PDA

View Full Version : % of women in elected office



TomF
01-21-2018, 04:36 PM
Interesting call-in show on the regional CBC radio today, prompted by yeaterday's Women's Marches, across North America and perhaps the world. The guest represented a nonpartisan organization which works to promote more women running for office, in whatever party. The arguments in favour ranged from women needing representation at the same % as their slice of the population, to beliefs that women would change policy. Specifically, would work for issues like child poverty, affordable housing, child care availability and quality, etc.

Now, I would love to see more women in office. I've had a disproportionate number of women who have been the Minister of the departments in which I've worked, and they have been grand. I can't say that their policy perspectives were obviously different from the male ministers I have served, but no matter.

But I couldn't help but reflect that the issues that the guest and many callers claimed were of more interest to women... are of more interest perhaps to *progressive* women. I have been watching interviews this week with Trump voters, asking them for a Scorecard. And the great majority of them, male or female, are just fine with Trump's actions to date. Not only that, they, men and women alike, aren't too upset by his misogyny, though the women in particular observe that it exists. I don't know if those women, particularly the more socially conservative among them, feel a great animus about womens' under representation in Congress, or if instead they figure it is just fine. It may be that the women more concerned about equal representation in Congress are convinced that women disproportionately support progressive causes. And are conflating politics and gender, in ways which would be called sexism, we're a man to make a conflation.

What do you think? Are socially conservative women being silent in such discussions, though making their views known through their choices to be less politically active, and more apt to vote for socially conservative men? Or would socially conservative women actually drive socially progressive change were they to stand for office and succeed in greater numbers?

bobbys
01-21-2018, 05:07 PM
Every conservitive woman thst dared to run was put through the lib gauntlet here .

Libs here ran the nastiest attacts against sarah palin anf her family in recent history.

You gleefully joined in..

No lib women here objected.

Hypocrites.

Tom Montgomery
01-21-2018, 05:09 PM
^
Sarah Palin is a moron and her family is a hot mess.

bobbys
01-21-2018, 05:26 PM
^
Sarah Palin is a moron and her family is a hot mess.
.

Libs are still furious she dared to run.. and keep her baby...

woodpile
01-21-2018, 06:04 PM
To answer the OP's question, here http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-government

I have no problem seeing more, if you want the job simply campaign and get elected.

TomF
01-21-2018, 07:23 PM
Every conservitive woman thst dared to run was put through the lib gauntlet here .

Libs here ran the nastiest attacts against sarah palin anf her family in recent history.

You gleefully joined in..

No lib women here objected.

Hypocrites.Palin was an incompetent twit, and her life after politics only confirms it. Yeah, I observed that she was and is a twit.

The interim leader of the federal Conservative party is female, and was really good at the job. No twit at all, quite the opposite. And as I said in the OP, I have worked for a disproportionate number of female Ministers, who were all at least as good as the name Minister's I've worked for.

Tell me, you figure Palin was all about affordable housing, programs for reducing child poverty, or reduce the costs of child care? Or was she about "drill baby drill" and all the Trumpiness we now see? I figure that if Palin was all for progressive causes, she might have said so. And that electing dozens of Plains wouldn't do what the folks on the radio show suggested it might.

Steve McMahon
01-21-2018, 09:25 PM
I was going to comment in more depth, but bbbbbssss has already ruined this thread.
Yes, more women in politics and leadership positions in general would be good, but not Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton etc....

Canoeyawl
01-21-2018, 09:41 PM
.

Libs are still furious she dared to run.. and keep her baby...

McCain was foolish to approach her, and she was foolish to run, all the opposition had to do was stand back and let her speak.

As far as her baby and liberal opinons? You are wrong, and just trying to create hard feelings by lying about it. and it is working...

bobbys
01-21-2018, 09:42 PM
I was going to comment in more depth, but bbbbbssss has already ruined this thread.
Yes, more women in politics and leadership positions in general would be good, but not Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton etc.....

Dont blame me he hates women.......

Steve McMahon
01-21-2018, 09:48 PM
.

Dont blame me he hates women.......

Yes the lard t'underin Jesus b'y, me goblygook translator is tuned to maximum stunned, and I think you busted it just the same.

mmd
01-22-2018, 10:06 AM
^ Yiss, b'y...

AlanMc
01-22-2018, 10:37 AM
i doubt there will ever be a 50/50 split of women in politics. you might get close to a 60/40 though.

TomF
01-22-2018, 11:34 AM
My question really is whether people who claim that simply empowering women of any political stripe to participate effectively in public life will change public policy on a variety of issues typically defined by such advocates as of special interest to women. Affordable housing, child poverty, food security, access to child care, etc.

I wonder if those issued are of special interest to progressive women, the women who show up at rallies like happened last weekend. And the fact that we don't hear women speaking against such policy isn't evidence of bipartisan female unanimity, but of conservative women tacitly supporting more conventional and traditional social roles. Such women will vote for Trump, and not participate in rallies in favour of causes dear to the hearts of progressive women. In that, being little different from their male counterparts.

My question in the OP wasn't about whether we should or shouldn't advocate for more women in office, but if part of the reason more women aren't standing for office is that a bunch of women like a bunch of men are socially conservative. And that as socially conservative women, they aren't particularly drawn to doing a socially progressive thing and standing for office. They don't see it as their ambition, partly because they are socially conservative.

AlanMc
01-22-2018, 01:00 PM
if you can't have a discussion with someone, that says just as much about you as it does them. i can have a discussion with anyone about anything.

Daniel Noyes
01-22-2018, 01:01 PM
.

Libs are still furious she dared to run.. and keep her baby...

women are free to be "independent" as long as they think in Lock Step with Liberal Old White Men on the Forum... :D


other wise they are mysoginastically attacked, and fun of and denegrated.

AlanMc
01-22-2018, 01:02 PM
women are free to be "independent" as long as they think in Lock Step with Liberal Old Men on the Forum... :D


and if they don't vote their way, it's only b/c they're servants to their male masters.

Daniel Noyes
01-22-2018, 01:03 PM
and if they don't vote their way, it's only b/c they're servants to their male masters.

case in point...


^
Sarah Palin is a moron and her family is a hot mess.

AlanMc
01-22-2018, 01:14 PM
Oh, I have lots of good discussions with the men. But I will never, ever, get them to see a different viewpoint. It is too threatening to their machismo. Maybe you can relate.




"I would never be able to even have a real discussion with their husbands"

so what does that mean if you "have lots of good discussions with the men"?

you have good discussions with them that aren't real? or the discussions are not real because they don't change their entire outlook on life and bend to your superior will?

bobbys
01-22-2018, 01:14 PM
McCain was foolish to approach her, and she was foolish to run, all the opposition had to do was stand back and let her speak.

As far as her baby and liberal opinons? You are wrong, and just trying to create hard feelings by lying about it. and it is working....

The point was to scare off any women in the future daring to run.

If a women does not go to a certain college, forsake children for career, , abort a few babies, not pander to celebrities, , she is not welcome.
.

bobbys
01-22-2018, 01:16 PM
I was going to comment in more depth, but bbbbbssss has already ruined this thread.
Yes, more women in politics and leadership positions in general would be good, but not Sarah Palin or Hillary Clinton etc.....

O come on libs loved hillary before the election. You could not find a bad word again her when she was 10 points ahead.

TomF
01-22-2018, 01:58 PM
Once again, I am all for competent people in office, whatever their gender. I find it appalls to have viciously incompetent people, whatever their gender. 2 female Ministers i've served in the past 5 years were absolutely top flight; one from either of our 2 major parties, R and L.

Otoh, Palin was and is an embarrassment of exactly the same category as Trump; pathologically Dunning-Krueger. That pathology is gender neutral just as competence is.

A female Mitch McConnell would be fit to serve in exactly the same degree as Mitch is. The question is whether she is prevented by patriarchy from running to promote those policies in that party, or if supporting the ethos which McConnell represents, she doesn't want to run.

What I wonder is whether the presumption that a patriarchal boys club is preventing such a person from running in the GOP or equivalent is not a "progressive" projection. That perhaps a female Mitch holds a view of social roles which does not include the ambition of running for office to the degree that the ambition is held by progressives.

It is kinda like observing that 96% of the graduating nursing class at the local university last year was female (true, btw). It isn't because women conspired to shut out male applicants to the program, or that women have no other career choices. Maybe many men and women just want different things, though there is some overlap. And gravitate to what they want.

John of Phoenix
01-22-2018, 02:22 PM
In looking at the red women running for flake and franks seats in Arizona, I have concluded that they are every bit as crazy, hate filled and stupid as any male counterpart.

Daniel Noyes
01-22-2018, 06:10 PM
.

The point was to scare off any women in the future daring to run.

If a women does not go to a certain college, forsake children for career, , abort a few babies, not pander to celebrities, , she is not welcome.
.


O so True Bobbys, the Liberals were incensed that a Woman would DARE to run as a Republican... Democrats consider minorities and females as their own bought political Property... Old Ways Die Hard with the Dems.

bobbys
01-22-2018, 08:02 PM
In looking at the red women running for flake and franks seats in Arizona, I have concluded that they are every bit as crazy, hate filled and stupid as any male counterpart..

Thanks for making my point, libs will try and destroy any women not a lib.

John of Phoenix
01-23-2018, 09:22 AM
We all knew it was coming. Dunning Kruger strong as ever. Still.

...they are every bit as crazy, hate filled and stupid as any male counterpart.

It's not directed at women.

AlanMc
01-23-2018, 09:43 AM
We all knew it was coming. Dunning Kruger strong as ever. Still.

...they are every bit as crazy, hate filled and stupid as any male counterpart.

It's not directed at women.



yeah... no.

ishmael
01-23-2018, 11:14 AM
Getting past third wave feminism, its post-modern roots, with its blaming men for EVERYTHING, its hatred of the patriarchy, its "in your face" embrace of anything odd or unusual, seems the task at the moment.

I'm a second wave feminist, unabashed. Whatever either sex wants to pursue they should. And if competent in that pursuit, their compensation should be equable.

It seems to me what has happened is a uni-polar analysis in pursuit of political power. A blind pursuit. If wages aren't equal it must be the result of structural inequality! Undoubtedly, there is structural inequality which needs to be addressed, but what are the other factors? We should address the "structure", "I'm not being paid equably for equal work" without dismissing a multi-variant look at what are inherent characteristics in the sexes.

For example: It is pretty well established that women, statistically, are by a large margin more oriented toward relationship, and men are more oriented toward things. With good, pretty conclusive, studies, this seems inherent, biological, not culturally biased.

Should women pursue careers in politics and business? Absolutely! We need more women in both, more relational energy as opposed to "bottom line" "thing" thinking. But they shouldn't do it out of an oppression of their own spirit in service of third wave feminist power brokers.

bobbys
01-23-2018, 11:21 AM
We all knew it was coming. Dunning Kruger strong as ever. Still.

...they are every bit as crazy, hate filled and stupid as any male counterpart.

It's not directed at women..

I see yer broad ....no pun...... brush paints every woman and you justify it by including men.

It has to be nice to be the only sane person in ones little world..

As i said every conservitive woman will gave to run the liberal male gaunlet..

Exspect to have their families inspected with full probes..

mdh
01-23-2018, 11:24 AM
Getting past third wave feminism, its post-modern roots, with its blaming men for EVERYTHING, its hatred of the patriarchy, its "in your face" embrace of anything odd or unusual, seems the task at the moment.

I'm a second wave feminist, unabashed. Whatever either sex wants to pursue they should. And if competent in that pursuit, their compensation should be equable.

It seems to me what has happened is a uni-polar analysis in pursuit of political power. A blind pursuit. If wages aren't equal it must be the result of structural inequality! Undoubtedly, there is structural inequality which needs to be addressed, but what are the other factors? We should address the "structure", "I'm not being paid equably for equal work" without dismissing a multi-variant look at what are inherent characteristics in the sexes.

For example: It is pretty well established that women, statistically, are by a large margin more oriented toward relationship, and men are more oriented toward things. With good, pretty conclusive, studies, this seems inherent, biological, not culturally biased.

Should women pursue careers in politics and business? Absolutely! We need more women in both, more relational energy as opposed to "bottom line" "thing" thinking. But they shouldn't do it out of an oppression of their own spirit in service of third wave feminist power brokers.

Agreed. Maybe Tom didn't watch the Peterson v Jordan interview.

John of Phoenix
01-23-2018, 11:28 AM
You just can't ACTUALLY be so stupid in real life.

I never even implied every woman. I said, "In looking at the red women running for flake and franks seats in Arizona..."

Read their bios and you'll see - "crazy, hate filled and stupid". You'd love every one of them.

:D LMAO :D

mmd
01-23-2018, 11:30 AM
I have often wondered if the selective comprehension of posts on the WBF is a mental defect or a conscious decision.

John of Phoenix
01-23-2018, 11:45 AM
Has to be trolling. Impaired at that level couldn't tie their own shoes.

David W Pratt
01-23-2018, 12:29 PM
Does anyone have, or know where to get, data on the % of women who run who are elected, vs men; a breakdown by party might be interesting too

ishmael
01-23-2018, 12:49 PM
If you launch a thread with the title "% of women in politics", are digressions on the theme unwelcome? Tom's somewhat convoluted thinking, which I enjoy very much, led from one thing to another. I don't apologize!

John of Phoenix
01-23-2018, 12:56 PM
An article from "The Failing NYT" says they are just as likely to win as men IF they decide to run but not many do.

There's a wealth of information out there. Try this -

https://www.google.com/search?q=data+on+the+%25+of+women+who+run+who+are+ elected&oq=data+on+the+%25+of+women+who+run+who+are+electe d&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8