Saturday, June 9

Kristi For President!

The other day I took part in a rare political discussion. Rare in the sense that I actually was having a conversation about politics. Allan and I attempt political discussions all of the time, but they mostly consist of him using lots of big words and complex notions, while I nod my head and throw in the perfunctory "uh-huh", just to keep up appearances. Anyway, back to my discussion with a twenty-something female about "who would you vote for today?". She, with no hesitation, declared Barack to be the clear winner in her book. It was in our examination of other candidates, though, that I found myself trapped by her next adamant declaration. It went something like: No woman should ever, ever be President of the United States. Seriously?? Her reason why? Because women are too emotional - and important decisions for our country can not be based on emotion. That's really had me thinking the last few days. Is that true? Can a woman not lead a country because we more emotionally-based than our male counterparts? I know I couldn't be President because I do tend to cry when under a lot of pressure and that just wouldn't do. But what about Margaret Thatcher? Indira Ghandi? Golda Meir? Benazir Bhutto? My young friend countered that these women were not leading The United States of America, and although that is true, I'm not really sure what she meant by that answer. I'm fairly sure I won't be marking Hillary's name in 2008, but will we see a woman President in my lifetime? If so, she'd better have waterproof mascara. Smeared make-up from all of the crying is just so unbecoming in the press photos.


Allan White said...

There's a lot under the surface here, but I think I hear kids brewing trouble in the other room so I'll have to think about any comments.

I've never seen you cry when a high-pressure situation really mattered. I think I would cry if I were president from the pressure - but by myself at night in the West Wing Bedroom.

It's interesting that those noted woman leaders were from many countries that are very conservative with, er, challenging populations that don't always act like good citizens of a nation-state. My guess is that leading those countries (Britain, India, Israel, Pakistan) was every bit as hard - if not harder - than running the US.

Kenli Shea said...

It is based more on the fact of making decisions based on emotions rather than just crying all the time. Crying actually has very little to do with being level headed in my opinion, well for the most part. I feel that men would be more logical and make a decision without a motherly instinct; emotionally based.
Running other countries might be just as hard, but we are a country that others hate and that others try to befriend. In that area I feel that it is very different. Other countries are more likely to respect a woman in charge b/c of how their political system is set up. Many of those female leaders from other countries are in that position b/c they were born into the right family and it was passed down to them.
She is twenty four.

Lindsey said...

I'm not voting for Hillary either, but... agh. That's sexism, plain and simple.

I suppose a case could be made for selecting a president who was a Thinking type, on the Myers-Briggs scale, over one who's a Feeling type. However, an estimated 30-35% of women are Thinkers, too; this means 1/3 of all women make their decisions primarily with their heads, not their hearts. And don't EVEN tell me men aren't swayed by emotional or subjective concerns!

The down side of logic and objectivity is that, the more heavily you rely on it, the worse your people skills tend to be. And the last thing we need right now is another president who doesn't play well with others.

kristi said...

Hum, I have many thoughts about this post. Part of me believes that women can do anything and are equal counterparts to men.

I also believe that men and women have different strengths and God given talents. There is a reason man and woman were put together. Although I am not saying that men have the talent to be president and women don't (I think we could all debate that some of our men presidents have been less than gifted)

The issue of head/heart is an interesting one, although superficially. I do think that on the surface woman are more emotional and motherly. But there are plenty of men that are this way. And there are plenty of women that are strong capable leaders.

Okay I have more thoughts, but overall I do believe that there could be a women president in the US. Very possible in my life time.

Steve Maxwell said...

OK. I will be the one to go to the other possible scary place in the awesome post K - White. I am the type of person to say that I have only a small idea of what it takes to live in the political world, so I have no solid idea what it takes to be President of USA. For me it is simply about the unknown. I am leery about the unknown. I think a person of any of the many cultures we have represented here in the US "could" make a great president; but are we ready for it? I would love to see a person make decisions for our country with a very "open" biblical stance, but are we ready for them. To be honest, I don't know. I even hate the fact that gender and nationality enters my mind when engaging in theses conversations but I have grown up in a country "run" by a "white - European Male" all my life. I simply don't "know" any different. If K - White was running the country I would support her - no doubt about it. Oh well, great post Kristi.