Female Senator Says 50% Of Congress Should Be Women, And This Guy’s Comeback Goes Viral
U.S. Senator from New York Kirsten Elizabeth Gillibrand asked the internet to imagine “if half of Congress was women. If half of all mayors and governors were women. Imagine what could get done.” Her tweet instantly ignited heated discussion about gender diversity in politics, receiving 75,000 likes and 21,000 retweets, and all of this huge attention only proves that it’s a topic worth debating about.
Gillibrand – who is a Democrat – earned national recognition for fighting the Pentagon over how sexual assaults are handled by the US military. She also leads a project, called “Off the Sidelines” that supports women candidates across her country. Do you agree with the senator’s statement or not? Let us know in the comment section below!
More info: Twitter
Everything started with this tweet
To which Tyson Davis quickly responded
And it started escalating
But while some agreed on the original statement
Others did not
And a few commenters even thought that the whole discussion was meaningless
What do you think? Is Senator Gillibrand right?
I'd settle for 51% of a Congress being intelligent, caring and honest (no matter their race, sex, gender identity or religious preference).
50% of citizens are women. So I see it as a normal thing if 50% of parliament were women. Not because they'd do better. In many cases, men are not there "because they do better". So there's a lot going on against "female shares", forgetting that as a matter of facts there are "male shares" today. But still, we have to justify ourselves, we have to say that we'd do better... some women would do good, some would do bad, EXACTLY LIKE MEN.
Agreed. It's good to pick people for jobs based on how well they are qualified. However, a democratic government should strive to be a representation of its adult populous. This concept in my opinion would also stretch beyond gender.
Load More Replies...
I'm thinking that the "Race" and "Gender/Sex" cards are getting badly torn, creased, and dog-eared. It's time to put them aside, if not totally destroy them. Besides, the "ad hominum" attacks they create are bad debate form and used only to cover a lack of critical thinking and reason. As to Senator Gillibrand's original question: Nothing would change, except the (gender-based) titles of those in charge. Foolishness is not the exclusive prerogative of any one group of people.
Cards. Just cards, huh? So I guess racism and sexism no longer exist or never existed, right? That people just act oppressed and use it to get their way? Oh great let's just ignore what's happening and has happened in our history... if you close your eyes, racism and sexism will just go away right, like they were never there? Ignorance is bliss, after all. Not to mention that women are just making up stuff, that the fact that there is a majority of male politicians doesn't actually influence what laws are passed that negatively affect women. Oh, sarcasm. But seriously, women would be less nervous about the whole abortion debate, among other things, if more lawmakers were female...
Load More Replies...
I'd settle for 51% of a Congress being intelligent, caring and honest (no matter their race, sex, gender identity or religious preference).
50% of citizens are women. So I see it as a normal thing if 50% of parliament were women. Not because they'd do better. In many cases, men are not there "because they do better". So there's a lot going on against "female shares", forgetting that as a matter of facts there are "male shares" today. But still, we have to justify ourselves, we have to say that we'd do better... some women would do good, some would do bad, EXACTLY LIKE MEN.
Agreed. It's good to pick people for jobs based on how well they are qualified. However, a democratic government should strive to be a representation of its adult populous. This concept in my opinion would also stretch beyond gender.
Load More Replies... I'm thinking that the "Race" and "Gender/Sex" cards are getting badly torn, creased, and dog-eared. It's time to put them aside, if not totally destroy them. Besides, the "ad hominum" attacks they create are bad debate form and used only to cover a lack of critical thinking and reason. As to Senator Gillibrand's original question: Nothing would change, except the (gender-based) titles of those in charge. Foolishness is not the exclusive prerogative of any one group of people.
Cards. Just cards, huh? So I guess racism and sexism no longer exist or never existed, right? That people just act oppressed and use it to get their way? Oh great let's just ignore what's happening and has happened in our history... if you close your eyes, racism and sexism will just go away right, like they were never there? Ignorance is bliss, after all. Not to mention that women are just making up stuff, that the fact that there is a majority of male politicians doesn't actually influence what laws are passed that negatively affect women. Oh, sarcasm. But seriously, women would be less nervous about the whole abortion debate, among other things, if more lawmakers were female...
Load More Replies...
94
86