Madonna scolds America

PrinceOfCats said:
As a European, taking chunks out America is more than a little easy, so in America's defence: obviously there are parts of Asia that don't even have democratic rule

So what? There are only 22 countries in the entire world that are considered democracies. Half of them are democratic republics too.
Even in those asian countries without democratic rule such as Sri Lanka or Phillipine there are female presidents. As early as 1973, the chinese central committe (equivalent of the senate) was over 10% female. In 1973, the US did not have one female senator. Even today, women only make up around 2% of the senate.

In america, it's such a BIG DEAL having a woman president. Elsewhere, from my personal experiences, it's based more on qualifications than gender and it doesn't seem like the sky is falling down if a woman takes a high position in office.
 
MySweetSeptember said:
Well.....Woman or not, I will not vote for Hilary Clinton in the 2008 Election. Hell no.

I keep envisioning a race between Clinton and Rice in '08 - maybe enough people will finally "throw their vote away" on a third party candidate to break the stranglehold the Republicrats have on us and some good will come of the inevitably torturous 18 months of campaigning. I want just one election where the result isn't roughly half the country whining that they're not to blame, because THEY voted for Kodos.

I'd very much like to see a woman president, but I don't want one just for the sake of having a woman. Give us someone good, Republican or Democrat or 3rd party, male or female, black or white, Christian or Jewish, and I have enough faith and hope left to believe they'll be elected. In the last campaign the best candidate the Democrats could come up with was someone who's biggest selling point was that he wasn't Bush, and Bush's big selling point was that OMGTHEEVILWILLGETYOUIFYOUDON'TVOTEFORME! It's pathetic. The United States as a country has to start thinking outside of the box and get some fresh blood and ideas in there because we're dying in a fetid cesspool of our own making.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

When talking about equality, democracy is often the thing. Such little known feminists as Mary Wollstonecraft and later the sufragettes were kind of a bit keen on this whole democratic enfrachisement lark. I don't quite see what you're driving at?
 
I think that she's right about American men being afraid of women and women hating other women.

I hope it's McCain vs. Clinton in 08, that's win-win for me.
 
I'd never vote for anyone because of his or her gender. That would be stupid.
 
I would not necessarily vote for someone based on gender. I am tending to vote with the Democrats because I am liberal myself, however I did not feel the most confident in supporting Kerry because I felt like he wavered a bit too much. That does not mean I would support Bush.

I will, in 2008, vote for the candidate whose beliefs line up most with mine and who will do something about helping stop problems both at home and abroad. I also want someone who will attempt to make the world more cooperative to help solve problems like AIDS because I honestly think AIDS is the biggest menace to the developing world. Whether or not it is a woman, I do not care. I am all in favour of having a woman as president. But if a man is better I will vote for the man.
 
the point of the matter is, madonna doesnt know what the hell she is talking about. fact: europe is just as scared shitless to elect a female leader as america is.

if she needs to pull examples from the friggen middles ages then her point is moot.

off the top of my head, the only MAJOR country right now iwth a female leader is Germany


nanker_phledge said:
Well there have been female head of state in ancient history just as much as in recent history in Finland , Latvia, India ,Ireland, Indonesia , Philippines, etc ...
 
uberchic said:
I think a woman would get voted for if one would run, but no one has yet!
IMHO; I'm only 16.

(But also excited that I'll be 18 for the next election. yay.)
of course women have run! there are more candidates than simply republican or democrat.



also, in response to madonna, america is still a young country. europe and asia have been around far longer. this actually reminds me of sometihng i heard in my silk road class today. during the mongolian empire, there a period where the entire empire (the largest ever) was ruled by woman, i thought that was awesome.

anyways, offtopic
 
Hipkitten said:
No. She's right in saying that it's about time we had a female president. But in my mind the discussion shouldn't stop there. It's about time that anyone who isn't a white male gets the presidency in the US. Obviously it comes down to who is best for the job; I wouldn't vote for a woman simply because she's a woman. Just as I would never vote only along "party lines." The bottom line is that there are still people who would not vote for a woman simply because of her XX status and that's just ignorant and wrong.

Excellent point about how the discussion should extend to non-whites.

But the Bush admin has exposed or created a whole massive group of backwards voters who are in favour of banning abortion, introducing the draft, banning homosexuals from getting married, creating policies based on religious faith....It's in danger of heading towards a discreet theocracy.

Considering that I wonder if America is ready for something as 'radical' as a woman or non-white President. :unsure:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boluda said:
the point of the matter is, madonna doesnt know what the hell she is talking about. fact: europe is just as scared shitless to elect a female leader as america is.

if she needs to pull examples from the friggen middles ages then her point is moot.

off the top of my head, the only MAJOR country right now iwth a female leader is Germany

Bah , I agree about the fact that Europe and the U.S are both reluctant to elect a female leader. But all the examples of countries that had a female head of state I gave were from the 20th c history until now (and there are probably more of them) so I guess that's still recent. You still have female presidents in the Philippines and in Chile (I know that you're referring to the lack of female leaders at the head of powerful rich countries ) and a female prime minister in New Zealand , Mozambique at present (I repeat , I know we're still speaking of a minority) .The thing that I find a bit stupid in Madonna's comment is that she's comparing the history of two continents with the history of one country (although she's probably referring to powerful countries)...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PrinceOfCats said:
When talking about equality, democracy is often the thing. Such little known feminists as Mary Wollstonecraft and later the sufragettes were kind of a bit keen on this whole democratic enfrachisement lark. I don't quite see what you're driving at?

Women suffrage is arguing a different issue because a democracy is supposed to grant equality of oppurtunities. In the case of suffrage, either no one is allowed to vote, or all citizens are allowed voting rights, only allowing one gender to vote would deny the other gender equality of opportunities.

I disagree that only a democracy can bring equality. That word is so trendy nowadays, often synonamous with liberty or equality but is that true? Thomas Jefferson believed democracy is nothing more than mob rule.

and if I'm following your arguement that without democracy then equality amongst the sexes cannot be achieved, then you just argued against yourself because america isn't a democracy, its a republic.
 
cocomonkey4 said:
Women suffrage is arguing a different issue because a democracy is supposed to grant equality of oppurtunities. In the case of suffrage, either no one is allowed to vote, or all citizens are allowed voting rights, only allowing one gender to vote would deny the other gender equality of opportunities.

That paragraph does not make sense.

I disagree that only a democracy can bring equality. That word is so trendy nowadays, often synonamous with liberty or equality but is that true? Thomas Jefferson believed democracy is nothing more than mob rule.

Nor does this one.

and if I'm following your arguement that without democracy then equality amongst the sexes cannot be achieved, then you just argued against yourself because america isn't a democracy, its a republic.

What? How are the terms 'democracy' and 'republic' in any way mutually exclusive, that's entirely illogical.
 
I think it's really easy to say sh*t like, "America isn't ready for a female president." Sure... maybe. But I haven't read any reports, studies, polls, stas or whatever to suggest that this is even remotely true. I think more often than not, some women just like throwing ideas like that around as an outry against our heavily patriarchal society.

I don't think the problem is that America isn't ready for a female president... America just isn't used to any good female leaders. How many female leaders has there been in the history of that country? How many at the national level for that matter? When women enter politics, they're most likely to do so at the local level - not because they see national politics as too flooded with male politicians, and therefore too much competition, but because they have a deeper connetion at the local level.

Women are disproportionately represented in office because there aren't too many women trying to get into office in the first place. But I think Hilary Clinton has proven that she is, at least, capable of handling politics at the national level. I think a lot of people recognize that, and I think that is why a lot of democrats were relieved that Kerry was not elected as president. Once Bush finishes his term (thanks god) Hilary can make a move for office.
 
Madonna...do you want to comeback? Cause it's looking like you're perfectly content slipping into obscurity, like Britney, or Mariah.
 
roppal222 said:
Excellent point about how the discussion should extend to non-whites.

But the Bush admin has exposed or created a whole massive group of backwards voters who are in favour of banning abortion, introducing the draft, banning homosexuals from getting married, creating policies based on religious faith....It's in danger of heading towards a discreet theocracy.
wth? Bush has Never said anything about being in favor of a draft. (In fact he said he would never inforce it) And most people in America are against it. Not to say they don't exist--but I don't know a single person who is for it. And people who were against gay marriage and against abortion were there before Bush came along, and will be there after. I'm not a big Bush fan, but he's not evil.


The reason I don't think Madonna should've said what she said is the WAY SHE SAID IT. She says America needs to step up and get a female Pres. Uh huh--well if Madonna were voting here--right now--and had the choice between voting for a male democrat and a female republican, she'd pick the male. So she should've said--America it's time to elect a female democrat. because that's what she means.
 
^ What is the draft?
cocomonkey4 said:
america isn't a democracy, its a republic.
There can be no republic without democracy.
Beside it is written nowhere that the democracy has to give equal right to all the people of a given nation.
Democracy means 'the common people rule', and what define the 'common people' changes with societies and time. The classic Greek had another definition than you, which excluded women, slaves and foreigners yet would you argue that they were among the first to practice a democratic system?
As for the rest of your post, I would agree with Prince of Cats that it's quite obscure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^ Right now in America we have what's called an "all volunteer army". A draft means that any man between 18-35, would HAVE to go if their "number" was called.
You may know a bit about this if you have ever studied anything on the Vietnam war..or other american wars;) The draft is very much criticized
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^ What is the draft?

To add to what has already been said, it's known as 'conscription' in commonwealth English and is similar to 'national service', which I believe you had in France some time ago. The professional army are often against the draft, which is used as evidence to show that the motivations behind it are ideological rather than military.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
WTF Madonna??? :huh: She's so Nucking Futs!!! :rolleyes: What a HUGE pest! I'm glad she doesn't live in the states anymore! And her remark about women not trusting other women in the states, that's a bunch of BULL
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Statistics

Threads
213,859
Messages
15,240,626
Members
87,799
Latest member
verydemimoore
Back
Top