This question is NOT about a candidates political views. Of course you can and should debate and want/not want a candidate for those reasons.
This question is aimed at understanding why some feel that just the act of being a woman, makes someone incapable of being president. Where does that sexism come from? There are examples from around the globe of women in highest ranking positions (those that have done more than one term as well).
I do not believe that. Not for a second.
I will proudly vote for a woman if her policies align for what I think is best for this country. I would have gladly voted for Nikki Haley if she got the GOP nomination.
The real problem when you campaign and promote a female candidate as being “special” just because she is a woman. It’s also a major problem when you use this “DEI cushion” to deflect and avoid legitimate criticism of be candidates track record, policies and abilities.
And this is exactly what the mass media is doing with Kamala Harris right now and it’s 110% bullshit. It’s been over a month now and has avoided all unscripted interviews and tough questions. Trump love him or hate him has never ducked a legitimate tough question.
Anyway it should come as no surprise that a legitimately qualified woman could serve as president but she has to be just as qualified as her male counterpart. It isn’t “misogyny” to grill her on tough questions and criticism the same way a male president wants to get grilled.
Because they're sexists. Unfortunately, given the attitudes and social norms of the US, they're not entirely wrong- while there are women who would probably do the job just fine, there are all too many who would fall back on "I'm a woman" as a shield against criticism. That line of thinking stops the notions of accountability and personal responsibility cold, and has been a hallmark of many of the women who've run for President- Hillary Clinton being the shining example.
In fairness, it's not entirely on them, but also on a society that tolerates that kind of thinking. And in fairness to Kamala in particular, I don't know if she's ever played the "woman card"- though in fairness to myself, her actions and previous policies horrify me to the point that I don't NEED to watch her closely to know how damaging to the country she'd be; I might easily have missed it if she did.
Bluntly speaking, society doesn't demand as much from women as it does from men, and the soft bigotry of low expectations is a very real phenomenon.
@Ladsin2 If they were, we wouldn't have different words for them.
@Ladsin2 Broad strokes, yes. You're going to have detectable patterns, but they're only tendencies, and not universal.
@Ladsin2 Me? No- at least not based on that. I do my best to give people an equal chance and not judge them based on their demographics, but I'm not going to pretend I succeed perfectly every time; I'm still human. Unfortunately, most people don't feel the same way.
I would not vote for any of those barely human beings but I would vote for Jill Stein, who happens to be a woman. The united states is far behind the times.
Other countries have had female leaders for decades. And far lower death rates due to everything from failing health care system, inflation, poverty, wars of invasion “interventions” land grabs, to genocide.
Any gender can be corrupt and any gender can do the right thing… this require support form anon sociopathic environment which is challenging in many countries at this point in history no less the United States.
All humans are “hormonal” the male hormone system is not studied the way the female system is bc women bleed and give birth. Women being out of control when majority of murders are by men, Is silliest tropes alive.
Wow vivant you will be great leader in future. President 😂
@moneymagnet24 I'll second that, where do I vote !!
I like how the poster posed a question about sexism and half the people say it’s fair and the rest can’t say loudly enough how it’s absolutely true 😂 good stuff.
Harris is not terrible bc she’s a woman, she’s a woman and she’s terrible and all sides of the spectrum will use this to bolster their position —whether it’s people don’t want her bc of sexism or people don’t want her bc she’s a woman.
Neither trope gets to the point which is the people don’t have democratically elected officials , nor actual representation so while you all fret away valuable time & brain power obsessing over gender, we’re still getting screwed and the house always wins.
Honestly I don't get it. Women have been shown to be the best leaders of countries. Countries with more women in government are shown to have better economic and social conditions. Women pass more laws that create equality which leads to a better outcome for all.
Y'all could learn something from @Razp_Sorbet.
Opinion
48Opinion
u Why do some women believe simply being a male, makes one incapable of being an important and valuable parent to a child?
Absolutely.. Thankyou.
You know its incredible here ( Thailand ) where I see so many Older Farangs ( Foreigner white skin ) males , become parents again , and the job that these guys do is brilliant , more acceptable here for the woman to just leave. You point is so true , its same in Australia.
I certainly don't believe that.
@SugarSugarplum And I have no hesitation about a woman president, if she is qualified and embodies the values I cherish. Kamala Harris is not qualified.
Thats me, although I've supported some and might support, i generally woukd not.
Simple answer… its the brain not the male female. Females are more horomanlly unstable and as auch, introduced error and risk. Perceived weakness introduces risk.
Ask of you want o know more. Note that before i had wxperience w pms pmsdd mental illness, placed women in a pedestal. I changed my view.
Personal experience I've had some good female leaders bit also seen the most emotional visciousness from women.
Agree! When our hormones are out of wack it makes us unable to make sound decisions and that causes big issues in our lives and for others. We can't trust a woman not to flip the fu€k out and possibly get us into all out war. We women need to stick with VP.
Huh weird... You know I could have sworn that all wars were caused by... Men.
@Razp_Sorbet 27 percent increase in wars when a queen was in power, as compared to the reign of a king. 🤡 at least I'll admit we're not stable enough to run a country. Our hormones rule how we react and think. I'm not for sisterhood or voting just because she is the same gender as me. That's an ignorant way to go about choosing our next president.
@Razp_Sorbet And you have no say in this. You are in New Zealand. Your opinion is void when it comes to anything in America especially presidential candidates.
@TheLovelyIntrovert ah yes because America is on another planet ☺️
P. s most queens or kings don't actually run the country or make any of the decisions. 😊 That's what the government is for.
@Razp_Sorbet In a monarchy. No one can rise against the decisions made by the King or Queen. However lobbyists can try to influence their decisions.
You must be talking modern. I'm not talking about current. I pointed out how it was more women (Queens) who started wars by the poor decisions that they made. All those people died centuries ago.
Are you not supposed to be smarter than an American?
@Razp_Sorbet what history lesson do you want next? 😂
@Razp_Sorbet Kings and Queens are mostly pointless now. That's why a Prime Minister exist.
@Razp_Sorbet I'm confused. Is declaring wars the best measure of making regrettable decisions?
Sure let's do some history lessons.
Let's take a look at who started the worst wars in history.
The three kingdoms war 184-280 said to have a death toll of 36 to 40 million. Started by Liu Bei a Chinese war lord.
The Roman civil war 91-30 BC. 3 million deaths. Started by Julius Caesar. He also started the Gallic wars with 1 million deaths.
The Mongol invasions and conquests. 1206- 1368. Started by Genghis Khan. 30-40 million deaths.
Let's look at some more modern ones now ☺️
World war 1 and 2. I think you know those ones. WW1 17-40 million, WW2 80 million deaths.
The Taiping rebellion 1850-1864. 25 million deaths. Started by Hong Xiuquan.
How about ones that are very recent?
Russias invasion of Ukraine. We know who started that right? 500,000+ deaths.
Israel-Hamas? 45,000 and rising daily!
@The_Confusion no, I was responding the to commenter who implied women being hormonal would start a war.
To note, I’ve supported women for president and likely for for… tulsi gabbard. I k ow women id choose over a man… because their skills, mind, abilities ovedcome my concern about hormonal shift. Bit what im saying is.. its something i consider given experience I've had. It is a factor… not the only one.
@Razp_Sorbet I think the most friendly environment would happen if countries had like a checkerboard pattern. And I don't mean any sort of freemasonry by that, what I mean is the genders, to have all 4 corners of a country's boarded tight against countries that have their leaders of the opposite gender. In north America there are only 3 in a row so let's take those for example. Canada - male. USA - female. Mexico - male. Similarly, Russia-Ukraine as well as Israel-Hamas could've had opposite gendered leaders, which would allow them to resolve their sexual tension without violence.
America has a different social structure where I'm not sure it would really work that well for us. Reason being that most American women are the products of white-feminism. Meaning American women care about things that women in whole other societies don't, and women of other societies tend to have a better understanding of men - in both the good and the bad - and their own femininity than American women do.
Although at the end of the day it really does not matter whether a man or a woman is a nation's leader, women have performed no better than the dudes. Like every situation some have been exceptional above the rest, but it doesn't much matter. Mary Queen of Scots had people killed for religious reasons like male leaders. And Indira, Benazir Bhutto, and Christina de Kirschner were are all crooks. Only difference is that I don't think it will be particularly well for America to have one.
That's funny, because other countries have had female leaders. New Zealand, the UK, Germany and even Tanzania. The United States for one reason or another just doesn't go with it.
I'm just gonna address the Elephant in the room here, the biggest voting block in America is White women. The most likely 1st female president is probably a White woman (no I don't think Kamala would win). You know who was a candidate in 2016 that didn't win the election because White women didn't vote for her? Hillary Clinton. 53% of her own kind voted against her.
For all that yapping and crying you all do, you guys won't even vote for one of your own to get into office, but expect men to?
I think that not many actually believe that , they just haven't had the chance to vote for one that SHOULD be there , maybe the system gets the good ones crushed along the way , but I'd agree Europe has had some great female leaders ( I was a massive Thatcher fan , especially when she closed the Coal mines in the North , completely useless ) ..
But , same in Australia , we've never had anyone decent come though , Gillard I do not count.
It needs the right woman , thats what would worry me if this particular one were to win , its would put the cause backwards , she needs to be vastly more skilled than either of these , past included , options. And of course this one got though because it was too late for anyone else.
Thats how it works.
I know you said this post is not about political views, but that's all elections are for me. I don't care about a candidates gender. There are many female anti-feminists on Jubilee that represent my views more so Cameltoe Harris. Hell if influencers like Billie Rae Brandt or the_lady_j on Instagram were running for president, I'd choose them over Trump any day.
The only thing is that there's never been decent candidates running for president other than Bernie Sanders (in my opinion). Right now it's just about choosing the lesser poison.
The only things that make me support a candidate are their apparent political views and their apparent personality.
I'm not even American. I'm Canadian, but it's the same thing here. I would take a donkey for PM rather than Trudeau at this point.
When people claim that, it is often the women with very bad morals and past that are running for office, then people claim it is sexist to not elect them. Let's see them elect Lauren Bobert. I doubt women would support a candidate like that and neither would liberal men because of her good morals and views, but most of them will claim it is sexism when many men don't vote for the immoral women.
It is just like in California when, as usual, democrats claim that republicans are racist (it is actually the democrats that are often racist which is proven by their policies), but republicans voted for Larry Elder and democrats wore a gorilla mask and threw eggs at him. Biden used the "N" word repeatedly too and they still voted for him.
The issue is, think of anything she's touched that hasn't turned into a complete disaster while IN office. She claims to have all these grandiose plans, but what has she done besides sleep her way to the top, have a cackling evil laugh, wrongfully imprison innocents and a record of complete failure at the border?
It's not about gender, it's about incompetence. She's a clown. Nobody wants to see her win that knows anything about the economy or politics.
I shudder to think where you get your journalism from.
Government is an inherently masculine origination of force. When you try to combine it with feminine impulses of nurture you end up with tyranny of forced micromanagement divorced from reality.
This is why women in general make bad leaders of state. They don't as a group understand the nature and balance of force as well as boys do, and are inclined towards a nurturing world view that does not mix well with the nature of the force which is the state.
Women don't tend to like feminine men for the same reason, and they are correct such men who embrace feminine instincts at the expense of their masculine nature are dangerous. As they tend to lack the self-control and be inclined toward somewhat abusive options.
That said this is not something understood commonly beyond observation. Nor is it a fixed rule for all women. Some kinds of women well in touch with their masculine side and understanding of the nature of force do make good leaders Most simply do not.
There are plenty of other men who lost the election is it because they're shorter, browner, younger, older, fatter, etc? No but it's because they don't really meet the qualifications people want. Those female candidates may have lost but it's not because they're female but a lot of women just bring up the gender victim card to make it seem like people are sexist but in reality, the government is something people should fight for and compete no matter what the discrimination is which men tend to be better at handling. Plenty of other men do face discrimination because it's a competition. If they don't like it and just going to complain, then they shouldn't have just be a candidate in the first place.
because if you look at the averages of a given society and you analyse the particular proclivities of men and women in that society, you'll find that it is much more likely for a man to have the defining characteristics of a good leader than woman. that's also why significantly more men are ceos than women.
it doesn't mean that no possible women may have what it takes. but the likelyhood is objectively lower than if the candidate is a man. it's just a matter of odds based on objective facts. and if you weren't a sexist, then the gender of the president shouldn't matter either way. but the objective qualifications they have going for them.
There are actually very few people who believe that. And you can't say it's not about a candidate's political views, because it's actually ALL about that, AND about their actual qualifications and capabilities as a leader. I can think of many women I would vote for in a heartbeat, but I sure as hell won't vote for Harris because she is a proven failure and a proven fraud, and her political views are not what the US needs right now. The reality is that Harris was ONLY chosen as Biden's running mate, and as the Democratic nominee this year, BECAUSE she is a woman of color. Choosing the best candidate for the most important and powerful position in the world, ESPECIALLY today given what is happening in the world right now, is pure insanity.
Have some honesty, set aside your victim complex, stop playing the gender card, and open your eyes to what is actually happening right now.
@VIVANT Did you actually upvote my opinion? Perhaps I have misjudged you all these years? Or, perhaps you have changed your views given what is happening in the US, and the world, today?
"This question is NOT about a candidates political views."
Actually, it is. I don't know anyone who has a problem with a female POTUS who is the best qualified candidate and has the right political views. There are plenty of female candidates I would vote for in a heartbeat. But I would never vote for Harris or Trump, and I didn't vote for Hillary.
People make assumptions about why voters won't vote for a particular female candidate, and most of the assumptions are wrong.
I don't think the American system promotes the best candidates for the presidency no matter what their gender is. The system is broken. If you look at Lina Khan she's actually doing something to protect consumers against monopolies so now both sides of the presidential race want to fire her as soon as they get elected. What does that tell you about who's actually getting represented? It's a joke.
Our constitution is a suicide pact and no one is at the wheel
You skipped a step.
U. s. president is also commander in chief of military. Need male characteristics to make those decisions as i explained based on history in a mytake.
I add the falkland problem with lady leader.
But specifically harris of all women that is even worse than average women.
Any ''leader'' is part of 'the System' overall.
It should not matter which ''gender'' they belong to.
When some believe that it DOES matter, they did not fully understand the idea of ''electing'' someone to make the voters believe that they are ''represented''.
They (you) are: not!
because up until now every female candidates that got anywhere close to the presidency was horrible. Kamila and Hillary are both genuinely bad people, Hillary with her emails and Kamila who tired to hide evidence that would set a man free from being executed. If only they sent moral women instead of the horrible ones the majority would be in favor of a female president.
Would you have accepted Geraldine Ferraro?
Maybe those people take a strict view of the US Constiution, that uses the word He (a male) when referring to the President...
Do we have any historians who can explain why the Constitution refers to the President as He, yet a woman is allowed to run for President?
The H in UK "HMS" us either he or her so it's transitional
I haven't really seen it, at least not in any numbers to be significant or matter on a world stage. What I have seen is lots of accusations of this sexism when anyone criticizes Kamala Harris. But that's typical, and not an actual indication of the worldview of those who criticize her.
For those who are in that sexist minority, what do you think their reasons are?
Not many people actually believe that in 2024.
Here's a better question for you: What do some people believe that simply being a female means that no one is allowed to point out that you're a complete garbage candidate with insane policy positions which are completely out of touch with what the electorate is asking for?
No reasonable person says that but your faux news with Laura Ingram to stoke outrage among fools
I wouldn't vote for a female president if the virtue of them being female is the selling point and I think most rational people would say the same.
Other say that female politicians favor what sounds good but is a disaster in practice by default aka putting emotions over logic. No idea if this is true, as I am not a woman, but it just sounds like politicians in general.
Because most American women use the law for their own benefit by accusing others on false claims.
This makes public image what would she do if she's a president.🤔
Most? You have no proof if that whatsoever
I don't think men and women are the same. Regardless of whether or not I agreed with the woman in question I think I would still be uncomfortable with a female president. If; however, it was between a shit male and a good woman I would probably choose the latter. I don't think female rule has worked for any successful society, and thus I would be concerned about that.
I have no problem with a woman being president but not Kamala Harris. I do not believe she is good for America. So let me ask you, if you were thinking about running for president. Could you if Russia has already pushed the button and sent their nukes our way, push the button and send nukes their way too?
I don't feel that way. I voted for Tulsi Gabbard in the 2016 primary.
Gender is not an issue for me. I would gladly vote for a woman if I agreed with her policies and thought she was qualified.
I don't think sex should matter in any job as long as you get the job done and do it well that all that should matter. Some of Britain's most powerful leaders were woman
I have voted for women many, many times! I will PROUDLY vote for Kamala! Genitalia, ethnicity or race aren't an issue for me. I vote for competence, intelligence and civility. I want a president who will uphold the Constitution and not attempt to overthrow the Government when they lose
Men are meant to be the leaders. There has not been a single female-led society in history that has been successful. Civilization requires patriarchy or it crumbles, as we are seeing now.
Yeah cause the men are clearly doing a fantastic job!
WTAF? As John McEnroe famously said " YOU can't BE SERIOUS?"
@itsgonnabemee we got us from living in caves and shitting in the woods to having electricity, running water, HVAC, phones, cars, and internet. You're welcome.
Ummmm... Women contributed more calories to paleolithic people than men.
@DrPepper12 yeah I call bullshit, they contributed no meat and you couldn't survive in those days as a pussy vegan.
As a matter of fact pussies were worshipped as "Venus figurines" for their god-like power to reproduce. There were no male gods or were totally ancillary. And that shitting in the woods? Yeah, that was women discovery too as the were all nomadic but it was the women gathering that they realized the plants grew better when shit on year after year following the game animals that men usually failed at capturing 19 our of 20 times.
@DrPepper12 [citation needed]
@DrPepper12 that is literally just an article about a crude stone age carving.
Women are inferior to men intellectually. There is only one Grand Master Starcraft 2 player who is female and there are 798 males and one male-to-female tranny.
The numbers don't lie.
Who hurt you? Where in the hell do you get THAT lie from?
No, not in the slightest. Being an incompetent female, like the current pick of candidates makes those specific candidates unsuitable for the job and unworthy of my vote.
Especially Elizabeth Warren lying about being native American.
Regardless of country it isn't meant for women to be headship leaders of a country.
Women can be governors and senators but not the prime leader of a country as such role should be reserved for man only.
I can't believe views like this even exist in 2024.
@DrPepper12: Its just how it is. It isn't because a woman can't be capable of doing a good job, its because a woman shouldn't be head over men in a nation.
WHY NOT?
REASONS
FACTS
EVIDENCE
EXAMPLES?
They see women leaders as weak leaders, and in most cases it's true, Giorgia Meloni is fine.
What @VIVANT said
Because VIVANT is ALIVE, it is evidently obvious and blatant !
It's all just politics. When Sarah Palin was nominated, it was the left freaking out.
Call me sexist or whatever you want, but a woman ain't suited for presidency or any sort of leadership, unless the real men had gone extinct!
theyhatewomen
and they never heard of Catherine II the Great or Jeanne d'Arc
Whoever said that is sexist or so stupid. We never had a female president!
Because all women who run for president care about is what’s between their legs
How do you eat without stabbing your face with the fork? Unreal that we have to deal with this in 2024
It has NOTHING to do with what you've got dangling between your legs!! It's what's in your HEAD that counts!!
I have NO fuckin idea!! It's so ridiculous that to even ask the question seems unintelligent and Neanderthalish. can't wait for some answers... 🙄
Because they took no history lessons. Don't know Catherine The Great or Cleopatra.
In America women are view as being emotional
It's called the Bible and some people's perversions of it... its the best way for misogynists to spread their delusions and justify it in a way that is expected to not be questioned.
Maybe women would have a better chance if they presented good policies instead of saying " vote for me because vagina"
The four clowns in your picture or a bad example. Lol.
My wife won’t vote for a female President. She doesn’t believe they can make the hard decisions especially in war.
Your wife is a self loathing, misogynist with a ignorant husband
@DrPepper12 No, I don’t think so. She is quite kind and strong. Her husband has been more successful in every aspect of his life than you… seriously.
It doesn’t. All the women running for president have been horrible.
I don’t think that at all! But I think Kamala is dangerous!
It’s a man’s profession I’m a female and black American
I don’t know but I agree with you
Because they view women as property.
They don't think or reason, they FEEL.
And that’s exactly what we need, leaders who can feel! Not just come up with cold, cynical strategems, but who can make decisions based on both knowledge and feelings.
Just look what Angela Merkel did to Germany.
Angela Merkel was a fantastic leader for Germany!
Then why are your daughters getting raped by "migrants"?
Beats me. I voted for Jo Jorgensen in 2020.
It should have been phased out about 50 years ago
American girls… ho
M-I-S-O-G-Y-N-Y !!!
I really wanna see a female president in USA
You can also add your opinion below!
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
