'Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand focuses on advancement of women'

Article here. Last time I checked, a good half of any given US senator's constituency is male. So why focus so much on just one gender when the other gender has issues with 'getting ahead' as well (boys and education, anti-male discrimination, etc.)?

Imagine a senator who stated quite publicly that his or her focus would be on helping whites get ahead, or green-eyed people get ahead, or people under 5' 5" tall get ahead, etc., all on the dime of the rest of that person's constituency?

Real political leaders are representative of ALL their constituents, not focusing on just one subgroup. I think it's time Sen. Gillibrand heard that. So please contact her and *politely* point this out, especially you folks in the State of New York here in the US. This idea that it is acceptable for pols to pursue the advancement of one group over others at the expense of the rest of their constituents must end, starting with the pursuit of women's interests over men's.

Like0 Dislike0


I find this a rather telling example of the problem with feminism:

"Asked if she would ever run for president, Gillibrand said no. "I have no interest in running for president.""

It seems despite her insistence on encouraging women to run for office, and her belief in equal outcomes (as noted by her opinions on STEM fields), she herself is not interested in the top spot. And while I think that is for the best, given her gender focus, it demonstrates a hypocrisy, in that she would seek equal gender outcomes while exemplifying why equal outcomes aren't a reasonable measure (IE, because it ignores personal choice, including her own)

Like0 Dislike0

Apparently, PAN is fielding a female presidential candidate in Mexico. The question is whether a female can win in a "macho" country. The answer is yes. So-called "macho" countries have had more success in electing female candidates than the "not-so-macho" US.


I suspect it's because female candidates in the US want to "push women's advancement" as opposed to representing all. They aspire to represent women, or make gender history, not to run the country for the benefit of everyone. A lot of men recognize that what's good for the hen is not always good for the rooster. You don't have to be "macho" to understand that.

Like0 Dislike0