If Women Were In Charge, There Wouldn’t Be Any Wars! Please…

When Sally Field won her Emmy, she gave a long, addled speech that included this line,

…(I)f the mothers ruled the world there would be no godd*mn wars in the first place.”

You’ve probably heard some variation of that line, over and over throughout your life, and probably from some embittered, feminist harpy who’d like to plant a pick-axe in the skull of every man with a swimsuit calender at his desk — if she thought she could get away with it.

But — let’s take a moment to think about this.

Would the world really be a more peaceful place if women were in charge?

Well, you know, it’s not as if there has never been a woman in charge of a country before.

For example, prominent women leaders include Margaret Thatcher in Britain (Falklands war), Golda Meir in Israel (The War of Attrition with Egypt), Queen Elizabeth the first (War with Spain), you can go on and on like this…

The reality is that if you can’t handle going to war, then you’re not qualified to lead a nation. So, women leaders — the ones that are worth a bucket of spit anyway — will go to war if need be, because that’s what the job requires.

So, a world run by women? I doubt if it would be one bit less peaceful and quite frankly, it might be much more violent given that women tend to be much more emotionally volatile than men.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend