The question posed concerning women in power and the decline of civilization is a little tricky for me. As a women disinclined since childhood to have children, I always felt I was meant for something different than rearing children, as well as something exceptional. To be clear, I recognise the child-bearing/rearing effort as a tremendous undertaking, just not one for which I am personally suited. The following is anecdotal, which I realise is not an argument, but here goes. My maternal grandmother lost her husband to heart disease when my mother was only eleven years old; what followed is that she successfully ran both a farm and a household, with my mother's help. In addition, she made sure my mother received a school and music education. As a young woman, my mother married an exemplary man, and raised his children while he did little other than work overtime to provide. She volunteered at our private school, kept an immaculate home for us, and gave us the same music education she had received. Once my sister and I were of an age of semi-independence, she went to work, and eventually she and my father started a business. Her side of it was the production (bringing in the resources), and his was more supportive, roles which precisely suited them. Given my history of watching strong, hard-working, successful women get it done, it is difficult for me to see women in leadership roles as negative. In my family experience, nothing could be further from the truth. My parents would have straight-up kicked my ass had I ever gone on welfare. They are firm believers in maximising one's own utility for maximum reward. I believe firmly in hard work, merit, and taking responsibility for acquiring what one wants in life. I once heard Ann Coulter state that women shouldn't be allowed to vote; I agree more with her father on that one: non-taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to vote. (Note that would edge out a plethora of single mothers who vote the wrong way.) To the point of women in positions of power, I do not believe leading women are the problem; I think it has more to do with state-sanctioned methods like affirmative action. I in no way believe a woman with superior qualifications should be disqualified for a job because she is a women, but rather that those superior qualifications should earn her the job in spite of being a woman. I guess you could call me an egalitarian. I suppose what I am saying is that any person chosen for any position - be it some job or the presidency - should be chosen on the basis of merit, and not some nightmare social engineering project. I believe things would be different if merit was the only factor considered. This is my theory on the subject.
