women taking charge...

[fli]

Cool. A play of mine is going to be performed at a junior college. Not professional stuff, nonetheless, I am very happy. I basically made an updated version of Aristophanes' "Lysistrata", but instead of Grecian locations, it is set in Iraq...

Translated it from 3 sources, changed it, took out some jokes, put in some new ones, essentially, it's Lysistrata, but much more easier to understand since the setting is in Iraq. Casting will start September, and be played out in November-- if nothing goes wrong.

Okay, basically, in the play, women make a sex strike, men give in, and there's peace.

But thinking about it, what if all women were in charge of everything? I mean, what if men were completly bared from doing any policy decision making-- just women.

What would the world be like under the authority of women? Would it be the same? Less wars, more wars, etc?

And don't make stupid PMS jokes... we've all seen that episode of the Man Show, and I'm sure some of the gals don't appreciate that kind of crap.

[stafffighter]

Well historically there have been female leaders who's countries took part in wars. From neffertitti to catherine the great to margret thatcher. Watr is not an issue based on something as simple as sex

[Lord-Humungus]

When is it and at what school??? My bro. is having a baby any day and I'll be in the area to visit...if your play is on then I'll come see it..it sounds really cool!

[fli]

At 8/19/04 07:09 AM, Lord_Humungus wrote: When is it and at what school??? My bro. is having a baby any day and I'll be in the area to visit...if your play is on then I'll come see it..it sounds really cool!

San Jose City College... perhaps we could meet from some NG tea?

[Lord-Humungus]

At 8/19/04 07:29 AM, spanishfli wrote:

San Jose City College... perhaps we could meet from some NG tea?

if I make it,I'll look for you! when? i guess i'll check the schools website...my showing up will all depend on work/baby schedule..but theres at least a reasonable chance I'll be in the area sometime soon...and I want to check out a law school in SJ while I'm up there anyway...we'll see!

[specimen56]

It would be exactly the same. IT all depend on what kind of leader gets in charge, not on their sex. And anyone who says otherwise is a sexist pig, male or female.

[1Shot-Paddy]

a lot of women are and have always been in charge of major areas concerning the government, being President or Prime Minister just means all the abuse will be hurled at you.

[mrpopenfresh]

Alot of women have already held the title of leader of their country. Great Brittain ahd one, Israel had, hell, even India had one. Women hardly have any differences compared to a man when it comes to leadership. Some chauvinistic people might criticise, but screw them.

[witeshark]

I think a woman in Iraq taking charge would be a tad difficult, but what a thought though

[fli]

At 8/19/04 11:58 PM, witeshark wrote: I think a woman in Iraq taking charge would be a tad difficult, but what a thought though

It's just a play-- a very funny-grab-on-your-gut-and-don't-hit-the-floor comedy...

But it has a beautiful message of peace that I have placed at the end...

[RandomFreak]

Boy.... It's almost impossible to say what it would be like if women were in total control. I mean yeah there have been women leaders throughout history but the arguement can (and has been) made that they were forced to react the male world around them and didn't act in a purely feminine manner. Would it be any better? I don't really think so, just very different.

[XcakerX]

bullshit reason to see some stupid ass play. *yawn* someone pass the bottle

[System-1]

At 8/20/04 12:32 AM, RandomFreak wrote: Boy.... It's almost impossible to say what it would be like if women were in total control. I mean yeah there have been women leaders throughout history but the arguement can (and has been) made that they were forced to react the male world around them and didn't act in a purely feminine manner. Would it be any better? I don't really think so, just very different.

how would it be different? less war? more compassion? lets face it. men are the cause of pretty much all of the wars and violence in the world. the world would become VERY passive if women were in charge...

[stafffighter]

As I have stated, there have been female world leaders who were every bit as violent as their male counterparts. There have also been dignified and peacefull examples from both genders.
Note I am avoiding seriosely sighting the drew carrey joke "I'm sure no one one would start a fight for no reason if women ran the world? 'Hello england, this is france, Why am I being invaded? ' Oh I think you know why." It's funny on a personal level but I do acknolege the diffrence between political standing and romantic entangelments.

[fli]

At 8/20/04 06:54 AM, stafffighter wrote: As I have stated, there have been female world leaders who were every bit as violent as their male counterparts. There have also been dignified and peacefull examples from both genders.
Note I am avoiding seriosely sighting the drew carrey joke "I'm sure no one one would start a fight for no reason if women ran the world? 'Hello england, this is france, Why am I being invaded? ' Oh I think you know why." It's funny on a personal level but I do acknolege the diffrence between political standing and romantic entangelments.

I can't recall women whom had actively engaged in politics being violent. The only thing I could is Thatcher-- but only because I don't know her that well, but I do recall about the islas/islands, Argentina thing, and recall that she was being very aggressive.

Next I could think is Mirabal sisters, las Mariposas, or in English, The Butterflies, who rebelled against Dominican Republic's dictator, Trujillo. They carried guns, but it seems that they didn't advocate violent war, just an uprising...

Perhaps Cleopatra... but then again, I'm not good at Roman or Egyptian history...

Otherwise-- examples please...

For me, I believe that women would tend to be more compassionate. And womens mind are built differently to men, biologically. They tend to communicate more, etc... I mean if women were the only ones in charge of governments, I do believe that things may be different.

[stafffighter]

Women are no less flawed creatures than men. And I have given my examples, one of which you agreed to in your admiddadly limeted understanding of history.
and, dog guy, about the quote in your profile, even species that do lay eggs require the eggs to be fertilized by males.
I'm calling for equality, not saying one tyrant would be better than another

[bombkangaroo]

wow, we've actually managed to avoid mysandric bollocks. i'm impressed.
but as stafffighter said, women are no different than men.
social gender stereotypes have no place in politics, and subsequently, no effect on the policies of female politicians.

margerte thatcher didn't hesitate to send our military over to the falklands to liberate them from the argentinian occupation. IIRC she is also credited with requesting that the terrorists in the iranian embassy not leave the building alive.

when you think of women as more compassionate, you're thinking of society's gender stereotypes, but you can't compare that impression with that of a female politician.
after all it's a job, and i don't recall too many vocations where an employee's gender made much difference to how they did their job.

[fli]

At 8/20/04 07:48 AM, stafffighter wrote: Women are no less flawed creatures than men. And I have given my examples, one of which you agreed to in your admiddadly limeted understanding of history.

"neffertitti to catherine the great to margret thatcher"... Okay, bomb explained Thatcher and the "occupation" thing, but what about the others?

[Elfer]

Women already do run everything. In exchange for this power, men get to pretend they're making decisions.

[specimen56]

At 8/20/04 01:50 PM, Elfer wrote: Women already do run everything. In exchange for this power, men get to pretend they're making decisions.

I thought that the people on here were trying to hold a proper discssion withoutinnane things like this cropping up? That there is typical propaganda. Bleh.

[bumcheekcity]

The last woman PM we has was Margaret Thatcher. She was so evil, when she visited Satan, he took notes.

Women can be just as bad as men, for being right-wing and starting wars. And stroppier, most of the time.

[Camarohusky]

At 8/20/04 04:20 PM, bumcheekcity wrote: The last woman PM we has was Margaret Thatcher. She was so evil, when she visited Satan, he took notes.

Women can be just as bad as men, for being right-wing and starting wars. And stroppier, most of the time.

Imagine how much more power the right woman could wield as opposed to a man... If she had the looks and the attitude she could get the guys to do anything she wanted...

[1Shot-Paddy]

spanishfli your're just using stereotypes to make a decision. You musn't know many women because they don't fall into that compassionate category.

[Camarohusky]

At 8/20/04 04:31 PM, 1Shot-Paddy wrote: spanishfli your're just using stereotypes to make a decision. You musn't know many women because they don't fall into that compassionate category.

Well, maybe not drunken Irish wenches. All of the non-IRA women I've seen were much less agressive than the guys I know, and if not that, they were at least less infatuated by their own hubris to do something so stupid as many iof things guys do.

[fli]

At 8/20/04 04:31 PM, 1Shot-Paddy wrote: spanishfli your're just using stereotypes to make a decision. You musn't know many women because they don't fall into that compassionate category.

Stereotypes? Turn on Discovery Chanel, and watch those intresting "Man vs. Women" shows where they show differences and similarities between the sexes. They talk about history literature, pyschology, evolution, everything. I am not stereotyping when I say that women are more naturally incline to communicate, or that they multi-task better, etc... Because I engaged in reading and watching this subject long before I made my statement. I am not stereotyping, especially when I didn't say, "all women..." and stuff like that. I said that women, in general, tend to be more compassionate then men. They are more inclined to be less aggressive. Notice how I didn't say, "All women are gentle flowers that we must protect..."

And it's true. Men and women think differently, and approach situations much more diffrently. Do you know that transgendered men will spend years taking "women classes"? In these classes, they learn how woman think and they are drilled with situations from talking on the telephone, holding your posture to picking up things. These classes don't teach the mannerisms of a woman, or how to mimick a woman. No-- they try to teach these transgendered men on how to think like a woman and then approach situations like women. If men and women thought exactly alike, these classes wouldn't be necessary.

[fli]

Where is Izuamoto?

[TheWakingDeath]

If women were any more compaissionate than men we'd have a hard time getting a republican elected in office since women are ever so slightly the majority of the population.
Women aren't compassionate, they're evil and insane. Men start wars because they're insecure over the size of their penises, not because they're meaner than women. I could see someone like my mother being the next hitler, gassing all of the people she didn't like. "What's that? They didn't invite us to their Christmas Party? I don't care if they don't celebrate Christmas, gas those Jew bastards!"
War is about penis size.

[TheWakingDeath]

At 8/20/04 06:30 PM, spanishfli wrote:

"

No-- they try to teach these transgendered men on how to think like a woman and then approach situations like women. If men and women thought exactly alike, these classes wouldn't be necessary.

Ah HAH, I must attend one of these classes, so I can better figure out when my girlfriend is lying to me, and manipulating me for my money!!! That will foil her, evil wench!
I'd never heard of these classes before. But they seem so... neccessary.

[Raptorman]

At 8/20/04 06:44 PM, Izuamoto wrote:

At 8/20/04 06:30 PM, spanishfli wrote:

"

Ah HAH, I must attend one of these classes, so I can better figure out when my girlfriend is lying to me, and manipulating me for my money!!! That will foil her, evil wench!
I'd never heard of these classes before. But they seem so... neccessary.

I can help with that; they both occur when her mouth is moving. Don't be to hard on her though it's in her nature. In fairness though it is just as easy for them to tell when we are lying to them or using them for sex.......

[TheWakingDeath]

Use a woman for sex? I would NEVER do that!