Posted on 03/19/2014 2:14:25 PM PDT by Sioux-san
Nobody should ever suggest that leadership and assertiveness are mutually exclusive; all sensible people must agree that in order to lead, someone must give directions, and when the time comes for it, that those directions must be given strongly. A great leader, like Germanicus Caesar, knows that at certain times even mutinous soldiers must be courted, and that at others they must be executed, and that only wisdom can discern which is more appropriate.
But I would never agree with Cheryl Sandberg that we should teach all bossy little girls not that they’re bossy, but that they’re natural leaders. I’ve heard plenty of women say that bossy women make great leaders; all of them have made their fellow women miserable.
There’s really only one reason why someone should be leading, at any given point, and that is because he – or, let us say, she – is going somewhere better than where we are leaving. It matters little if someone knows how to command if she’s leading us into poverty, or misery, or off a cliff and into the ocean. John Locke wasn't the man who discovered the value of kings; Solomon (and, I am certain, many gone before him) can be found saying that good kings make the people rejoice, and bad kings make them mourn, and that the quality of a leader – one might say, the purpose of a leader – is determined not by himself, but by the effect he has upon his people....
...And if a woman wants to be a great leader, let her learn to be a great person by giving good orders first to herself and speaking with grace. Then, if she can prove herself worthy of command, let her command for the good of others....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I don’t think bossy girls are afraid of anything. They probably have been tyrants-in-training for their whole life. They will take care of those who do not do their bidding and dare to call them names, even if it is accurate....
No. This is just a particularly crude attempt to control the debate by denying the very vocabulary of criticism.
The bossy thing going around the Media is phoney and a distraction, but what isn’t phoney is the elevation of women into leadership positions, be it political office, CEO, or whatever when that woman clearly is not worthy and not qualified to lead (same goes for men, but Obama sure put that bar down into the mud)...merely to prove that everything is all PC here at this company or that.
I would agree that men’s testosterone levels are falling. My 33 year old son has said as much. I think it’s due to a combination of things, like soy additives in food products, hormones given to cows to make them lactate even when they don’t have a calf to nurse, not to mention all the female hormones from birth control pills that are weeweeing into the water system. Why some women seem to have higher levels of testosterone makes me wonder if they aren’t taking it as a supplement. Something just ain’t right, whatever the reason.
It should be easy to Photoshop an irate Michelle Obama with a cowbell around her neck. Bossy is as bossy does.
Michelle is in a class by herself for being a bully - I am sure Barry is afraid of her.
I publicly criticized a company women’s employee resource group for promoting the “ban bossy” for women’s history month. And I did it in writing on the corporate intranet after seeing it posted for the third time.
1. If the biggest problem we have is the word “bossy”, feminism is a joke.
2. You’re ignoring true problems in the world like girls who can’t go to school in the developing world or drop out for lack of bathrooms when they hit puberty
3. If your leadership potential withers when called “bossy”, how will you handle being called arrogant, elitist, domineering or selfish?
4. Focusing on banning a word instead of developing solid leadership and character in women suggests that women are the delicate hothouse flowers men used to accuse women of being. That is a step backward, not forward.
5. A bunch of women going around as word police makes them come across as nannying nags. And no one wants to listen to a nag. Keep it up, and no one will want to listen to your cause, either.
I will probably get flack for having done this at work. Wondering what to do if they try to sentence me to diversity training or sensitivity training.
There is a recent study linking the use of anti-depressants in pregnancy with a four time higher incidence of autism.
I wonder if there is a similar correlation between years of hormonal contraception and giving birth to a homosexual. We already know there is a correlation with the number of older brothers - is it also how long Mom was on contraceptives before having him?
interesting thoughts - do you have a link to that autism study? Pregnancy, Birth, and Childhood have been so thoroughly medicalized, it is difficult to know if it is any one thing or cumulative effx of lots of factors. I believe in the KISS principal for Life - keep it simple, sweetie!
Tragically, I don’t think she is the slightest bit unique in her being a bully. I have seen (thankfully, from afar) several women who have all the villainy of tyrannical men, some who even possess a shrill degree of cruelty that men tend to avoid.
Nicolae Ceausescu was the evil tyrant of Romania, but it was his wife Elena, whose savagery was so great that it may have been the final straw of his dictatorship. Her final act was both a brutal crackdown by the secret police, and instructions that they should burn the dead bodies of those they killed to prevent their identification by their families.
I would have to agree that women, given the opportunity, can be the more cruel and ruthless ones. Tyranny must be resisted, even if it is wearing high heels and lipstick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.