# Would you like to live in a female-dominated world?



## Garro (May 16, 2013)

So you constantly hear feminists cry "Patriarchy!!!" and complain about it. So I am curious, as women, if you had the opportunity to live in a female-dominated matriarchal world would you? If so, or if not why?

And to men: Would waking up one day finding yourself in a female-dominated world with no way back be a nightmare for you, or do you think you'd enjoy it?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

It depends. If you are talking about mostly or all key leadership positions being held by women but the same world, no real problems. Although some religious issues would need addressed with me for running a church but if it were a totally different world, why not?

If you're talking about some form of dystopian world, I would probably be in jail, enslaved or executed. Although, given tasks as a warrior, I might be complacent.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DanaS (May 28, 2014)

I think one nice thing would be that rapists and child molesters would actually get just punishments.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)




----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DanaS said:


> I think one nice thing would be that rapists and child molesters would actually get just punishments.


There are many female child molesters and rapists.

There are many female politicians and law makers.

Male here and I would make forcible or drugging rape a capital offense if I had the power.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

3putt said:


>


Ha ha! I actually thought of that episode of TNG!!!


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
In some ways child molesters do get just punishments (if convicted). they are sent to prison where they are repeatedly gang-raped and beaten, sometimes to death. What worse could you ask for?

BTW, I am very much opposed to the brutality in some prisons.


If the issue is convicting child molesters and rapists, that is a much more difficult problem because sometimes there is very little evidence. 




DanaS said:


> I think one nice thing would be that rapists and child molesters would actually get just punishments.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

I think more women should be in positions of power, especially in cultures where they are mostly excluded and suppressed. Overall, I think men and women should have equal opportunity and authority - neither should dominate or have control.

However, women have all the flaws and issues that men have, so there wouldn't really be any real change if they dominated, IMO. They might be a little more subtle and persuasive, but that could actually lead to more coercion and control.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)




----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

samyeagar said:


>


That episode was a bit terrifying! That was female dominated with an extreme shortage of males! Would not want that!
_Posted via Mobile Device_Or was I thinking of a different episode?


----------



## ScrambledEggs (Jan 14, 2014)

DanaS said:


> I think one nice thing would be that rapists and child molesters would actually get just punishments.


All gender wars aside, it is a mistake to assume that the concentration of power in any group or special interest will actually lead to a higher degree of justice in anything.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

ScrambledEggs said:


> All gender wars aside, it is a mistake to assume that the concentration of power in any group or special interest will actually lead to a higher degree of justice in anything.


Word. And it would be equally insulting for someone to say something like... oh, I dunno...

"Paternity fraud would become rampant. Perhaps even the norm."

See what I did there?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Your poll needs a choice for "Meh": .. does not matter... all humans are flawed. The world would still be screwed up.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> Is this the island of no-shave and sweatpants?


No....they are all missing the obvious and very REAL place where this is true...the Isle of ******...where Wonder Woman comes from. BAMM!

Themyscira - Wonder Woman Wiki


----------



## twocents (Jun 5, 2015)

The question is not about rapists and molesters. 
Germany, England and Israel were ruled by women. I don think it is any different.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

twocents said:


> The question is not about rapists and molesters.
> 
> Germany, England and Israel were ruled by women. I don think it is any different.


All of those countries have mostly men in positions of power. Having one woman as the head of state does not make it a female dominated society.


----------



## Joey2k (Oct 3, 2014)

Do you think women are more likely than men to punish anyone more harshly for anything? Women have more of the touchy-feely let's-be-nice-and-rehabilitiate-them vibe, I would think.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> No....they are all missing the obvious and very REAL place where this is true...the Isle of ******...where Wonder Woman comes from. BAMM!
> 
> Themyscira - Wonder Woman Wiki


Wonder Woman is obviously bi because I am married to her! >
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Joey2k said:


> Do you think women are more likely than men to punish anyone more harshly for anything? Women have more of the touchy-feely let's-be-nice-and-rehabilitiate-them vibe, I would think.


I don't think so. Women who are cops are not touchy-feely. The approach to punishment is learned.


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

It seems to work okay for the Navajos. They have a good balance. 

In traditional Navajo culture the women own all the land. Property is passed down matrilinealy, from mother to daughter throughout generations. I may be wrong, but if a Navajo woman has no daughters, she passes it on to the oldest niece or a younger sister. Sons don't inherit from their mom's, only the daughters do. It is more equitable if you think about it. 

_"Until recently there was no conception of joint property ownership between husband and wife. As a result Navajo women have always enjoyed a favored and somewhat more “liberated” position in their society than have their white counterparts. A woman controls the hogan, built on land that was set aside for her by her family; she owns the children, which belong to her clan, her sheep, the product of her sheep and other livestock, her jewelry and all blankets she might weave and the income from the sale of any of her property. A husband owns what he has inherited from his own family and all goods which he has bought out of his own earnings .... Either partner may sell or trade what he owns, though one usually consults with the other about any major transactions." …………. Raymond Friday Locke_

_Navajo society is traditionally matrilineal, meaning that one’s clan identity is derived from the female and not the male. In a traditional introduction, a Navajo person will first introduce himself or herself by naming the maternal clan, followed by the paternal clan.

Changing Woman, the principal deity of the Navajo religion, represents the many roles that a woman takes on in her lifetime. Changing Woman also created the first Navajo clans and guidelines for living and established the matrilineal system.

Navajo women have always been at the core of social and economic control in their culture and occupy a strong position in Navajo life. Women are the potters and weavers, crafts they have been practicing for centuries. Women have traditionally owned the land and livestock, passing these possessions down to their daughters, who have been trained to manage them._


----------



## MarriedDude (Jun 21, 2014)

Might as well give it try...i mean, why not?

It's not like things could get much worse then they are now. Could even improve. 

I bet there would be less starvation..maybe women would focus more on ensuring all people have access to the basics, food, medical care, education. That would be a HUGE improvement with far reaching consequences...good ones
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

MarriedDude said:


> Might as well give it try...i mean, why not?
> 
> It's not like things could get much worse then they are now. Could even improve.
> 
> ...


Have you seen some of the vultures in politics? Women make just as good villains as men. I don't think good or bad tendencies can be allocated to one gender more than another.

My oldest sister would be a tyrant if given power.

We descend from Celtic tribes though. Could have something to do with it...
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

England/Great Britain is a female dominated society. Has been since Victoria.


----------



## OnTheFly (Mar 12, 2015)

DanaS said:


> I think one nice thing would be that rapists and child molesters would actually get just punishments.


Laughable!

Rape used to be a capital offence, what happened in the time from then to now? 

Jeopardy theme playing......

The rise of liberalism on the back of feminism. 

In the construction trade I'm in and the others trades I interact with, not a single man would advocate a lessening of punishment for rape from execution to ever diminishing jail time. 

We live in a virtual matriarchy now, so look to your sisters to point your finger.

Edited to add: I voted for the fourth option, but I think that's obvious, haha


----------



## Somanylemons (May 2, 2015)

No I wouldn't want to. 

I'd much rather live in a meritocracy where people got their jobs etc based solely upon merit.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

bandit.45 said:


> Navajo women have always been at the core of social and economic control in their culture and occupy a strong position in Navajo life. Women are the potters and weavers, crafts they have been practicing for centuries. Women have traditionally owned the land and livestock, passing these possessions down to their daughters, who have been trained to manage them.[/I]


There are other societies currently and in the past who did/do this.

There is one in India that I've heard of but I cannot remember their name.

Under old Jewish law property was separate. Each spouse keeps what they inherited and earned. They share only as they chose to... well except that the man has to support his wife since in the old days it was hard for a woman to earn a decent living.

It's the same under Islam and old, Middle Eastern Christianity. 

I think that the basis of community property is English law. At one time all property that a woman brought into her marriage became her husband's permanently. This was mostly about land and gold (money). She could keep her jewelry and other personal valuables.

But in the late 1800's and early 1900's laws were changed to be more equitable. Inheritance and separate property are separate. And all that is acquired in the marriage is community.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

OnTheFly said:


> Laughable!
> 
> Rape used to be a capital offence, what happened in the time from then to now?
> 
> ...


Oh, you mean like in Islamic countries where the punishment for rape is stoning/death? And they still do it to this day.. yep, they stone/execute rape victims. There's some justice for you.


----------



## OnTheFly (Mar 12, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> Oh, you mean like in Islamic countries where the punishment for rape is stoning/death? And they still do it to this day.. yep, they stone/execute rape victims. There's some justice for you.


Did you honestly think I was advocating Sharia Law.......honestly?

(insert facepalm meme here)


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

OnTheFly said:


> Did you honestly think I was advocating Sharia Law.......honestly?
> 
> (insert facepalm meme here)


I am certain he wasn't referring to third world Islamic theocracies.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I don't see a lot of difference in the behavior of female vs male high level politicians, so I don't think it would make a lot of difference.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I think it is a silly notion really, are power hungry, angry, bitter women and better or worse than power hungry, angry, bitter men?

I believe in equality and mostly Meritocracy. I do believe in Feminism but only in its true form of equality and bringing Women's rights up to par with Men's. 

But we need people that are good at what they do whether that be ruling the world or working in other more mundane jobs, that is not gender based it is ability based.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

You mean like inner city Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago or Compton?


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Poll results are... interesting


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

I think, deep down, most people want equality and equal opportunities for both sexes, because whether you are the oppressed or the oppressor, there is an imbalance.

In some societies around the world where women are still treated appallingly simply because they are female, I can guarantee there are some male relatives who wish they could change the world for their mother/wife/daughter/sister, and for those who enjoy their positions of dominance, they'll never be challenged to be better people. They'll live like arseholes and they'll die, and the world will be a better place once they are gone.

If I were in a society where my son or daughter were treated like lesser human beings being due to their sex, it would break my heart. I'm a product of a society that is striving towards equality between sexes, and I'm thankful. I'm thankful for all the hard work by the men and women who have come before me who made these changes happen.


----------



## Kitt (Jun 3, 2015)

Sure, I've lived in a male dominated world all my life and I'm pretty sure not much would change. If people honestly believed men and women were equal, we would no longer have these question. Why are males more capable than females? The idea that you would like to live in a male dominated society as we live in is better means you think something is wrong with females or they are inferior. Logic! (Please try to refrain from religious nonsense as I'm not a believer and find it hollow.) Why do you ask this question? Are you sincere or trying to upset men?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

RandomDude said:


> Poll results are... interesting


No kidding. 

The problem with the poll is that it does not have an option for those how would neither hate it nor love it. I cannot participate the pole because it does not have that option.

What I'd like to see is a world in which neither gender dominated. Instead when it comes to jobs, political positions, etc. gender does not matter.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

Some African cultures are matriarchal. They work more or less the same way as any other albeit their sense of communal justice is different. Truth and Reconciliation Commissions come, for the most part, from matriarchal cultures. And those have, at least in the places where they're successful, have ameliorated endless tribal wars and retributions.


----------



## DanaS (May 28, 2014)

ScrambledEggs said:


> All gender wars aside, it is a mistake to assume that the concentration of power in any group or special interest will actually lead to a higher degree of justice in anything.


I don't know about that. Women would certainly be more for justice where women/children are involved. With the stories of both Hastert and the Duggers in the news right now it sickens me that there is a statute of limitations on child abuse and rape. How sick is that? I guarantee if women were in charge there would not be a statute of limitations and there would be much more aggressive policing in child abuse/rape etc.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

Garro said:


> So you constantly hear feminists cry "Patriarchy!!!" and complain about it. So I am curious, as women, if you had the opportunity to live in a female-dominated matriarchal world would you? If so, or if not why?
> 
> And to men: Would waking up one day finding yourself in a female-dominated world with no way back be a nightmare for you, or do you think you'd enjoy it?


If there's a recipe for success then I'm happy no matter the gender ratio. I wouldn't care if 9 of 10 successful people were women so long as it's possible for everyone. For example if traits more prevalent in women were part of this recipe then sure I'd be happy. After all that would put the ball in my court to either foster those traits and succeed or not.

But honestly this poll needs two more options
- I'm a female and it wouldn't matter.
- I'm a male and it wouldn't matter.


----------



## NotEasy (Apr 19, 2015)

Here in Australia we have had female Prime Minister (President), State Premiers, Govenor Generals and company CEOs etc. Some silly people say we are already a female dominated country. But in most cases it has only been one female of each, the vast majority of politicians, high public official, CEOs etc remain male. And many of these females were very badly treated or hounded out of office because of gender. Our Prime Minister was seen as unsuitable because she was a red-head. One State Premier was ridiculed over her fashion sense, such as a love of polka-dot dresses. And after they were hounded out the refrain was "they paved the way", "it will be better for those that follow", but they remain a tiny minority. Meanwhile our current Prime Minister is regularly seen in "budgie smugglers" (google it but perhaps NSFW) but this gets little ridicule.
I would hope a period of female domination led to better overall behaviour and ended in a meritocracy. But probably I am a dreamer.


----------



## ScrambledEggs (Jan 14, 2014)

DanaS said:


> I don't know about that. Women would certainly be more for justice where women/children are involved. With the stories of both Hastert and the Duggers in the news right now it sickens me that there is a statute of limitations on child abuse and rape. How sick is that? I guarantee if women were in charge there would not be a statute of limitations and there would be much more aggressive policing in child abuse/rape etc.


The very word dominate, used by the OP, guarantees, it would not lead to greater justice in the aggregate. If women had all this embedded power, as men are said to, why would we not assume some of them would abuse that power to meet their sexual needs and desires? The OP's proposal is not just shift in who is president but where most wealth and power lies within society. 

I guess what you are saying is that women are naturally more egalitarian, which maybe true but then would not power corrupt that as well?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

DanaS said:


> I don't know about that. Women would certainly be more for justice where women/children are involved. With the stories of both Hastert and the Duggers in the news right now it sickens me that there is a statute of limitations on child abuse and rape. How sick is that? I guarantee if women were in charge there would not be a statute of limitations and there would be much more aggressive policing in child abuse/rape etc.


You are only saying that because of bias. It would not change.

My sister and I are both products of an extremely abusive upbringing.

She is abusive and extremely hostile to her own children and indiscriminately violent and a bully.

I am a bully's worst nightmare. I am just as ferocious as my sister but I have directed my fury at abusers of all sorts.

I am extremely protective of women and children. My sister is my opposite. She is almost wicked in how she treats everyone.

So how come her vagina doesn't make her more compassionate than me who has a penis?

Your thought process doesn't equate.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

I'd like to see a society and culture that is dominated by people of goodwill, empathy, and compassion that are weary of labels. People who think about the future of their male and female children, the lives of the men and women they love and who hate evil perpetrated by men and women. If those people are female, I don't mind. Anyone who can get the job done is OK with me. However, I don't think it's gender based. As far as I can see, men and woman love their family in equal measure and want their families safe and happy and not fodder for evil people. Some don't in equal measure.

The problem is the effective use labels that encourage group-think and mass action. Labels are such powerful tools that they makes the masses act against their own interest. People act with their label affiliation - race, gender, SES etc. The feminist is one such label used by fear mongers. Feminist takeover = women will taking over the country = making society more sensitive to issues that overwhelmingly effect women and less sensitive to men. Patriarchy the opposite. 

People don't really know what changes will be generated by greater involvement of women in positions of power but they are either for it or against it. The same people have male and female children and relatives that they love. Why then don't we consider the effects of each individual issue based on its merits and effects on the male and female people in our lives without employing labels?


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

I have to agree with Conan. I don't think it would necessarily lead to harsher laws or less tolerance for abusers. I just heard about a woman who stubbed a smoke out on someone's face. Another news story where a teenage girl stabbed another girl in the throat. A few months ago, a mother who killed nine children.

I'm not saying women are worse. I'm just saying they're not necessarily better. I think we need the best of both sexes leading the way.


----------



## Satya (Jun 22, 2012)

Women leading the world would truly frighten me. While I have known many kind, level headed women professionals, I've also personally worked for many queen bees, and they are exhausting and morally drain their staff. 

Likewise I've worked for some difficult men, one called me the c-word on the office floor once in front of peers.

It takes all sorts in this world,not just one sort.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

In the USA in the last election, 71 million women voted vs. 61 million men. Women have the numbers to change the political landscape across the board. I guess we need another poll response for me ... Women already have the power, whether they realize it or not.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

People who ruthlessly climb over bodies on their rise to the top exhibit little gender bias. Can you imagine if a male CEO of Yahoo decreed that no one could work at home anymore? They'd be on trial in the Hague for war crimes. On the other hand much of the vast hatred against Margaret Thatcher was BECAUSE she was a woman and people seemed to expect that the leader of the Tories would somehow become a liberal democrat because she had ovaries. Similarly both Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are both condemned for running their firms into the ground yet the long parade of idiot men who came before them get a pass. Seems rather unfair don't you think.

No I think the disconnect is not THEM, it's how we view ourselves and our reactions to women leaders. If they act all feminine we applaud them if nothing goes horribly wrong in which case we condemn them for being too weak. But if they're really strong we call them men and tell them to remember their place. This is one reason why women have more trouble working with other women than men do. 

Does anyone remember remake of The Stepford Wives? Glenn Close's famous line - 'When women were becoming men, men were becoming GODS!'


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Jung_admirer said:


> In the USA in the last election, 71 million women voted vs. 61 million men. Women have the numbers to change the political landscape across the board. I guess we need another poll response for me ... Women already have the power, whether they realize it or not.


I the issue is that the voter does not select the candidates. The parties do, and they are still predominately old boy clubs.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

What applies to one office doesn't translate to the vast majority of elected positions.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

My CEO is a woman who I don't find particularly good at her job. But for anyone doing the job she does I'd say the same thing. I really don't see gender or color when it comes to leadership. We shouldn't really care. Show me results. I was thinking of this this AM when Dear Leader Obastard was on in Germany giving some sort typically worthless speech about something. It occurred to me that he never actually says 'this is what we are doing this is what we will do and this is what the goddamn results will be so help me God'. All you ever get from the Great Mumbler is some boring and tortured explanation of HIS thought process as he works through how he justifies what he does. I don't care about his thought process. I don't need to sign on. I don't want to give leaders affirmation. Screw that. You want the big job then do the big job. If having a uterus helps or hurts that, if being black or gay or a quadriplegic helps or impedes that, that's on you. Not my f^cking problem.

Anyone remember The Name of the Rose, when the Papal Emissary is arguing with the Jesuits over this arcane discussion whether Christ own His own clothes? And the Papal Emissary slams his fist on the table and shouts "This isn't about whether Christ owned his own clothes this is about whether The Church will own all of the lands you see before you!"

That's what I'm talking about.


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

Whoever is better at doing a certain job, tasks, etc. that's who runs the show. Whether it be the man or woman, doesn't matter to me. Based on our abilities and nothing more.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Western civilization is constantly evolving. If one day that means only women hold elected office, so be it. I imagine at that point reststance will be futile.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Satya said:


> Women leading the world would truly frighten me. While I have known many kind, level headed women professionals, I've also personally worked for many queen bees, and they are exhausting and morally drain their staff.
> 
> Likewise I've worked for some difficult men, one called me the c-word on the office floor once in front of peers.
> 
> It takes all sorts in this world,not just one sort.


Women are expected to be kinder and gentler but these traits rarely lead to successful leadership. 

In my former professional life, I was responsible for getting results using a considerable amount of tax-derived research dollars. I had one priority, repay my sponsor for their faith in my vision. 

First, I had to assemble a team of people to support my mission. Some people in the team lost their desire to follow my lead. Therefore, I needed to employed consequences commiserate with their waywardness. They of course felt wronged. 

A good leader is first a good follower. I find that sub-optimal workers find the most fault with their superiors. It might help to consider that women and men have to employ the same methods to get the job done. Gender expectations don't come into play if your eye stays on the mission.


----------



## sisters359 (Apr 9, 2009)

This is a trick question. "Female-dominated" is a concept connected with "patriarchy," because both glorify power and genitalia. 

My feminist "utopia" would be a world where people got where they were based solely on their merits, starting from the same spot, with absolutely no way of advancing through illegal or immoral means; a world where people born with more talent/ability did not mean that somehow they "deserved" and got more than others who worked just as hard--where working hard and being a decent person were enough to enjoy a good life. 

Crazy, I know!


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

sisters359 said:


> This is a trick question. "Female-dominated" is a concept connected with "patriarchy," because both glorify power and genitalia.
> 
> My feminist "utopia" would be a world where people got where they were based solely on their merits, starting from the same spot, with absolutely no way of advancing through illegal or immoral means; a world where people born with more talent/ability did not mean that somehow they "deserved" and got more than others who worked just as hard--where working hard and being a decent person were enough to enjoy a good life.
> 
> Crazy, I know!


Other than all the genocides and famines, the altruistic equality of communism works rather well.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Until I landed on this forum.... I never gave any thought to gender issues / "gender wars"... just blew completely past me....the people I hung with .. we just never spoke of these things. 

I have always upon meeting ANYONE.. male or female.. friend, co-worker, relative, acquaintance... all that I see or want to know is...
"ARE THEY A GOOD PERSON?...."Do they treat others with respect?"... can I trust them? Do they live ethically ? Do they welcome me/ accept me for who I am... or do they look down upon me, my family ...if we are different ... will they use me, manipulate me.. are they truthful? 

Gender is not on my mind .... *I see these things*.. then take it from there.. 

There are tremendous inspiring Leaders of MEN.. and WOMEN.. as it should be.. and will continue to be.. 



> *CuddleBug said*: Whoever is better at doing a certain job, tasks, etc. that's who runs the show. Whether it be the man or woman, doesn't matter to me. Based on our abilities and nothing more.


 In fairness.. Yes.. this is how it should be..


----------



## McDean (Jun 13, 2015)

I think it has already happened, except in the middle east (and I don't advocate for that style either)....men in America are blamed for near everything and it's acceptable. If your wife is unhappy, you're not doing enough. If your kids are maladjusted it's because dad spends too much time on the job. If you look at a pretty woman, as a man you turned them into an object (then why bother to dress nice and wear makeup, tell me its all for you and I will enjoy a good laugh!)...We've created a culture of 'I need to do this/that/other for ME' with our fairer sex because we had that pendulum too far the other way for hundreds of years. I would like to see an equally run world between men and women where neither felt the need to bash on the other to feel better about themselves.....the best I can offer is that a world dominated by women would be no better than the one we have now, the wars would be fought over different things is all and if you think women aren't warlike you haven't seen them when their children are threatened....


----------



## pragmaster (May 7, 2014)

The joke is on men. Women have been in charge this whole time. Lol. Bahaha

I am all for meritocracy. 

I believe women are far more powerful than men in every way possible. Robots can do the jobs men do, but robots cannot possibly do the jobs women do. If that is a sexist statement, then yes, I am a tad sexist. 

Of course myself I don't see things as men/women. People are different and I see everyone as human scum first. 

Damn scum. 

In all seriousness, I would actually love to live in a world dominanted by women.


----------



## alte Dame (Aug 7, 2012)

At this stage in my life, my personal dream is to move to Miami with 3 of my women friends and change my name to Blanche. Having my 'microcosmic' world dominated by women seems like bliss to me. Lower stress, lower blood pressure, no more shaving or hair color. That's the life.


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

It's an interesting concept; overall I think society would improve in some things, and stay the same in others. If we're strictly talking of politics, I don't think much would change. There would still be crime, there would still be economic struggles, and we would still be facing the environmental and international relations issues we are today. Politicians in general are corrupt and selfish; that's not determined by gender. However, I think women have a very different mode of communication than do men, and when it comes to positions of authority, men are more likely to view other men as a threat, whereas women are more likely to be inclined to work together. So a female dominated political system might make improvements a male dominated system wouldn't. In business and education, I think women are just as likely to succeed as men, if not more likely. Our ability to communicate more effectively affords a wider range communicative options, thereby effectively reaching a larger number of employees, students, and coworkers. 

Women have been widely underestimated over the years, and are now starting to tap into the depth of their real potential, and reaches into every subject, every personality trait, and the vast majority of career fields. I watched a fascinating debate in the writing class where I act as a teacher's assistant; it was called, "Men Are Finished." It was positively brilliant! The reactions of the male students were incredible to me; instead of genuinely listening to the arguments presented in the debate, they saw it as a "Men vs. Women" issue. Sure, the title of the debate is fairly inflammatory. It's supposed to be. But the argument made isn't really one of men versus women, but rather an examination of all the ways men and women contribute to society and how they differ; specifically it examines why women are more likely to succeed in education and business, and why that contributes to the decrease of the patriarchy that has existed in this country for centuries. I wish I could remember the website it was on. It challenged my personal opinions and made me think heavily on what I believed, like any debate should.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Created2Write said:


> It's an interesting concept; overall I think society would improve in some things, and stay the same in others. If we're strictly talking of politics, I don't think much would change. There would still be crime, there would still be economic struggles, and we would still be facing the environmental and international relations issues we are today. Politicians in general are corrupt and selfish; that's not determined by gender. However, I think women have a very different mode of communication than do men, *and when it comes to positions of authority, men are more likely to view other men as a threat, whereas women are more likely to be inclined to work together*. So a female dominated political system might make improvements a male dominated system wouldn't. In business and education, I think women are just as likely to succeed as men, if not more likely. Our ability to communicate more effectively affords a wider range communicative options, thereby effectively reaching a larger number of employees, students, and coworkers.


I've been working for a company that's been overwhelmingly female dominated on nearly all levels for several years, and this has not been my experience. I've seen women, especially at higher levels, act EXACTLY like men with regards to seeing each other as threats.

FWIW, from my perspective since I work with 90% females, and live with 4 others (had a male dog, but he gave up and died), I DO live in a female-dominated world.


----------



## Thundarr (Jul 4, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> I've been working for a company that's been overwhelmingly female dominated on nearly all levels for several years, and this has not been my experience. I've seen women, especially at higher levels, act EXACTLY like men with regards to seeing each other as threats.
> 
> FWIW, from my perspective since I work with 90% females, and live with 4 others (had a male dog, but he gave up and died), I DO live in a female-dominated world.


Is your smiling avatar a sign of satisfaction or a symbol of irony?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Thundarr said:


> Is your smiling avatar a sign of satisfaction or a symbol of irony?


Yes.


----------

