Women in politics

[JerrySeinfeld]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

That's kind of a joke. There isn't anything stopping women from entering politics today other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances.

Just like there are more men in prison than there are women.

So according to the logic of "equal representation in all groups of society" we should be working really hard to make sure more women end up in prison? Unless we're making that inevitible jump to Sharia (Islamic Law) overnight, I think not.

Why not? Because women aren't equally represented in prison for alot of reasons. But it's not because of some kind of conspiracy against men. It's because women behave differently than men do.

Maybe crime isn't the only area of difference?

Gee - what a novel concept.

[g_bambino]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

Yes, I was thoroughly disappointed when I read about this. Social engineering at it's best. But, it's clearly being said to contrast the current government's cutting of funding to women's groups and the Dept. of the Status of Women. In other words, in typical Liberal style, it's all about looking good and nothing about actual substance, i.e. it seems all soft and lovey towards women, not like those misogynist Conservatives, but is blatantly sexist and discriminatory.

[JerrySeinfeld]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

Yes, I was thoroughly disappointed when I read about this. Social engineering at it's best. But, it's clearly being said to contrast the current government's cutting of funding to women's groups and the Dept. of the Status of Women. In other words, in typical Liberal style, it's all about looking good and nothing about actual substance, i.e. it seems all soft and lovey towards women, not like those misogynist Conservatives, but is blatantly sexist and discriminatory.

If this were the USA, I'd probably say "they'd better be careful: by claiming all the "feel good" issues as their territory, they risk drifting way off to the left and alienating most middle class voters."

But here in Canada, I'm not sure there is such a thing as "too far left". - especially in vote-rich commie Toronto.

But the Libs always have been good at one thing the cons never seem to grasp: Campaign from the left, govern from the right.

Harper's been trying, but the libs are far more stealth at it.

[guyser]

"But here in Canada, I'm not sure there is such a thing as "too far left". - especially in vote-rich commie Toronto."

What is good for Toronto is good for the country. Calgary too !

It must suck to live outside those two areas

[JerrySeinfeld]

"But here in Canada, I'm not sure there is such a thing as "too far left". - especially in vote-rich commie Toronto."

What is good for Toronto is good for the country. Calgary too !

It must suck to live outside those two areas

Oddly, Calgary and Toronto are polar opposites as far as ideology.

[Saturn]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

That's kind of a joke. There isn't anything stopping women from entering politics today other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances.

Just like there are more men in prison than there are women.

So according to the logic of "equal representation in all groups of society" we should be working really hard to make sure more women end up in prison? Unless we're making that inevitible jump to Sharia (Islamic Law) overnight, I think not.

Why not? Because women aren't equally represented in prison for alot of reasons. But it's not because of some kind of conspiracy against men. It's because women behave differently than men do.

Maybe crime isn't the only area of difference?

Gee - what a novel concept.

I suppose your argument here is that women are too stupid to enter politics? They don't commit enough crimes to be in jail more often and they don't have the brains to be in politics more often?

[JerrySeinfeld]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

That's kind of a joke. There isn't anything stopping women from entering politics today other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances.

Just like there are more men in prison than there are women.

So according to the logic of "equal representation in all groups of society" we should be working really hard to make sure more women end up in prison? Unless we're making that inevitible jump to Sharia (Islamic Law) overnight, I think not.

Why not? Because women aren't equally represented in prison for alot of reasons. But it's not because of some kind of conspiracy against men. It's because women behave differently than men do.

Maybe crime isn't the only area of difference?

Gee - what a novel concept.

I suppose your argument here is that women are too stupid to enter politics? They don't commit enough crimes to be in jail more often and they don't have the brains to be in politics more often?

No, not at all.

It's that men and women are different. Maybe women are too SMART to enter politics.

Whatever the reason the rationale is this:

Just as women and men have different representations in jail for any variety of unknown or partially explained reasons, so too will their representations be different in all kinds of realms of society, and to "work to rectify these unequal representations" is not only futile...it's also plain disrespectful to women.

Women know they can enter politics and succeed. What's insulting is a paternalistic social engineering frenchman who rides into town claiming to be the hero for all the poor little women's problems in the world.

[Black Dog]

Links for the link impaired.

New Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, in a bid to see more women in Parliament, says he will hand-pick women candidates to run in selected ridings across Canada in the next election.

Hey, it's good enough for our pals in Afghanistan...

A quarter of the seats - 68 seats - in the parliament are reserved for women, as well as 10 seats for the Kuchi community.

But I'm sure there was nothing stopping Afghan women from entering politics other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances...

[mikedavid00]

Yes, I was thoroughly disappointed when I read about this. Social engineering at it's best. But, it's clearly being said to contrast the current government's cutting of funding to women's groups and the Dept. of the Status of Women. In other words, in typical Liberal style, it's all about looking good and nothing about actual substance, i.e. it seems all soft and lovey towards women, not like those misogynist Conservatives, but is blatantly sexist and discriminatory.

Well I know that Belinda has been campaigning for this so I think it might have to do with inside politics.

It's also proven I believe that women don't go into politics simply due to the opposite of the sexes and nothing more.

[Black Dog]

It's also proven I believe that women don't go into politics simply due to the opposite of the sexes and nothing more.

Huh?

[Canadian Blue]

Hey, it's good enough for our pals in Afghanistan...

A majority of Canadian's oppose that though. I don't know, I'm not the one that said it.

Sure Dion might hand pick a bunch of women to run, but will they even win? Let's face it if a popular male mayor is running for the Lib's, but is taken out of the running so a second rate candidate can run that's plain retarded. I don't see how it could even work, especially with our current system. Maybe under PR, but once again that would take away to much power from the PMO.

[Black Dog]

Sure Dion might hand pick a bunch of women to run, but will they even win? Let's face it if a popular male mayor is running for the Lib's, but is taken out of the running so a second rate candidate can run that's plain retarded.

See, Dion's plan makes sense when you consider the possibility that, currently, there are second rate candidates get the nod because they are men.

[Saturn]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

That's kind of a joke. There isn't anything stopping women from entering politics today other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances.

Just like there are more men in prison than there are women.

So according to the logic of "equal representation in all groups of society" we should be working really hard to make sure more women end up in prison? Unless we're making that inevitible jump to Sharia (Islamic Law) overnight, I think not.

Why not? Because women aren't equally represented in prison for alot of reasons. But it's not because of some kind of conspiracy against men. It's because women behave differently than men do.

Maybe crime isn't the only area of difference?

Gee - what a novel concept.

I suppose your argument here is that women are too stupid to enter politics? They don't commit enough crimes to be in jail more often and they don't have the brains to be in politics more often?

No, not at all.

It's that men and women are different. Maybe women are too SMART to enter politics.

Whatever the reason the rationale is this:

Just as women and men have different representations in jail for any variety of unknown or partially explained reasons, so too will their representations be different in all kinds of realms of society, and to "work to rectify these unequal representations" is not only futile...it's also plain disrespectful to women.

Women know they can enter politics and succeed. What's insulting is a paternalistic social engineering frenchman who rides into town claiming to be the hero for all the poor little women's problems in the world.

Women and men have different representations in jail for obvious reasons - women commit fewer crimes. It is far less clear why there are 5 times as many men in parliament as women. Maybe you can suggest some that can account for those differences?

[Saturn]

Yes, I was thoroughly disappointed when I read about this. Social engineering at it's best. But, it's clearly being said to contrast the current government's cutting of funding to women's groups and the Dept. of the Status of Women. In other words, in typical Liberal style, it's all about looking good and nothing about actual substance, i.e. it seems all soft and lovey towards women, not like those misogynist Conservatives, but is blatantly sexist and discriminatory.

Well I know that Belinda has been campaigning for this so I think it might have to do with inside politics.

It's also proven I believe that women don't go into politics simply due to the opposite of the sexes and nothing more.

Aha, that's why half of Swedish MPs are women - Swedish women must be men.

[Canadian Blue]

Maybe women see people like Belinda Stronach, and think to themselves that they don't ever want to get into politics. I don't even know why Belinda is in parliament, what did she do that was so great.

Anyways, more women in parliament sure, but how would you do it. The only real way to garauntee having more women in parliament is through proportional representation.

PS: The job I want to get into is made up of about 80% women, but I haven't seen a huge push for equity lately, nor do I see the need to.

[JerrySeinfeld]

So Dion is slapping on his social engineeering hat to bump up the number of women in politics.

That's kind of a joke. There isn't anything stopping women from entering politics today other than their own personal decisions based on unique circumstances.

Just like there are more men in prison than there are women.

So according to the logic of "equal representation in all groups of society" we should be working really hard to make sure more women end up in prison? Unless we're making that inevitible jump to Sharia (Islamic Law) overnight, I think not.

Why not? Because women aren't equally represented in prison for alot of reasons. But it's not because of some kind of conspiracy against men. It's because women behave differently than men do.

Maybe crime isn't the only area of difference?

Gee - what a novel concept.

I suppose your argument here is that women are too stupid to enter politics? They don't commit enough crimes to be in jail more often and they don't have the brains to be in politics more often?

No, not at all.

It's that men and women are different. Maybe women are too SMART to enter politics.

Whatever the reason the rationale is this:

Just as women and men have different representations in jail for any variety of unknown or partially explained reasons, so too will their representations be different in all kinds of realms of society, and to "work to rectify these unequal representations" is not only futile...it's also plain disrespectful to women.

Women know they can enter politics and succeed. What's insulting is a paternalistic social engineering frenchman who rides into town claiming to be the hero for all the poor little women's problems in the world.

Women and men have different representations in jail for obvious reasons - women commit fewer crimes. It is far less clear why there are 5 times as many men in parliament as women. Maybe you can suggest some that can account for those differences?

Because fewer women get elected.

[Saturn]

Maybe women see people like Belinda Stronach, and think to themselves that they don't ever want to get into politics. I don't even know why Belinda is in parliament, what did she do that was so great.

Anyways, more women in parliament sure, but how would you do it. The only real way to garauntee having more women in parliament is through proportional representation.

PS: The job I want to get into is made up of about 80% women, but I haven't seen a huge push for equity lately, nor do I see the need to.

Clearly if you can ensure that women stay out of politics in the current system, you can also ensure that there are more women in politics under the current system. I don't see how the number of female MPs relates to proportional representation - or that the 4:1 men:women ratio can be explained by it.

Maybe women see Belinda Stronach and think that they don't want the media to describe their clothing as the most important thing about them and they don't want to be blamed for everything that men can get away with without any notice.

Shouldn't men look at male politicians and the corruption and scandal men are involved in and decide to leave politics to women? What did Bernier do to be in parliament? He didn't even run.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Maybe women see Belinda Stronach and think that they don't want the media to describe their clothing as the most important thing about them and they don't want to be blamed for everything that men can get away with without any notice.

These Belinda references make me wanna puke. How in heaven's name did BS get to be the standard-bearer for Canadian women politicians? Because she plays the gender card every time her character is (rightfully) questioned?

This just shows how gullible you and the rest of the Canadian electorate are.

Why can't we look at true ethical, educated and intelligent women politicians like Rona Ambrose? he uis a far classier, smarter, more educated and respectable figure than Stronach.

Stronach has no loyalty, is an opportunist who shed her boyfriend and party at the first opportunity to grab power (which backfired - by the way) and has now lately been named as the "other woman" in a divorce filing. Not exactly what I would call classy A-1 role-model material. For men OR women politicians.

Give me a BREAK. If Stephen Harper had done ANY of the above the Libs would be all over it - and he wouldn't be able to cry to the media and claim sexism as a defense for poor judgement.

But enough about her. The point is: Women can and do enter politics ALL THE TIME.

My quesiton is: why is it important to ENCOURAGE women to enter politics? Are we saying they can't do it on their own?

And more importantly: WHAT BARRIERS exist today? So far all I have heard on this is that your "feelings might get hurt" if you enter politics. What a joke. That barrier exists for men and women equally.

Come up with something concrete or quit whining about the "poor little women".

[Saturn]

Women and men have different representations in jail for obvious reasons - women commit fewer crimes. It is far less clear why there are 5 times as many men in parliament as women. Maybe you can suggest some that can account for those differences?

Because fewer women get elected.

But why is that? We all know that if you ran a dog in Alberta for the conservatives, the dog would get elected. It really isn't the voter's preference to vote for men. Political parties choose to run more men which is why more men get elected. Why can't they choose to run more women? If running more men is fair, I don't see why running more women is not.

[blueblood]

Maybe women see people like Belinda Stronach, and think to themselves that they don't ever want to get into politics. I don't even know why Belinda is in parliament, what did she do that was so great.

Anyways, more women in parliament sure, but how would you do it. The only real way to garauntee having more women in parliament is through proportional representation.

PS: The job I want to get into is made up of about 80% women, but I haven't seen a huge push for equity lately, nor do I see the need to.

Clearly if you can ensure that women stay out of politics in the current system, you can also ensure that there are more women in politics under the current system. I don't see how the number of female MPs relates to proportional representation - or that the 4:1 men:women ratio can be explained by it.

Maybe women see Belinda Stronach and think that they don't want the media to describe their clothing as the most important thing about them and they don't want to be blamed for everything that men can get away with without any notice.

Shouldn't men look at male politicians and the corruption and scandal men are involved in and decide to leave politics to women? What did Bernier do to be in parliament? He didn't even run.

There doesn't need to be proportional representation, just good old fashioned competition. If a woman is better than the guy, she should get party nomination and if she's a better choice of a candidate then get elected. If the guy is better, then he should win, it's all about choice, it's simple. Maybe women aren't in politics because they might just not want to for whatever reason, so what. Look at it this way, should a male MP/candidate whose doing a good job lose his spot for someone just because she's a woman? This affirmative action BS is crippling our country and this culture of being penalized because you work hard to better yourself from others has got to stop. Getting elected in politics is a bitter competition and if you don't stack up your not in.

[Saturn]

Maybe women see Belinda Stronach and think that they don't want the media to describe their clothing as the most important thing about them and they don't want to be blamed for everything that men can get away with without any notice.

These Belinda references make me wanna puke. How in heaven's name did BS get to be the standard-bearer for Canadian women politicians? Because she plays the gender card every time her character is (rightfully) questioned?

This just shows how gullible you and the rest of the Canadian electorate are.

Why can't we look at true ethical, educated and intelligent women politicians like Rona Ambrose? he uis a far classier, smarter, more educated and respectable figure than Stronach.

Stronach has no loyalty, is an opportunist who shed her boyfriend and party at the first opportunity to grab power (which backfired - by the way) and has now lately been named as the "other woman" in a divorce filing. Not exactly what I would call classy A-1 role-model material. For men OR women politicians.

Give me a BREAK. If Stephen Harper had done ANY of the above the Libs would be all over it - and he wouldn't be able to cry to the media and claim sexism as a defense for poor judgement.

But enough about her. The point is: Women can and do enter politics ALL THE TIME.

My quesiton is: why is it important to ENCOURAGE women to enter politics? Are we saying they can't do it on their own?

And more importantly: WHAT BARRIERS exist today? So far all I have heard on this is that your "feelings might get hurt" if you enter politics. What a joke. That barrier exists for men and women equally.

Come up with something concrete or quit whining about the "poor little women".

Give me a break! Emerson crossed the floor only 2 weeks after being elected as a Liberal. Did he get called a whore, bitch, and so on? The same conservatives who called Belinda a whore and a bitch were delighted to have Emerson turn conservative.

What is intelligent and ethical about Rona? Steven put her in the worst place possible, so that she comes out looking as the worst cabinet minister in his government. He pushed Belinda out and put Ablonczy in the backbenches to protect himself and his leader's chair. He surrounded himself with losers and brownnosers in cabinet, so that no one would challenge his leadership.

[Saturn]

Maybe women see people like Belinda Stronach, and think to themselves that they don't ever want to get into politics. I don't even know why Belinda is in parliament, what did she do that was so great.

Anyways, more women in parliament sure, but how would you do it. The only real way to garauntee having more women in parliament is through proportional representation.

PS: The job I want to get into is made up of about 80% women, but I haven't seen a huge push for equity lately, nor do I see the need to.

Clearly if you can ensure that women stay out of politics in the current system, you can also ensure that there are more women in politics under the current system. I don't see how the number of female MPs relates to proportional representation - or that the 4:1 men:women ratio can be explained by it.

Maybe women see Belinda Stronach and think that they don't want the media to describe their clothing as the most important thing about them and they don't want to be blamed for everything that men can get away with without any notice.

Shouldn't men look at male politicians and the corruption and scandal men are involved in and decide to leave politics to women? What did Bernier do to be in parliament? He didn't even run.

There doesn't need to be proportional representation, just good old fashioned competition. If a woman is better than the guy, she should get party nomination and if she's a better choice of a candidate then get elected. If the guy is better, then he should win, it's all about choice, it's simple. Maybe women aren't in politics because they might just not want to for whatever reason, so what. Look at it this way, should a male MP/candidate whose doing a good job lose his spot for someone just because she's a woman? This affirmative action BS is crippling our country and this culture of being penalized because you work hard to better yourself from others has got to stop. Getting elected in politics is a bitter competition and if you don't stack up your not in.

So women just don't want to get ahead - they are stupid and lack ambition. Or they do want to get ahead - but they are stupid and therefore unelectable. Come out and say it outloud.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Because fewer women get elected.

But why is that?

Same reason fewer women go to prison: Because men and women are different. We're not the same. We're not equal. We have equal RIGHTS but that doesn't make us WANT to do the same things.

Political parties choose to run more men which is why more men get elected. Why can't they choose to run more women? If running more men is fair, I don't see why running more women is not.

Women can run anytime they want.

The nominatino process is actually quite simple. Sign up, buy a membership, rally your supporters, show up at the nomination meeting and have a vote.

That's exactly what Rona Ambrose did and how she became a candidate, an MP and ultimately a minister.

Now I ask you again for the umpteenth time: What is stopping other women from doing the same thing?

[mikedavid00]

Yes, I was thoroughly disappointed when I read about this. Social engineering at it's best. But, it's clearly being said to contrast the current government's cutting of funding to women's groups and the Dept. of the Status of Women. In other words, in typical Liberal style, it's all about looking good and nothing about actual substance, i.e. it seems all soft and lovey towards women, not like those misogynist Conservatives, but is blatantly sexist and discriminatory.

Well I know that Belinda has been campaigning for this so I think it might have to do with inside politics.

It's also proven I believe that women don't go into politics simply due to the opposite of the sexes and nothing more.

Aha, that's why half of Swedish MPs are women - Swedish women must be men.

When you setup a status quo, you will filter out some of the best candidates for the job or position. This is factual and proven.

ie: When you have a status quo that says half of police must be women, the men who got filtered out were more likely to be better candidates than the women who got accepted.

This same principle applies for Universities, jobs, and anything else where there is a status quo system.

[mikedavid00]

women commit fewer crimes.

Less women run at the ground level for politics and take less memberships.

It is far less clear why there are 5 times as many men in parliament as women. Maybe you can suggest some that can account for those differences?

More men run at the lower level and thus, more men get elected.

Let's just all acknowledge that there is an 'opposite of sexes'. Men and women are different. Let's not over complicate things.