Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to If women ruled the world, there would be no wars
Gomedome
In the scenario that you muse about, my best "guesstimate" is that today's world would be essentially the same! If women ruled the world rather than men, then there would be simply a role reversal. Men would behave more like women, and women more like men! As far as warfare is concerned, there would no less wars under female rulership than male.
posted by
GEPRUITT
on October 11, 2006 at 2:10 AM
| link to this | reply
SuccessWarrior - I'd have to second that notion
I just can't see the woman they called the "Iron Lady" ...Margaret Thatcher, breaking down and blubbering in Parliament.
posted by
gomedome
on October 10, 2006 at 8:16 AM
| link to this | reply
blackcat30 - I have a vision of two guys standing up in a bar and pounding
the crap out of each other but.....
I can't draw a mental image of a male head of state, say President Bush for example, going into a testosterone induced fighting stance. Fortunately, the hormonal influences that would make two males act like pit bulls towards each other tend to dissapate in the male anatomy by the time men reach the age where they are likely to be elected to office. .....we should be thankful for this.
posted by
gomedome
on October 10, 2006 at 8:14 AM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x -- Boadicea - I forgot about her and she's a good example
of a woman that led her people to war.
posted by
gomedome
on October 10, 2006 at 8:05 AM
| link to this | reply
.Dave. - that's the thing of it, a society with religious encampments is
not a truly free society.
When matters other than the needs of a society's constituents are the determinant factors of every day life, those needs are no longer met.
posted by
gomedome
on October 10, 2006 at 8:02 AM
| link to this | reply
Success... well, I certainly hope so! : )
posted by
-blackcat
on October 10, 2006 at 7:41 AM
| link to this | reply
BC, I don't have any facts but I'd guess any woman capable
of fighting her way to the top and controlling a country is more the fighting type than the weepy type.
posted by
SuccessWarrior
on October 10, 2006 at 7:33 AM
| link to this | reply
LOL... are the dangers of PMS any worse than the
dangers of testosterone overload? In my experience, women are more likely to get weepy and men are more likely to pick a fight.... of course this depends on the person but both are equally scary.
posted by
-blackcat
on October 10, 2006 at 7:25 AM
| link to this | reply
and you haven't seen women fighting?
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 10, 2006 at 7:18 AM
| link to this | reply
actually my favorite woman leader is Boadiccea (sp?)
the Celtic woman who gave the Romans quite a discomfort.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 10, 2006 at 7:14 AM
| link to this | reply
ha
how many vicious women have you been around?
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 10, 2006 at 7:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome, no thanks. I don't want to return to such days. Whichever side you were on, times could easily change and you'd end up being the persecuted.
As for women ruling the world, at least we'd have more shoe shops.
posted by
_dave_says_ack_
on October 10, 2006 at 7:11 AM
| link to this | reply