Author Topic: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?  (Read 5443 times)

VladTheImpaler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
I'm feeling philosophical and pondering the upcoming Presidential election.
Can't believe it's less than 2 months away.
I'm pretty certain Hillary Clinton will be the first woman president.
"Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote."
I often wonder if younger people even know this.
How do you feel about having a woman President of the Unites States in less than 100 years of women having the right to vote?
(Please don't make any assumptions about me or my political views, this is simply for a topic for armchair history buffs or philosophers who think it's an interesting topic to ponder, thanks.)

purple monkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 323
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2016, 07:33:46 PM »
It should have already happened.

libertarian4321

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2016, 12:27:46 AM »
Hopefully, she won't take us into another pointless war in her first week in office.

davisgang90

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Location: Roanoke, VA
    • Photography by Rich Davis
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2016, 04:09:11 AM »
Genitals, that's how to pick a world leader!

VladTheImpaler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2016, 05:31:50 AM »
I agree it should of already happened, but I don't think the country was ready.
It will be interesting to see if the rest of the world is ready.
Will foreign leaders see her as an equal?

Adram

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 65
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2016, 07:03:33 AM »
I agree it should of already happened, but I don't think the country was ready.
It will be interesting to see if the rest of the world is ready.
Will foreign leaders see her as an equal?

Let's ask Angela Merkel and Theresa May.

Nick_Miller

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1655
  • Location: A sprawling estate with one of those cool circular driveways in the front!
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2016, 07:12:06 AM »
It should have already happened.

+1

It's frustrating when your 10-year-old daughter is looking through a Book of US Presidents with her dad (me), and she has to ask the obvious question as she scans through all the President portraits.

Someone implied genitals shouldn't be a reason for putting someone in the Oval Office. I will turn that around and state that genitals HAVE been used to keep half the population from being in the Oval Office.


RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2016, 12:32:15 PM »
I agree it should of already happened, but I don't think the country was ready.
It will be interesting to see if the rest of the world is ready.
Will foreign leaders see her as an equal?

Let's ask Angela Merkel and Theresa May.

And remember Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi and Golda Meir.

Roots&Wings

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2016, 04:24:01 PM »
It should have already happened.

+1

It's frustrating when your 10-year-old daughter is looking through a Book of US Presidents with her dad (me), and she has to ask the obvious question as she scans through all the President portraits.

Someone implied genitals shouldn't be a reason for putting someone in the Oval Office. I will turn that around and state that genitals HAVE been used to keep half the population from being in the Oval Office.

In the US, yes. Your daughter might be interested to know more about the many female leaders of government worldwide, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_or_appointed_female_heads_of_government, which the US might finally join this year.

VladTheImpaler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2016, 07:47:47 PM »
While we are throwing out names, I'll add:

Queen Elizabeth I was Queen of England and Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death on 24 March 1603.
(Often called the "Golden Age")

Queen Victoria reigned for exactly sixty-three years, seven months, and two days (June 20, 1837 - January 22, 1901).
Queen Victoria was England's longest serving monarch.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3179
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2016, 07:54:56 PM »
While we are throwing out names, I'll add:

Queen Elizabeth I was Queen of England and Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death on 24 March 1603.
(Often called the "Golden Age")

Queen Victoria reigned for exactly sixty-three years, seven months, and two days (June 20, 1837 - January 22, 1901).
Queen Victoria was England's longest serving monarch.

Marie Antoinette
Maria Theresa Walburga Amalia Christina (Antoinette's mother)
Catherine the Great
Mary, Queen of Scots (killed by her cousin, Queen Elizabeth)

Wallygator

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2016, 03:01:22 PM »
I wish Carly Fiorina gained more popularity during her run for president.  She was my pick out of all the candidates on either side so I have no problem with a woman president.  In fact yes it should have happened by now, however, the woman running in this election is one of the most corrupt candidates to ever run, male or female.  Therefore it would be great to have a woman president but unfortunately Hillary is not that woman.  YMMV.

VladTheImpaler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2016, 04:49:53 PM »
In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave all men the right to vote. It specifically stated that a citizen had the right to vote regardless of race or color.
In 1920, the 19th amendment guaranteed all American women the right to vote.

It took +50 years for women to gain the right to vote after African American men.
Any coincidence we had African American President first followed by a woman President?
Does sexism run deeper than racism?

boy_bye

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2016, 05:07:42 PM »
In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave all men the right to vote. It specifically stated that a citizen had the right to vote regardless of race or color.
In 1920, the 19th amendment guaranteed all American women the right to vote.

It took +50 years for women to gain the right to vote after African American men.
Any coincidence we had African American President first followed by a woman President?
Does sexism run deeper than racism?

Couple of responses here ...

Well, that's an interesting question. I don't think sexism runs "deeper" than racism ... but I do think they have some differences in the spheres in which they play out. Men and women crave to live with each other (at least a majority of men and women do), whereas most powerful white people throughout history don't seem to want to live closely with black people, preferring to exploit them from a distance. So, sexism is often in a woman's face even in her deepest and closest relationships, while I'm not sure how much racism black people experience inside their own homes.

And it's not like racism and sexism are separate from each other. They exist in the same cultural place and time -- they impact each other. For instance, it's true that African-American men got the "right to vote" earlier than white women did. But in practice, many/most African Americans were not able to vote until the mid-20th century. Once white women won the right to vote, we didn't have to keep fighting for it. I mean, women had to/have to keep fighting for other rights, but we didn't have to keep fighting for the vote.

So ... clearly the experience of white people and black people is wildly different in this country. White women have white privilege that black men do not, and black men have male privilege that white women don't have access to. Black women lack either white or male privilege, but may for instance have straight privilege that a gay black man doesn't have. It's not a simple, zero-sum type of thing.

And it's not a scorecard. The concept of privilege is just a mental model to help us understand complicated forces that play out in all of our lives. Only when we understand it on a societal level can we begin to even try to shift it at an individual level.

I want to see a black woman president in my life. Possibly right after Hillary. I want a lesbian president. I want a single mother president. I want to continue to see people in leadership who have not been infused with insane amounts of privilege their entire lives.

Put another way, no more generationally-wealthy-white dudes, please -- at least not until we've had at least 43 more presidents with different backgrounds.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2016, 08:11:05 AM »
I want a lesbian president.

Ontario (Canada) has a lesbian Premier.  And her sexuality was not a big issue in her election.  Right now we have 3 women who are premiers (2 Liberal, 1 NDP)(out of 10 provinces and 3 territories) so it is possible.  Not great for Prime Ministers, our only female Prime Minister (Kim Campbell) took over from a standing PM and then her party lost the next election.  But the present PM had an even split in his first cabinet (lots of ethnic diversity too, Canada is an ethnically diverse country) and when asked why 50% women, he answered "because it is 2016". 

There are even women running for leader of the Conservative Party of Canada right now.

So it can happen.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5278
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2016, 08:50:22 PM »
Genitals, that's how to pick a world leader!

Is it weird that her party/supporters are the only one that makes mention of her gender? I mean, that's weird, right?

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2344
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2016, 12:02:20 AM »
I wish Carly Fiorina gained more popularity during her run for president.  She was my pick out of all the candidates on either side so I have no problem with a woman president.  In fact yes it should have happened by now, however, the woman running in this election is one of the most corrupt candidates to ever run, male or female.  Therefore it would be great to have a woman president but unfortunately Hillary is not that woman.  YMMV.

Being a tech person, I could never vote for one of the worst leaders in modern tech history.

Before she came, HP was a respected name.

Now... HP is split into two companies, neither of which do anything really interesting. They constantly shed jobs. Apple takes over their buildings. Etc.

She ran on the premise of successful business. She has no successful business reputation. She has the exact opposite. Those she claims to represent would never vote for her. No HP employee would vote for her.

EricL

  • Guest
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2016, 12:56:09 AM »
Is it crazy to not give a damn about keeping a SJW score, genitals, ideological purity tests, the sentiments of small children, or sexual preferences in selecting our leaders? Should people who just want a president who's a competent leader/manager and reasonably honest be allowed to vote at all?


oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3179
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2016, 07:30:07 AM »
It should have already happened.

+1

It's frustrating when your 10-year-old daughter is looking through a Book of US Presidents with her dad (me), and she has to ask the obvious question as she scans through all the President portraits.

Someone implied genitals shouldn't be a reason for putting someone in the Oval Office. I will turn that around and state that genitals HAVE been used to keep half the population from being in the Oval Office.

We looked through presidential flashcards, and I knew all of them were Christian. However, I was surprised at how many were the exact same denomination! We need diversity of all kinds.




Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4929
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #19 on: October 07, 2016, 07:32:37 AM »
In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave all men the right to vote. It specifically stated that a citizen had the right to vote regardless of race or color.
In 1920, the 19th amendment guaranteed all American women the right to vote.

It took +50 years for women to gain the right to vote after African American men.
Any coincidence we had African American President first followed by a woman President?
Does sexism run deeper than racism?

Couple of responses here ...

Well, that's an interesting question. I don't think sexism runs "deeper" than racism ... but I do think they have some differences in the spheres in which they play out. Men and women crave to live with each other (at least a majority of men and women do), whereas most powerful white people throughout history don't seem to want to live closely with black people, preferring to exploit them from a distance. So, sexism is often in a woman's face even in her deepest and closest relationships, while I'm not sure how much racism black people experience inside their own homes.

And it's not like racism and sexism are separate from each other. They exist in the same cultural place and time -- they impact each other. For instance, it's true that African-American men got the "right to vote" earlier than white women did. But in practice, many/most African Americans were not able to vote until the mid-20th century. Once white women won the right to vote, we didn't have to keep fighting for it. I mean, women had to/have to keep fighting for other rights, but we didn't have to keep fighting for the vote.

So ... clearly the experience of white people and black people is wildly different in this country. White women have white privilege that black men do not, and black men have male privilege that white women don't have access to. Black women lack either white or male privilege, but may for instance have straight privilege that a gay black man doesn't have. It's not a simple, zero-sum type of thing.

And it's not a scorecard. The concept of privilege is just a mental model to help us understand complicated forces that play out in all of our lives. Only when we understand it on a societal level can we begin to even try to shift it at an individual level.

I want to see a black woman president in my life. Possibly right after Hillary. I want a lesbian president. I want a single mother president. I want to continue to see people in leadership who have not been infused with insane amounts of privilege their entire lives.

Put another way, no more generationally-wealthy-white dudes, please -- at least not until we've had at least 43 more presidents with different backgrounds.
Uh, have you looked at how many states new voter laws have kept some women from voting (as compared to men)?  The difference is staggering.

boy_bye

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #20 on: October 07, 2016, 07:49:25 AM »
In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave all men the right to vote. It specifically stated that a citizen had the right to vote regardless of race or color.
In 1920, the 19th amendment guaranteed all American women the right to vote.

It took +50 years for women to gain the right to vote after African American men.
Any coincidence we had African American President first followed by a woman President?
Does sexism run deeper than racism?

Couple of responses here ...

Well, that's an interesting question. I don't think sexism runs "deeper" than racism ... but I do think they have some differences in the spheres in which they play out. Men and women crave to live with each other (at least a majority of men and women do), whereas most powerful white people throughout history don't seem to want to live closely with black people, preferring to exploit them from a distance. So, sexism is often in a woman's face even in her deepest and closest relationships, while I'm not sure how much racism black people experience inside their own homes.

And it's not like racism and sexism are separate from each other. They exist in the same cultural place and time -- they impact each other. For instance, it's true that African-American men got the "right to vote" earlier than white women did. But in practice, many/most African Americans were not able to vote until the mid-20th century. Once white women won the right to vote, we didn't have to keep fighting for it. I mean, women had to/have to keep fighting for other rights, but we didn't have to keep fighting for the vote.

So ... clearly the experience of white people and black people is wildly different in this country. White women have white privilege that black men do not, and black men have male privilege that white women don't have access to. Black women lack either white or male privilege, but may for instance have straight privilege that a gay black man doesn't have. It's not a simple, zero-sum type of thing.

And it's not a scorecard. The concept of privilege is just a mental model to help us understand complicated forces that play out in all of our lives. Only when we understand it on a societal level can we begin to even try to shift it at an individual level.

I want to see a black woman president in my life. Possibly right after Hillary. I want a lesbian president. I want a single mother president. I want to continue to see people in leadership who have not been infused with insane amounts of privilege their entire lives.

Put another way, no more generationally-wealthy-white dudes, please -- at least not until we've had at least 43 more presidents with different backgrounds.
Uh, have you looked at how many states new voter laws have kept some women from voting (as compared to men)?  The difference is staggering.

No, I would be really interested to learn about that if you want to link me up.

2Birds1Stone

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7916
  • Age: 1
  • Location: Earth
  • K Thnx Bye
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #21 on: October 07, 2016, 07:53:18 AM »
I wouldn't exactly classify her as a woman.....

[MOD NOTE: I know this is the Internet, but let's try to keep things classy, relevant and useful. Thanks.]
« Last Edit: October 11, 2016, 12:50:35 PM by FrugalToque »

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4929
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #22 on: October 07, 2016, 07:54:03 AM »
In 1870, the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave all men the right to vote. It specifically stated that a citizen had the right to vote regardless of race or color.
In 1920, the 19th amendment guaranteed all American women the right to vote.

It took +50 years for women to gain the right to vote after African American men.
Any coincidence we had African American President first followed by a woman President?
Does sexism run deeper than racism?

Couple of responses here ...

Well, that's an interesting question. I don't think sexism runs "deeper" than racism ... but I do think they have some differences in the spheres in which they play out. Men and women crave to live with each other (at least a majority of men and women do), whereas most powerful white people throughout history don't seem to want to live closely with black people, preferring to exploit them from a distance. So, sexism is often in a woman's face even in her deepest and closest relationships, while I'm not sure how much racism black people experience inside their own homes.

And it's not like racism and sexism are separate from each other. They exist in the same cultural place and time -- they impact each other. For instance, it's true that African-American men got the "right to vote" earlier than white women did. But in practice, many/most African Americans were not able to vote until the mid-20th century. Once white women won the right to vote, we didn't have to keep fighting for it. I mean, women had to/have to keep fighting for other rights, but we didn't have to keep fighting for the vote.

So ... clearly the experience of white people and black people is wildly different in this country. White women have white privilege that black men do not, and black men have male privilege that white women don't have access to. Black women lack either white or male privilege, but may for instance have straight privilege that a gay black man doesn't have. It's not a simple, zero-sum type of thing.

And it's not a scorecard. The concept of privilege is just a mental model to help us understand complicated forces that play out in all of our lives. Only when we understand it on a societal level can we begin to even try to shift it at an individual level.

I want to see a black woman president in my life. Possibly right after Hillary. I want a lesbian president. I want a single mother president. I want to continue to see people in leadership who have not been infused with insane amounts of privilege their entire lives.

Put another way, no more generationally-wealthy-white dudes, please -- at least not until we've had at least 43 more presidents with different backgrounds.
Uh, have you looked at how many states new voter laws have kept some women from voting (as compared to men)?  The difference is staggering.

No, I would be really interested to learn about that if you want to link me up.
Here is a news article, I'll get less biased links for you this weekend:http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/texas-voter-id-law

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3179
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2016, 08:37:42 AM »
On sexism and HRC.

Anyone watch the Tina Fey skit with a bunch of women celebrating their last fuckable day?

****

"A woman her age is supposed to be invisible. But Hillary Clinton, who is 68, refuses to disappear — and there is no shortage of people who despise her for it.

One voter at a Donald Trump rally described her to The Washington Post’s Jenna Johnson last week as “an angry, crotchety old hag.” Trump, who isn’t exactly a spring chicken at age 70, claims Clinton lacks “stamina” and a “presidential look” and mocked her by acting out her stumble when she had pneumonia last month.

There’s misogyny, and then there’s the ageist misogyny that older women face. That under­current runs very deep in our culture, and it’s one of the reasons the haters hate Hillary Clinton so deeply."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/hillary-clinton-is-a-68-year-old-woman-and-plenty-of-people-hate-her-for-it/2016/10/06/fac46ee8-8bd9-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html

Nick_Miller

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1655
  • Location: A sprawling estate with one of those cool circular driveways in the front!
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2016, 08:43:51 AM »
It should have already happened.

+1

It's frustrating when your 10-year-old daughter is looking through a Book of US Presidents with her dad (me), and she has to ask the obvious question as she scans through all the President portraits.

Someone implied genitals shouldn't be a reason for putting someone in the Oval Office. I will turn that around and state that genitals HAVE been used to keep half the population from being in the Oval Office.

We looked through presidential flashcards, and I knew all of them were Christian. However, I was surprised at how many were the exact same denomination! We need diversity of all kinds.

+1

No one will be happier than I will be when we elect an openly non-religious President. It MAY be in our lifetime, but disdain toward atheists is probably even more heavily rooted than disdain of other groups like gay folks, Muslims, etc. I think people view us "know it alls" or something like that. I tell people, "I don't claim to have all the answers, but that doesn't mean you get to just make up ridiculous stuff (and in some cases, try to sculpt government policy around said "ridiculous stuff.")."

It's almost like people think you need to "believe" in SOMETHING, even if that SOMETHING is completely ridiculous. Like it's better to view a chair as a "Higher Power") (see AA materials) than it is to be a completely rational, science-based person who prioritizes observation, consistency, etc.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2016, 08:54:44 AM »
It should have already happened.

+1

It's frustrating when your 10-year-old daughter is looking through a Book of US Presidents with her dad (me), and she has to ask the obvious question as she scans through all the President portraits.

Someone implied genitals shouldn't be a reason for putting someone in the Oval Office. I will turn that around and state that genitals HAVE been used to keep half the population from being in the Oval Office.

We looked through presidential flashcards, and I knew all of them were Christian. However, I was surprised at how many were the exact same denomination! We need diversity of all kinds.

+1

No one will be happier than I will be when we elect an openly non-religious President. It MAY be in our lifetime, but disdain toward atheists is probably even more heavily rooted than disdain of other groups like gay folks, Muslims, etc. I think people view us "know it alls" or something like that. I tell people, "I don't claim to have all the answers, but that doesn't mean you get to just make up ridiculous stuff (and in some cases, try to sculpt government policy around said "ridiculous stuff.")."

It's almost like people think you need to "believe" in SOMETHING, even if that SOMETHING is completely ridiculous. Like it's better to view a chair as a "Higher Power") (see AA materials) than it is to be a completely rational, science-based person who prioritizes observation, consistency, etc.

Careful.  Next you'll be suggesting that the evidence shows that the highly religious AA is no more effective (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_Alcoholics_Anonymous) than any other method of treating alcoholism.  That'll rile folks up.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2016, 09:10:01 AM »
Genitals, that's how to pick a world leader!

Is it weird that her party/supporters are the only one that makes mention of her gender? I mean, that's weird, right?

You're kidding, right?

Rudy Giuliani saying "a businessman" would make a far better leader than "a woman"?

All of the "Trump that Bitch" T-shirts being sold to Trump supporters?

All of the various ways that Trump himself mentions her gender as reasons not to vote for her?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-women.html?_r=0


thd7t

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1348
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2016, 09:12:00 AM »
Genitals, that's how to pick a world leader!
I too am glad that we may finally end that practice. It's embarrassing that we've gone this long without seriously considering half of the population for the highest office.

VladTheImpaler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #28 on: October 11, 2016, 09:42:15 AM »
What is the core fear of people who oppose a woman president?

Are they worried that it will change the power dynamic in the boardroom? Or even the bedroom?

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #29 on: October 11, 2016, 10:03:53 AM »
What is the core fear of people who oppose a woman president?

Are they worried that it will change the power dynamic in the boardroom? Or even the bedroom?

It is about the 1-2 weeks a month where they tend to go unhinged.......but Hillary is past that stage of her life.


/sarcasm off

boy_bye

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2016, 10:04:40 AM »
Genitals, that's how to pick a world leader!
I too am glad that we may finally end that practice. It's embarrassing that we've gone this long without seriously considering half of the population for the highest office.

For real! I always love how people accuse feminists of being anti-male without ever acknowledging the thousands of years of misogynist history that we are just now starting to crawl out of. As though those thousands of years of history *weren't* about genitals, and the reason dudes were in power for all that time was simply because of merit. Insert massive eye-roll here.

Interesting article here on how, to privileged groups, equality feels like oppression:
http://inthesetimes.com/article/16157/our_feminized_society


RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2016, 12:32:10 PM »
It's almost like people think you need to "believe" in SOMETHING, even if that SOMETHING is completely ridiculous. Like it's better to view a chair as a "Higher Power") (see AA materials) than it is to be a completely rational, science-based person who prioritizes observation, consistency, etc.
Well, there is always the Flying Spaghetti Monster.  And isn't there something with invisible unicorns?

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2016, 12:34:17 PM »
It's almost like people think you need to "believe" in SOMETHING, even if that SOMETHING is completely ridiculous. Like it's better to view a chair as a "Higher Power") (see AA materials) than it is to be a completely rational, science-based person who prioritizes observation, consistency, etc.
Well, there is always the Flying Spaghetti Monster.  And isn't there something with invisible unicorns?

I'm concerned about the relationship between pirates and global warming.  As pirates have decreased, global temperatures have gone up.  This is an unsustainable trend and we need to invest in high seas piracy.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2016, 12:34:41 PM »
What is the core fear of people who oppose a woman president?

Are they worried that it will change the power dynamic in the boardroom? Or even the bedroom?

It is about the 1-2 weeks a month where they tend to go unhinged.......but Hillary is past that stage of her life.


/sarcasm off

Oh, as opposed to the 4.5 weeks/month that certain members of our species spend under the influence of testosterone? (snark)

In all seriousness, this is an amazing stage of life, so much of the strum und drang is over.

libertarian4321

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #34 on: October 11, 2016, 02:58:59 PM »
I wish Carly Fiorina gained more popularity during her run for president.  She was my pick out of all the candidates on either side so I have no problem with a woman president.  In fact yes it should have happened by now, however, the woman running in this election is one of the most corrupt candidates to ever run, male or female.  Therefore it would be great to have a woman president but unfortunately Hillary is not that woman.  YMMV.

Being a tech person, I could never vote for one of the worst leaders in modern tech history.

Before she came, HP was a respected name.

Now... HP is split into two companies, neither of which do anything really interesting. They constantly shed jobs. Apple takes over their buildings. Etc.

She ran on the premise of successful business. She has no successful business reputation. She has the exact opposite. Those she claims to represent would never vote for her. No HP employee would vote for her.

As a former DELL investor, I LOVED Carly Fiorina as the CEO of HP.

While she was leading HP, her "rock star" incompetence was a great for Dell investors.

Then came the black day when they fired Carly Fiorina, and hired a low-key (but, unfortunately, competent) CEO. 

The party was over for Dell.

FIRE Artist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Location: YEG
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #35 on: October 11, 2016, 03:21:12 PM »
Is it crazy to not give a damn about keeping a SJW score, genitals, ideological purity tests, the sentiments of small children, or sexual preferences in selecting our leaders? Should people who just want a president who's a competent leader/manager and reasonably honest be allowed to vote at all?

In Canada, I can say that I have never known anything about the religious affiliation of our Prime Ministers, it is not used as an election platform as far as I have know, and the same applies for all other elected public officials (save for the Catholic School board in provinces misguided enough to have them).  A few years ago, I was working on expat assignment in Sumatra Indonesia, during my first week, I had several locals ask me about the "Muslim Mayor" elected in Canada.  They were referring to the very popular Major Nenshi of Calgary.  It was a great conversation starter about the difference between "Muslim Mayor" and "Mayor who happens to be Muslim" in a country like Canada that has true separation of church and state. 

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2016, 04:07:33 PM »
Is it crazy to not give a damn about keeping a SJW score, genitals, ideological purity tests, the sentiments of small children, or sexual preferences in selecting our leaders? Should people who just want a president who's a competent leader/manager and reasonably honest be allowed to vote at all?

In Canada, I can say that I have never known anything about the religious affiliation of our Prime Ministers, it is not used as an election platform as far as I have know, and the same applies for all other elected public officials (save for the Catholic School board in provinces misguided enough to have them).  A few years ago, I was working on expat assignment in Sumatra Indonesia, during my first week, I had several locals ask me about the "Muslim Mayor" elected in Canada.  They were referring to the very popular Major Nenshi of Calgary.  It was a great conversation starter about the difference between "Muslim Mayor" and "Mayor who happens to be Muslim" in a country like Canada that has true separation of church and state.

I think part of this is the Catholic/Protestant thing never got big in Canada, because of the many PMs we had from Quebec - so they were Catholic.  That meant religion was just not a big thing in terms of politicians.  Did anyone blink at seeing 2 turbaned Sikhs in Trudeau's first Cabinet? No, they were asking about the 50% women (and as he said, it is 2016).  We've managed some diversity in GGs as well, once we started not having British appointees.

Of course it is not new in the US, I remember the fuss about JFK being Catholic.  As in, he will take orders from the Pope fuss.

MayDay

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4953
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2016, 08:00:03 PM »
My dream is for HRC to take office, then divorce Bill and come out as a lesbian.

Boom, 3 birds, one stone.

Leisured

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
  • Age: 79
  • Location: South east Australia, in country
  • Retired, and loving it.
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2016, 05:43:15 AM »

Just out of interest.  I am Australian, and my monarch, Elizabeth 2, visited Australia in 2011. By a fluke, the Governor General of Australia, who represents the Queen when the Queen is not in Australia, was a woman, as was the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. I attach a link to a photo showing these three great ladies in conversation.

The Queen is in light blue, the Governor General, Quentin Bryce, in dark pink, and the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has a striped top, not the most suitable attire.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=queen+elizabeth,+quentin+bryce+julia+gillard&biw=1242&bih=580&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjp7MTj1dfPAhXhqlQKHaSlAUkQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=QOVLNFZ1JOV4QM%3A

Queen Elizabeth 2 has recently become the longest serving monarch of Britain.


thd7t

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1348
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2016, 06:13:04 AM »

Just out of interest.  I am Australian, and my monarch, Elizabeth 2, visited Australia in 2011. By a fluke, the Governor General of Australia, who represents the Queen when the Queen is not in Australia, was a woman, as was the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. I attach a link to a photo showing these three great ladies in conversation.

The Queen is in light blue, the Governor General, Quentin Bryce, in dark pink, and the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has a striped top, not the most suitable attire.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=queen+elizabeth,+quentin+bryce+julia+gillard&biw=1242&bih=580&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjp7MTj1dfPAhXhqlQKHaSlAUkQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=QOVLNFZ1JOV4QM%3A

Queen Elizabeth 2 has recently become the longest serving monarch of Britain.
As of today, she is the longest reigning monarch alive.

MayDay

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4953
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2016, 03:42:33 PM »

Just out of interest.  I am Australian, and my monarch, Elizabeth 2, visited Australia in 2011. By a fluke, the Governor General of Australia, who represents the Queen when the Queen is not in Australia, was a woman, as was the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. I attach a link to a photo showing these three great ladies in conversation.

The Queen is in light blue, the Governor General, Quentin Bryce, in dark pink, and the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has a striped top, not the most suitable attire.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=queen+elizabeth,+quentin+bryce+julia+gillard&biw=1242&bih=580&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjp7MTj1dfPAhXhqlQKHaSlAUkQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=QOVLNFZ1JOV4QM%3A

Queen Elizabeth 2 has recently become the longest serving monarch of Britain.

Do you consider the stripes the problem, or the lack of hat?

It looks like a fancy outfit to me, but we don't do hats in the US. Thank God.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5278
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: A woman in the White House on the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage?
« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2016, 11:26:30 PM »
My dream is for HRC to take office, then divorce Bill and come out as a lesbian.

Boom, 3 birds, one stone.

Genuis. As long as she tweets about this all on one day and gets it over with - I couldn't handle this leaking out over several months of constant 24/7 news coverage.

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!