A Female Led political party

Blue moon, you are correct. If someone takes from your plate and gives to others, it could be theft. It could also be taxation in a prosperous country. If, however, you GAVE it to those less fortunate, it would be compassion.

 

Thanks for this, and I will agree with the majority of what you presented. In a democratic country there are rights of free speech. While I may disagree with Blue Moon, there was no racist nor sexists comments made by him. This IS free speech, something worth dying for. Too far left becomes effective communism. To far right becomes fascist. We are not there. a more centrist position allows for the benefit of all views without destruction of any. Women are far better at compromise in my opinion and belief. Males become too black and white with testosterone holding their feet in place. Religion in government holds the government's feet in place.

 

how true. so if either left or right is wrong for everyone, what is the solution? More centrist perhaps? That needs compromise. So THEN let's go back to the male or female discussion. Hmmmm...who is better at compromise?

 

And if you look at the stated intent of the leadership of the time, the choice and rights with regards to education and medical care was left to the states to avoid over centralizing power. Certain items were indeed left out of the constitution, but not intended to be left out of the hearts of America.

 

my favourite statement

 

Yes. I have directly seen scenarios where patients have died where they shouldn’t have due to understaffing and burnout. Profit helps with innovation, but there has to be balance. Nobody ever questions the fire department budget because it is a public service but healthcare should get the same treatment.

 

Ok, but lets park the extremes of left and right. We I think, will both agree, both are very toxic. So, centre right will never want to devolve the details of humanity to legislation, that is a left thing. See C-16 as an example. Basically, moving into law how people should speak, basically removing free speech. Typical ideological agenda stuff.

Having a balanced educational curriculum where respectful and balanced views are encouraged, again, the centre right will never push against this.

Now the question of whether new bias is evolved as a result of a Female Led Political Party, well we have that now for example in the US; Affirmative Action. The UK has Positive Action, but the 2 are not the same. Positive Action is voluntary and based on the premise of a case where equal merit has been achieved say between a white male and/or a black/female/trans/disabled person, the recruiter can offer the post to the minority, as long as it can be demonstrated that the category is under-represented. I think @L-u-c-y 's policies stretch this concept, so you have a middle ground between Affirmative Action and Positive Action. Well, that would be my take on it.

 

@L-u-c-y , I think @Blue Moon's Toddler Class 101 intellectual development, empathy and social conscience zoned out with a loud "ME ME ME!" as soon as a well-intentioned pre-school teacher, probably a woman with an air of authority, 'accidentally' dropped a dollar on the floor near where he sat dribbling. No way he was giving that back.

Not so much off topic. It merely underlines the urgency for capable Female Government.

 

thank you, L-u-c-y. a great thread that came back to its origin. when we look around, the opportunity to help is everywhere. the true benefit is shared between the needy and the needed. yes, we need to take care of our own needs, and in most societies we need to help others. not everyone will, and we cannot force goodwill, kindness or empathy. we can, however, look to create a top down approach such that the government recognizes needs as well as self-worth and economic growth. these are not exclusive with the correct values, and I believe possible with female leadership. hell, it works wonderfully in our home!

 

Massive vacancy in this scenario for a men’s only party. “Feminism has gone too far” etc. would be it’s manifesto slogan.

@L-u-c-y your proposed party is too hedgehog-y, not enough fox-y for my liking

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...egy-by-john-lewis-gaddis-review-a3806501.html

Your persona on here on the other hand...

 

Jawohl Mein Führer!

 

outstanding piece of comedy

 

Lucy, buildup & others of the like mind, feel free to feed, shelter and heal all the freeloaders you wish. Just please use your own resources. Don’t use my money or expect me to contribute. I am not my brothers keeper.

 

It depends. If an old lady were knocked down on the sidewalk and broke her hip I would do what I could. If, however, the person who knocked her over continued into the street and was run over, I’d leave him lay and walk right past him.

The difference in the two? The old woman had virtually nothing to do with her situation and the person laying in the street is paying the price directly related to his own actions. Today, I am expected to help both. No, I won’t agree to that.

If you are a hard-working married couple with one child whose home is obliterated by a meteorite, I could lend a hand. If, on the other hand, you are a couple with four kids where one or both parents are not working and your youngest child burns the house to the ground, you are SOL in my book.

See the difference? The first couple has apparently made smart decisions and through no fault of their own, still has a crisis. The second household has been making bad decisions as is noted by the too numerous children and unemployed parents. I have been forced to subsidize the piss poor decisions of others for far too long while having absolutely no say-so in whether they are deserving of my assistance. This has led to my strong opinion concerning helping all of humanity, no matter the reason.

I have helped others in the past and probably will again in the future, but they will be those I feel are deserving of my efforts. They will be the ones with whom I choose to share my bounty. They won’t be the victims of self-inflicted tragedies and troubles. I won’t willingly and gladly hand over my hard earned resources when the sheriff knocks at the door and collects the tax to feed, shelter and heal those I don’t find worthy.

 

If I felt they were worthy of the assistance and it was given directly to them, where we looked each other in the eye and it was known this was a one-time affair, sure I could. But I would not give blindly at all. No agencies. No programs. No middleman taking his cut. And don’t come back for a second taste. There will be none.

 

I don't mean to sound rude but is this a fetish based post or a serious idea? I'm just confused because Lucy, you scare me. xD .. Although this is is definitely a fetish post, I want to just throw out some unnecessary obvious points.

Conditioning "children" is such a touchy subject I'm surprised for even a fetish post you would mention that. Anything related to prohibition in western society is already unrealistic and shown to simply make matters worse, breeding crime and wasting tax payers money trying to enforce it. Doctors will never be politically swayed to recommend unnecessary treatments.


Most of all, even if these implementations would lead to a nicer world, the real reason that this will never be possible is because men are fucking dumb. We don't just think with our dicks, but rather our balls. The majority of history has been dominated by men because men are simply more aggressive, violent, stronger and mostly dumb enough to use all those tools to further the interests of the very rare smart man.

Sure there are submissive men that are very reserved like myself, but in a purely nonsexual situation where a dominant strong man tells you to 'move' vs a dominant strong woman, most people will move for the man before he even says a word. Maybe it's genetic, maybe it's cultural and I'm only speaking from the opinion of a reserved sub from the states. haha

Sexy idea but I would love to hear your real opinion on a practical change to better things.

 

In short, respectfully, yes.

In the US we leave such things up to the school districts and parents. The idea that a political party can influence the fine balance of parental rights and school curriculum is a slippery slope. No disrespect intended, Lucy. For the federal government to influence local government to make any changes over school districts and boards, you would need to work directly with the community or literaly gain a monopoly with this female political party over every aspect of government and local community. Parents have rights too.

Also, the only way to really do that would be to make a cult church. I'm up for the church of chastity, but not sure the majority of men and women would be. Dominant, female politically active champions for radical changes aren't really recieved well either. Again, this is just bs devils advocacy based my own opinion on whether this would be practical in the USA, so I hope I'm not sounding offensive.

 

Yes, I'm sorry for not being clear in stating I was merely giving my opinion based on its practicality in the US. I won't presume on whether that's viable in the UK or not. I will say this, although I don't need to patronize you as I'm sure you know, but there are a lot of conservative women who would rather men remain predominantly in charge when it comes to politics. I'm sure this is case in the UK as well, although perhaps not as extreme as it is in the US. I think there was a study done that showed women are less likely to support female politicians.

What do you think are some viable methods to encourage and support female political representation that need to be implemented, besides creating a female party? Personally I think continuing to work closely with universities as many individual groups have been is a start, but some countries are even adopting a quota to secure positions in government for qualified women. It's a big problem here in the US where there is simply a severe lack of female representation.