I don't really find any good womeme philosophers but there must be at least a few out there that aren't emotional brainlets

ayn rand

tfw someone asks a question and prompts not to provide the answer

I want a female Hobbes. Once that is done, I will change my mind.

I wouldn't make that broad of a statement. I would say that it's not part of their natural role in society though. I think women in politics is largely a bad idea.

https://twitter.com/TruthWillLive?s=09
Found it

what do you mean by politics? are we also including governance/rulers here?

Woman are piss poor leaders usually

In my statement, yes that's what I'm saying. My ideal system, if there is going to be voting, would be only family men get a vote.

except considering the golden age of England was under a female queen

Tbh, nobody should get the vote

Death to democracy

Women are bad leaders, except Everytime they've done well

@riacan >1 person

There have only been a handful of good woman leaders in history

she's not the only successful queen, but you do need to remember there are less examples of queens ruling

the number is almost guaranteed to be lower if there are less doing it

It's not a weakness in women that they don't naturally seek to lead or are not generally the most effective leaders. It's part of what makes them women.

lets also account for queen victoria, one of the longest reigning monarchs and during one of the peaks of the empire

This one female leader that happened to be good for her country is proof that womemes are good leaders

I just named a second

why are you saying one

Queen Victoria had no power

Tbh, a female sultan would be lit

point is, there are bound to be less female examples due to cultural norms

but there are tons of examples of shite male rulers

again, because there have been more male rulers

Part of it is the proclivity to seek out power, their lack of that drive is a function of their nature. Cultural norms acknowledge this nature, they don't enforce it. I wish we did enforce it. Feminism is what is enforcing this idea that women should seek out things which they statistically do not find happiness in and aren't great at.

it's perhaps controversial in some circles to say, but this drive and also success often depends on one core question - planning to have kids?

Can't we just burn ourselves?

women who don't have kids more often do have that drive and success

women who do, often don't

and most women do

Yes, that's very much part of it. Even if women could do great at these things, we would be sacrificing families to achieve some statistical goal. For what?

you'll find out when you grow up

No, women who have been duped into joining the rat race and competing with men end up childless or with fewer children. You have cause and effect wrong.

no u

Dyno disagrees with you, burn yourself.

you can argue either side of that debate phash and it's impossible to prove either

point is though