I defined good women the same as I define good men: those individuals who strive to control the more negative tendencies of their sex. I admire men, for example, who though they are much stronger physically than women, strive to keep that strength in check when they are angry. Baldwin is most decidedly a textbook example of a FAILURE in that regard. Not a good man.
Conversly, I regard with huge contempt silly women who indulge their tendencies toward emotionalism and illogic. It gives all of us women a bad name. I think women's tendencies toward emotionalism and disregard for logic is why the founding fathers didn't give them the vote, and it was wise of them. Women have the same responsiblity as do men in controlling the behavioral weaknesses that correlate with their sex. As a woman, I CAN CALL OTHER WOMEN OUT when they indulge in silly-illogical-emotional-women crap. Men can't.
*************
Why not?
Men and women are most decidedly different, with different weaknesses. But I don’t see how either gender’s biologically inherent faults would render them incapable of helping to decide the future of the country they live in by voting. I assume then, that you do not vote, since you think it unwise for women to do so? It must be awful for you, since the 19th amendment is unlikely to be repealed, to see all these emotional, illogical women running around voting every couple of years. My sympathies.