Who are you voting for?

[Mila_]

For those of you who believe women and men are very different, how much of that do you believe is innate and how much do you believe is learned? And, if you have children in the future, do you believe watching a small human turn into an adult could change your opinion at all? Before having children, I had no idea how much of their personality is already there when you meet them. My oldest daughter is extremely type a (always has been) and owns a significant amount of characteristics that are seen as boy. But, those characteristics make her so strong and they aren't necessarily masculine outside of the lines our culture draws. So far when we engage socially with other kids, she doesn't seem to feel the need to tone herself down, but I am nervous for what going to school might do. Will she feel pressured to fit herself in more with girls whose traits are more classically feminine? This shit eats at me.

It would be nice if we could just accept that all people are different and the same. If we didn't pressure people to fit in with their tribes, maybe they'd be more likely to reach their full potential. If we let the type A girls bust stuff up instead of telling them to calm down, they'd give more to the world. And if we stop beating down dudes who aren't classically masculine, there'd be less rage.

Sexual differences are innate and personalities are too for the most part. For every type A girl there are 10 feminine ones. Like I said 15 times before I am talking about tendencies, I am not a determinist. If you happen to have a dominant, opinionated daughter nobody should club that out of her or punish her for it, or expect her to conform to any roles. But that just depends on how good of a parent you are and most parents are narcissistic assholes incapable of understanding their children as separate people. But on the other hand assuming that just because dominant girls exist that means there is no female nature is shortsighted.

Like I said before, my problem is not with the exceptions, they exist and deserve their place. If a woman came along who was actually a good leader and the best candidate, I would vote for her. One of my favorite politicians in Spain is a woman. But pretending that most women are equipped for the job of leading is nonsense and it is also nonsense to assume that if they arent it is because we didnt teach them the right expectations and skills.

My problem is with marxism in culture. How media, the education system, and social fads push to educate women like they were men. I wonder if you would be proud of your girl if instead of getting a type A dominant and strong womyn you would have gotten a gentle, soft spoken little girl who loves her dolls. Would you have signed her up for baking classes and play house with her? Or would you have tried to make a strong womyn out of her?

It is a crusade against femininity and motherhood what is going on in our culture and it is far more damaging than the opposite. When women were educated to be mothers and wives they were content with building families and expressing their female needs. But now all culture teaches us is that if you are a home maker you failed at life, you are a parasite, a gold digger, or weak and that in order to be empowered you need to be a fighter and go to an office. The first scenario left the small sliver if type A girls feeling inadequate. The second scenario leaves the majority of women feeling inadequate and society in decline from a plumbing fertility rate, diminishing family formation, and soaring abortion rates.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Like I said before, my problem is not with the exceptions, they exist and deserve their place. If a woman came along who was actually a good leader and the best candidate, I would vote for her. One of my favorite politicians in Spain is a woman. But pretending that most women are equipped for the job of leading is nonsense and it is also nonsense to assume that if they arent it is because we didnt teach them the right expectations and skills.

There is a difference between being a strong leader and being an effective leader. I agree men are partly biological (being bigger, stronger, taller gains more respect) and certainly cultural better equipped to be strong leaders. However, there is a fair amount of research that the collaborative style of leadership that woman tend to practice on average produces better results.
Now, it's been ages since I've read the studies (It was right around the time I was getting my MBA) and they were more focused on middle managers. But both the military and corporate America have embraced much of it. If you want an authoritative leader, Trump is your man, and he may even be good at getting stuff done. But it is generally more important to do something right (see Obamacare) than to do something just for the sake of action.

 

[JickyJuly]

I wonder if you would be proud of your girl if instead of getting a type A dominant and strong womyn you would have gotten a gentle, soft spoken little girl who loves her dolls. Would you have signed her up for baking classes and play house with her? Or would you have tried to make a strong womyn out of her?

I have one of those as well. Well, I don't know if she's soft spoken. She doesn't talk to me much yet. But, my middle child is pretty much an angel baby. I want the world to leave her that way the same way I want the world to leave the first daughter rough and tumble. I have tons of worries for the girly one as well just different worries.

I understand that the loudest of the feminists have rallied against women who choose more classic roles. Those people have done a lot of damage. To me, that's not equality at all. In fact, it's misogyny. But, that doesn't have to mean that all people who believe women can do anything are covert misogynists. I'm really proud to be a girl and a mother. Motherhood is probably the only thing I'm genuinely proud of.

We can celebrate positive traits in people without attaching a gender. I guess that's my goal with my daughters. I think it is possible for the world to be more gender neutral with children and just let them develop without pressure to be good at being a girl or good at being a boy. My house stays pretty gender neutral, and I know I probably seem far left, but my husband is a 50 year old man who was raised in church school. If he can be thoughtful for the sake of healthier little humans, anyone else should be able to as well.

I do disagree with your assertion that women aren't natural leaders. Maybe it's a cultural thing, but most of the households I've gotten to be close to are run by women. Women might tend to lead in a way that is not quite so overt, but that could be more of a learned thing as well.

 

[Vera]

@JickyJuly That was incredibly eloquent and well-stated.

 

[Henk]

Let's name and shame !

It are those fucking Bernie lovers, those damn 21st century hippies, they are butthurt that their favorite did not get the Democratic nonimation and they did not vote.

That's why there are now 7 millon votes less for the Democratic candidate then 4 years ago.

Yeah, they are also here, at ACF, and thanks to them, we do now have an idiot as President of the USA, who has access to the nuclair launch codes.

 

[Puffin]

 

[Lili_xo]

Some might think is empowering to say we are all the same male and female. I think is the opposite and is taking power away. And maybe that is the agenda anyway - to take power away. Well you will not take that away from me. Ever.

 

[Lili_xo]

I think NOT noticing a gender and its unique qualities is kinda insulting because saying men are same as women and vice versa is insulting and is like taking power away from them.

I Am sexy. I did not even know I have it until guts started reacting, thanks guys and thanks fir the tokens. I love feeling sexy. And I was made feel guilty and even attacked verbally by some females out there with feminists tendencies for my natural sexy!!!!

I never thought of this before that much until now when people wrote stuff here but am just happy with me being female and is what I like, Am not saying being female must be a certain way so am not saying is that way but even the radical feminists could not hide their catty style - men even fight differently!!! Cause they different. So if u wanna say we all the same look in the mirror first. Yeah.

These two male and female do things differently and will NEVER be same no matter what slogans.

Now I see and I agree this is Marxist - this equalization of people these grey mass of people or same and equal and the same is what marxists want.

Is seriously fighting against nature.
Is like saying hey I don't care bout nature am gonna train this tiger from jungle to be my kitten - well try lol.

Stop fighting the nature save energy cause u will never win there and make ppl into robots it has been tried with communism for a century still no positive results.

 

[eyeteach]

This is freaking great, where did you find this?

 

[JickyJuly]

That's why there are now 7 millon votes less for the Democratic candidate then 4 years ago.

I understand your frustration with the results (I feel it too), but I think your reasoning on this is way off. The people to blame for this are the DNC and team Hillary. Trump was not a strong candidate. He didn't even manage to get loyal, long time Republicans on his side. That's a pretty major weak point given the loyalty on the red side. The Dems lost because they ignored the will of the people. They counted on winning over the Bernie people after completely dismissing them. On top of that, they spit in the face of democracy during the primaries and left a trail of emails proving it. They were cocky and assumed Americans would be more scared of Donald Trump than of a failure in the system. I sucked it up and voted Hillary mostly because of a fear of Mike Pence, but I respect those who went 3rd party.

The media also has blood on its hands here. During the primaries, they treated Trump and his supporters as a joke during the primaries while ignoring Bern and openly showing a bias toward Clinton. You can't make people feel like everything is rigged, like their vote is nothing and then expect them to be passionate about the candidate. I don't condone skipping a vote, mostly because there are always other parts to the vote than President. But, I can see why some stayed home.

 

[AmberCutie]

I understand your frustration with the results (I feel it too), but I think your reasoning on this is way off. The people to blame for this are the DNC and team Hillary. Trump was not a strong candidate. He didn't even manage to get loyal, long time Republicans on his side. That's a pretty major weak point given the loyalty on the red side. The Dems lost because they ignored the will of the people. They counted on winning over the Bernie people after completely dismissing them. On top of that, they spit in the face of democracy during the primaries and left a trail of emails proving it. They were cocky and assumed Americans would be more scared of Donald Trump than of a failure in the system. I sucked it up and voted Hillary mostly because of a fear of Mike Pence, but I respect those who went 3rd party.

The media also has blood on its hands here. During the primaries, they treated Trump and his supporters as a joke during the primaries while ignoring Bern and openly showing a bias toward Clinton. You can't make people feel like everything is rigged, like their vote is nothing and then expect them to be passionate about the candidate. I don't condone skipping a vote, mostly because there are always other parts to the vote than President. But, I can see why some stayed home.

 

[Puffin]

This is freaking great, where did you find this?

Either predictIt(comments section), reddit or both.

 

[JoleneBrody]

The majority of American house holds are and have been "run" by women since before the womens liberation movement. When men work and women stay home what do you think those women do? They ran that shit like a tiny lil 3 bedroom 2 bath country.

To say women aren't natural leaders is very counter intuitive to the idea that they are meant to stay home and manage the family, because that is a hell of a lot of leadership. Stay at home moms are more often than not responsible for everything EXCEPT going to work. The governing of multiple people and their possible future success, financial management and planning to ensure that success is even possible and the feeding and cleaning of all within the "country" of that home.
Women in traditional roles are basically presidents...

 

[Lili_xo]

To say women aren't natural leaders is very counter intuitive to the idea that they are meant to stay home and manage the family, because that is a hell of a lot of leadership. Stay at home moms are more often than not responsible for everything EXCEPT going to work. The governing of multiple people and their possible future success, financial management and planning to ensure that success is even possible and the feeding and cleaning of all within the "country" of that home.
Women in traditional roles are basically presidents...

This is not the same as handling terrorism , wartime , nuclear.....etc is why I said is mans job to be president cause he gotta do all that and stay emotion free during the process. So well is all really...

 

[JoleneBrody]

This is not the same as handling terrorism , wartime , nuclear.....etc is why I said is mans job to be president cause he gotta do all that and stay emotion free during the process. So well is all really...

Emotion free...
ok.

 

[Lili_xo]

Yes men can easier detach from emotions. Can you? Cause rating my post disagree when I say family life handling not same as terrorism handling makes no sense. Do you really think is same? Lol. Seriously.

 

[Lili_xo]

There are always exceptions but in general men better equipped by nature to handle these. Ok. Is the whole point and there is not more I can add really.
Btw women are very strong in their own way but it is just different.
I feel like am repeating myself here so will stop now.
Hugs.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Yes men can easier detach from emotions. Can you? Cause rating my post disagree when I say family life handling not same as terrorism handling makes no sense. Do you really think is same? Lol. Seriously.

I didn't chill pill, poo or facepalm like a jerk. I just rated disagree because I simply disagree with your opinion. You have a right to that opinion but I simply do not agree with it. Not a big deal

 

[Lexi Emerson]

Yes men can detach from emotions. Can you? Cause rating my post disagree when I say family life handling not same as terrorism handling makes no sense. Do you really think is same? Lol. Seriously.

Man, are you really upset about a disagree rating? You really shouldn't post in a thread that is debating political views if you don't want em.

I personally hit disagree on you because I think your whole stance about "president is a man's job because they can stay emotion free" is whack. Like people have said before, Trump doesn't exactly run things emotion free (I'd go as far as to say that man is emotionally unstable). Plenty of women AND men react with emotions. That is a basic human concept- NOT just women.

Plus who wants someone running a country without at least SOME emotions. They're Americans who live in the same country as us and the things that impact us impact them, too. It's so silly to think that because Hillary looked a little teary while giving a concession speech that she wasn't fit to lead. Did you not see Bill teary eyed behind her- you know that man that has led this country in the past? Or Tim Kaine on the other side of her who was even more teary eyed than both of them?

 

[Lili_xo]

Is no big deal. I just dint understand how can anyone disagree that terrorism handling and family life are not same kind of handling - that's all.

 

[Lili_xo]

Am not upset. On the contrary I feel energized because this not making any sense rating proved my point on this particular subject.
In my opinion at least. And yes I love it I can say it. Thank you.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Is no big deal. I just dint understand how can anyone disagree that terrorism handling and family life are not same kind of handling - that's all.

You packaged that point within another point. I like candy but I'm not going to eat it if it's covered in shit, ya know?

 

[Mila_]

The majority of American house holds are and have been "run" by women since before the womens liberation movement. When men work and women stay home what do you think those women do? They ran that shit like a tiny lil 3 bedroom 2 bath country.

To say women aren't natural leaders is very counter intuitive to the idea that they are meant to stay home and manage the family, because that is a hell of a lot of leadership. Stay at home moms are more often than not responsible for everything EXCEPT going to work. The governing of multiple people and their possible future success, financial management and planning to ensure that success is even possible and the feeding and cleaning of all within the "country" of that home.
Women in traditional roles are basically presidents...

The household has always been female territory. Which is why women manage the home while men manage society. And it is an important role, and it is a sacred role, and saying home-making is stupid by equating it to making sandwiches and washing dishes is incredibly naive. It is shitting on womanhood. It is like men said things like "what is my role in this world? writing memos in tiny pieces of paper and commuting?"

But educating your kids and running a household is not leadership. Leadership means that you are capable of rallying support among a large group of people with opposing interests because they see you as a leader and they would follow you into war. Being a leader means not being afraid of making the difficult decisions, those decisions that nobody wants to take but that must be taken to save your group. Women are not naturally inclined for this.

Women are in charge of a very different area which is establishing and nurturing social ties and relationships within their communities. This task involves the construction of codified morality and a web of common meaning. It is the job of women to enforce the rules of morality in their communities which is why women tend to be the ones to ostracize and criticize anyone who breaks them. Women are in charge of the spiritual life of the family, children's education, nurturing and managing the daily needs while men protect, provide, lead and plan for the long term.

Both roles are necessary but they are different.

 

[JickyJuly]

This is not the same as handling terrorism , wartime , nuclear.....

If you're ever in Florida, I invite you to come spend a few hours at my house. With 3 kids under 4, it gets pretty close to terrorism, wartime and nuclear. Hehehehe.
Seriously though, can we, as women, maybe not try to speak for other women in the realm of weaknesses? It perpetuates so much doubt in women. If you, personally, feel that you would not make a good President due to lack of emotional control, I respect that. But why try to take the ability away from other women? Like, I can't kick a ball to save my life, but that doesn't mean there aren't amazing female soccer players. I'm not brainy enough to be an engineer, but that doesn't mean plenty of other women aren't. I don't have a right to represent the female sporting ability or thinking ability just because I have a vagina. You don't have a right to represent women's emotional control just because you have one either. We need to drop the divisive nonsense.

 

[Lili_xo]

Seriously though, can we, as women, maybe not try to speak for other women in the realm of weaknesses? It perpetuates so much doubt in women.

The truly strong ones don't get affected at all by what anyone says.

 

[JoleneBrody]

The household has always been female territory. Which is why women manage the home while men manage society. And it is an important role, and it is a sacred role, and saying home-making is stupid by equating it to making sandwiches and washing dishes is incredibly naive. It is shitting on womanhood. It is like men said things like "what is my role in this world? writing memos in tiny pieces of paper and commuting?"

But educating your kids and running a household is not leadership. Leadership means that you are capable of rallying support among a large group of people with opposing interests because they see you as a leader and they would follow you into war. Being a leader means not being afraid of making the difficult decisions, those decisions that nobody wants to take but that must be taken to save your group. Women are not naturally inclined for this.

Women are in charge of a very different area which is establishing and nurturing social ties and relationships within their communities. This task involves the construction of codified morality and a web of common meaning. It is the job of women to enforce the rules of morality in their communities which is why women tend to be the ones to ostracize and criticize anyone who breaks them. Women are in charge of the spiritual life of the family, children's education, nurturing and managing the daily needs while men protect, provide, lead and plan for the long term.

Both roles are necessary but they are different.

Oh I agree whole heartedly that men and women go about thing differently, but I believe they can both do the same job as well.
Considering Trump was elected on the idea that our system is broken and hasn't worked for a long time, specifically regarding forgein affairs and war efforts... I find it interesting that more dont look at the one and only constant in the history of the US presidency?

This is honestly just a ponder that popped in my head RIGHT NOW, so I haven't thought about it much more than this post.

 

[Lili_xo]

The truly strong ones kick ass and fight. They get fucking angry and fight. They don't get affected as in omg....give up dreams. Ever.
Also seriously it seems to me like some of you think that being a great woman is doing what a man does. Same stuff and unless she becomes commander of chief is no good. or something.

 

[mynameisbob84]

The truly strong ones don't get affected at all by what anyone says.

So it's okay to say whatever we want about large groups of people regardless of whether it's true or not, damaging or not, regressive or not, because it will only affect the people for whom the blanket statement happens to apply to? I'm not sure I follow the logic there.

 

[JickyJuly]

I don't think you've actually read a thing anyone who disagrees with you has said on this page.

 

[Lili_xo]

So it's okay to say whatever we want about large groups of people regardless of whether it's true or not, damaging or not, regressive or not, because it will only affect the people for whom the blanket statement happens to apply to? I'm not sure I follow the logic there.

Let me put it this way - the ppl who beat up the high school girl because she supported trump and they ended up hurting her = trump is not responsible for that just cause he said something in his speech someone does not agree with.
However this is a broader subject...