Skip to comments.
What If Women Ran the World?
BusinessWeek ^
| Tue Apr 15, 2003
| Thane Peterson
Posted on 04/15/2003 12:23:32 PM PDT by WaveThatFlag
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301-310 next last
To: WaveThatFlag
uh oh,
Isa 3:12
12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. (KJV)
To: hispanarepublicana
... and missiles would no longer be aerodynamic. LOL!
42
posted on
04/15/2003 12:41:54 PM PDT
by
Anamensis
(New axis of evil: Syria, Iran, Hollywood)
To: Post Toasties
Alpha Male Alert!
43
posted on
04/15/2003 12:42:20 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(Become a Monthly Donor to Free Republic. Please?)
To: hispanarepublicana
Does this legislation make my butt look big?
44
posted on
04/15/2003 12:42:38 PM PDT
by
keithtoo
45
posted on
04/15/2003 12:42:44 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(Become a Monthly Donor to Free Republic. Please?)
To: WaveThatFlag
Women... pfft. Look at Golda Meir (curse be upon her moustache). She let the Arabs build up an attack force and then she let them launch a surprise attack--beause she thought pre-empting them like in 1967 would have looked bad for Israel politically! Women leaders... I would need to see a woman like Condoleezza Rice or Margaret Thatcher before I considered voting for one of them. Their track record in running world governments is no better than men's.
46
posted on
04/15/2003 12:43:19 PM PDT
by
xm177e2
(Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
To: Honcho
Yeah, women are all sugar and spice and everything nice...
Mrs. Anthrax
Dr. Germ
47
posted on
04/15/2003 12:44:22 PM PDT
by
GraniteStateConservative
(Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
To: WaveThatFlag
Q: What if woman ran the world?
A: Nuclear war every month.
48
posted on
04/15/2003 12:44:28 PM PDT
by
Hacksaw
(New LP Award : The Pablo Escobar Medal of Freedom)
To: Anamensis
If women ran the world, instead of a war every 20 years, there'd be a war every month. I see was beaten to this several times.
49
posted on
04/15/2003 12:45:31 PM PDT
by
Hacksaw
(New LP Award : The Pablo Escobar Medal of Freedom)
To: WaveThatFlag
If women ran the world we'd be in a hell worse than dealing with the french. Women are reactionary based on emotion. That's how we ended up with a Clinton as potus. He was cute. Now apply that to foreign policy and imagine the disaster.
50
posted on
04/15/2003 12:45:49 PM PDT
by
Havoc
(If you can't be frank all the time are you lying the rest of the time?)
To: WaveThatFlag
Depends upon who's running the country. Hitlery Clintoon or Puce Pube Pelosi--have real problems. Give me a Margaret Thatcher or a Golda Meir and I'll vote for her. In the western world, many women hold prestigious offices. However, that can't be said of the islamic world. Now think about improvements in the islamic world made by women. What would muslim countries be like if a woman were the head? There would be peace in the middle east!
To: Havoc
Clinton was CUTE????? I don't know ANY woman who thought that. I never did get that whole thing.
52
posted on
04/15/2003 12:47:00 PM PDT
by
Brad’s Gramma
(Become a Monthly Donor to Free Republic. Please?)
To: Havoc
True. There's no such thing as 'cute' foreign policy, no matter what women may want to believe.
To: WaveThatFlag
But in my experience, women tend to pursue conciliation and cooperation long after men would have been at each other's throats. Um...has this author ever been to high school or college and seen groups of girls/women? Hell, has he ever seen two girls actually FIGHT? If you want to see a dirty, nasty, cheating fight, watch a couple of high school girls go at it.
And that's not even considering the protective streak that most women have about their kids. Remember, "the most dangerous place in the world is between a mother and her children"!
}:-)4
54
posted on
04/15/2003 12:49:57 PM PDT
by
Moose4
(Mew havoc, and let loose the kittens of ZOT!)
To: Blueflag
No you forgot. Women and men ARE exactly the same. Except that women are better than men at some things.
55
posted on
04/15/2003 12:50:38 PM PDT
by
WaveThatFlag
(Run Al, Run!!!)
To: Post Toasties
I think, all in all, women will tend to let the core situations deteriorate much more, hoping quick fixes will resolve issues, and then the ultimate result is likely to be much more detrimental to whichever society has put its trust primarily in women leaders.
To: WaveThatFlag
I just bought a metal combat baton. Gonna take up figure skating.
This stuff is too silly to bother with commenting at length. Suffice it to say that the author takes a particularly creaky and evidenceless social premise, postulates an entire world running strictly under its conditions, and speculates that it would all come out like he imagines. He should stick to writing romance novels.
To: WaveThatFlag
"Let the American infidels bask in their illusion"
58
posted on
04/15/2003 12:52:15 PM PDT
by
COURAGE
To: Illbay
Among the more savage societies in the history of the world, such as the Plains Indians of North America, the men do the fighting, then bring the captives--men, women and children--back to camp. The women are in charge of the hideous and neverending torture of the captives.
No doubt they turn off the TV and talk them to death.
To: WaveThatFlag
On the one hand, women will be more inclined to peace. Presumably when they've retired from being more vicious guerilla fighters than men. Yeah, that's consistent.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301-310 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson