging like men have balls are subject to testosterone spikes. Over biology, there lies self-control and embracing feelings or love and respect towardrs your chosen partner, which is something any half-decent men or women should have learned to do past their teenage years. The statement where women define their men based on their financial power is not a valid generalisation, because the phenomenon is possibly very true in a few, and midly true in a minority, but not absolutely true for all of them.

I might come across as insolent when embarking in a lot of these kinds of bouncing replies with you and some of you guys. Yet, it's actually you guys who are not gaining anything by revelling in your state of bitterness and misery. Even, and I mean even if all you said was true, and if you see a possible solution in dating a foreign girl of some description, why continue to let the grim reality of US women define your relationship with all women? The simplest answers are usually the most effective:

1) live and let live;
2) go abroad and re-learn to respect your partner and love her (and yourself!) again.

Am I spouting heresy?

[Ginger]

[Teal Lantern]

Do women make good Leaders, Presidents or Prime Ministers?

etc.

No. They are just held to a lower standard.

The reason history buffs can name some exceptional ones is precisely because ... THEY WERE THE EXCEPTION.