In response to:

Female vs. Male Senators

Steven668 Wrote: Jan 08, 2013 12:30 AM
First, while testosterone may partially explain some of the more flamboyant exchanges in Congress, we should remember that Congress was specifically designed to flounder. Let's face it, getting 51 of 100 people to agree on what time to have lunch requires a miracle. Anything important, and theory has it that if you can get that agreement, you have reached the best possible decision. Second, matriarchal societies are rare in history, but they tended to be reactionary, repressive, tyrannical and warlike. If you think the Constitution gets short shrift now, try electing a 60% majority of women to Congress and see what happens. I have written to my female Senator, and can tell you first hand that nobody can dismiss your concerns like a woman!
Demosthenes5 Wrote: Jan 08, 2013 12:52 PM
There has not been one matriarchial society that has progressed past the stone age in terms of technology.
Demosthenes5 Wrote: Jan 08, 2013 12:52 PM
There has not been one matriarchial society that has progressed past the stone age in terms of technology.
Demosthenes5 Wrote: Jan 08, 2013 12:52 PM
There has not been one matriarchial society that has progressed past the stone age in terms of technology.

As the son of a woman, the husband of a woman and the father of daughters and granddaughters, I celebrate the record number of females who are now United States senators. However, I do see some differences in the way these and other women are treated, depending on their party, policies and beliefs.

Diane Sawyer broadcast a celebratory report last week on ABC's "World News Tonight" on which she gushed about the "record number" of 20 female senators. Senator Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., also praised the Senate female population. Senator Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said she won't be satisfied until there are 50...

Friday, May 24 | 04:40 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 04:40 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 04:40 AM ET
Friday, May 24 | 04:40 AM ET