Fox News: Sexism May Still Be Hillary's Greatest Challenge

Gee. Men and women are different.

Who would've thought it?

I'll give this Gerber person some credit here: she's right about the fact that both men and women respond differently to men and women in positions of authority, although it's a bit of a stretch to generalize it to all people. Most of us know that when men are in charge, they're expected to look out for men, women and children, whereas when women are in charge, they're only expected to look out for women. Perhaps this innate selfishness on the part of some women has something to do with the difference in the way people respond to a male leader vs. a female leader?

Don't get me wrong, there are some very fine female leaders out there and throughout history, and it would be terribly unfair to paint all women with the same selfish brush. Still, there's a reason that most people prefer to work for and be led by men. Call it a pattern. Google has the details.

The "frontman fallacy" works like this:

When men are in charge, we do what we usually do (there are exceptions): we look out for, provide for and make sacrifices for women and children. However, we're inevitably accused of only looking out for ourselves, despite clear evidence that this isn't the case.

When women are in charge, particularly feminist-influenced women, they sacrifice men for women and children. Then they accuse men of wanting to harm women (they usually toss in children too, although feminists don't care about them any more than they care about men) when we complain that we're being abused or neglected by our governments.

That pattern's pretty clear. So it's little wonder these misandrists are advising Clinton to play up her vagina (shudder): it's the only card she's got (aside from her fantastic track record on domestic abuse...as a perpetrator), and given that it's worked for women throughout history, why change the tune now, right?

The recent polls suggest that Hillary's "inevitability" has all the credibility of her husband's "fidelity."

Obama is leading by a few margin-of-error points in Iowa, and closing fast in N.H.

So Hillary's brilliant campaign staff decides to send Obama a message by releasing his kindergarten essay about wanting to be President someday. (Apparently by third grade he wanted to be an astronaut....)

The message is -- "If we can dig this up about you in kindergarten, what ELSE do you think we have? Be very afraid, negro man.")

Hillary can play the gender card until the cows (bad reference to N.O.W...) come home.

Her biggest gender problem is that women and men everywhere know she could not satisfy her husband, and so she looks like a woman who could not properly manage even one dick. (Wonder why the unelectible Dennis K. is smiling all the time? His wife has brains and beauty, smokin'...)

And now the scorned-by-her-husband Mrs. Clinton wants us to believe she can deal "man-to-man" with the Saudis?

Fer chrikey's sake, Hillary could be the first U.S. President who cannot even drive a car when she meets our esteemed Mideast allies!

Her problem is sexism? The only reason she's even up there is because of sexism. Can you imagine a man running for President on the "I'm married to somebody" platform?

FEMINISM-- Fuck Every Male Idiocy Now Is Socially Mandated

Absolutely

The good leadership trait of both men and women has always been in putting other’s needs above themselves. The traditional role of men looking out for women and children is a cornerstone of any modern society.

Nobody asked me but; most men’s brains are hardwired different that a women’s.

Why, because the two hemispheres of a man’s brain, is more greatly separated in emotions and logic than that of a women.

In my opinion, this is why women are better wired to deal with children than a man; in any given immediate situation. I am not saying that women make bad leaders because of this trait, because it also enables her to “multi task” easier than a man.

This difference does not make one gender superior to another, nor should it be taken as such, but there is a difference.

In general, a man’s mind tends to function more objectively and logically than does that of a women’s mind. This makes it easier in looking at the “big picture” when making decisions, as opposed to making immediate decisions given any particular moment, when situation demands it.

I believe this is because men and women are to compliment each other as a species’ and not meant to be competitive, but rather in working as a team have greater success in life.

The problem arises when selfish motivation between the sexes raises its ugly head.

To my way of thinking this makes Feminism the enemy of mankind. When the sexes start competing this destroys unity and a divided people soon fall.

As far as Hillary is concerned, she may feel that her agenda is best for the county. Or it could be that she just doesn’t care: because of a lust for power, (or maybe a little of both) I can’t judge.

However like I said; selfishness is never a good trait when running a Country, or any other position of leadership.

This objective ability often makes men more desirable to work for than women; (just ask my wife): women in charge who she worked for most always attacked her personally rather than objectively on a daily bases.

However, like I said this could be considered nothing other than bad leadership traits.

Let US work together for pete sake!

Now there's a man that won't ever have fidelity problems!