The Rise of the Female Foreign Minister

[nomadthethird]

And you, presumably, don't believe that you are being a tit by levelling only the most ridiculous questions and nonsensical "objections" to what people say without even actually reading a person's posts to check if your assumptions about their points are true.

 

[jambo]

This might be the most retarded thing you've ever said here.

Yes, if there's a binary in contemporary society, that means that in social matters, people tend to see someone as EITHER "pretty", or "smart." It doesn't mean that their perceptions are true, just that these perceptions exist.

What is difficult about this?

And if you'll note, I never said this binary applied exclusively to women, now, did I?

Well, you seemed to be implying that 'extremely bright women' couldn't also be pretty.

The fact remains, however, that there once was a day when only extremely bright women who worked very hard could make it to the top politically. Usually these women were of average or below-average looks, because "SMART" and "PRETTY" has always been a binary in contemporary society.

You know, it's just about politely asking you for clarification. And yet again you are being a cunt. And I use that in the cross gender sense.

 

[jambo]

Here's another good one. Thanks for being such a stickler for math, Jambo.

Unforunately, there is no such thing as "statistical predilections amongst genders." There is in some cases a statistical correlation between a career and a higher number of men or women who practice it.

This sort of correlation does not prove that there's a "predilection" among a certain gender for that career, only that certain careers are more likely to be entered by men or women. This could be for a variety of reasons that may have absolutely nothing to do with "predilection" and everything to do with gender norms, economic disparity, inequal opportunities for women and men, etc.

So a 'good one' is a singular word you can pick on and miss the wider question and the spirit in which it is asked so you can just be an argumentative time waster.

 

[jambo]

I don't want the conversation to go in this direction, and I'm not interested in pointless bickering, but if you insist on just being abusive and dismissive and basically an idiot.

 

[nomadthethird]

Well, you seemed to be implying that 'extremely bright women' couldn't also be pretty.

You know, it's just about politely asking you for clarification. And yet again you are being a cunt. And I use that in the cross gender sense.

NO I DIDN'T. I very clearly and frankly stated that many people (NOT NECESSARILY ME) think that pretty people can't also be intelligent.

W.T.F.

How old are you? 15?

 

[nomadthethird]

I don't want the conversation to go in this direction, and I'm not interested in pointless bickering, but if you insist on just being abusive and dismissive and basically an idiot.

Yes, of course, silly me, I'm such an idiot for responding directly to things you've posted.

I'm so stupid!

 

[jambo]

NO I DIDN'T. I very clearly and frankly stated that many people (NOT NECESSARILY ME) think that pretty people can't also be intelligent.

W.T.F.

How old are you? 15?

No, it's not unambiguous because there are assumptions in this statement. It might seem clear to you, but that's because they are your assumptions.

The fact remains, however, that there once was a day when only extremely bright women who worked very hard could make it to the top politically. Usually these women were of average or below-average looks, because "SMART" and "PRETTY" has always been a binary in contemporary society.

I could of course take a guess, or several, at what you are assuming here but I choose instead to ask a question. Only idiots always assume they know exactly what someone else is trying to say.

 

[nomadthethird]

No, it's not unambiguous because there are assumptions in this statement. It might seem clear to you, but that's because they are your assumptions.

I could of course take a guess, or several, at what you are assuming here but I choose instead to ask a question. Only idiots always assume they know exactly what someone else is trying to say.

What I have said in both of your examples here was stated perfectly plainly, was not controversial, and the meanings of these statements is not up for grabs in the "Jambo wants to be an obscurantist in every last thread" game.

I'm not going to waste my time rewording posts that were perfectly clear and unambiguously put because you seem to think that doing so would be some sort of advancement of this discussion.

It wouldn't be. It would be a waste of time, since none of the rest of us have any trouble understanding one another in most threads.

 

[nomadthethird]

No, it's not unambiguous because there are assumptions in this statement. It might seem clear to you, but that's because they are your assumptions.

I could of course take a guess, or several, at what you are assuming here but I choose instead to ask a question. Only idiots always assume they know exactly what someone else is trying to say.

There's an assumption in every argument or proposition, btw.

Maybe you need to take a formal logic course.

 

[jambo]

The fact remains, however, that there once was a day when only extremely bright women who worked very hard could make it to the top politically.

Usually these women were of average or below-average looks,

because

"SMART" and "PRETTY" has always been a binary in contemporary society.

What I am asking is, how in your view does line 4 follow from line 2? What is the (presumed) mechanism? Do you see?

Helpfully we've established that 'a binary in contemporary society' means here 'a perception of a binary'. So that's a start.

 

[nomadthethird]

What I am asking is, how in your view does line 4 follow from line 2? What is the (presumed) mechanism? Do you see?

Helpfully we've established that 'a binary in contemporary society' means here 'a perception of a binary'. So that's a start.

ONCE AGAIN, you are not reading what I'm actually saying.

I didn't say that people perceive a binary that is not really there--I said that there's a socially inscribed-on-most-minds binary that makes people believe someone can't be smart and good looking.

Not everyone buys into this way of thinking, but it is the predominant mode of thinking, especially in more "traditional" societies in the West.

 

[jambo]

socially inscribed-on-most-minds binary

Yes, a perceived binary in other words.

So these 'extremely bright women who worked very hard' were 'Usually...of average or below-average looks' because nobody (men in positions of power?) could conceive of a 'pretty' female being smart?

The fact remains, however, that there once was a day when only extremely bright women who worked very hard could make it to the top politically. Usually these women were of average or below-average looks, because "SMART" and "PRETTY" has always been a binary in contemporary society.

It only makes sense that in far right countries, only the prettiest women are allowed to make it into government.

'Only makes sense' how? What is it about the 'far right' that should (obviously) make this the case?

 

[luka]

great thread.

 

[josef k.]

To the internet!

[Raises a glass]

 

[nomadthethird]

great thread.

Hey luka, remember those three other times Jambo went into a thread and gummed it up with all kinds of strange misreadings and a warped faux-Socratic method were he insisted that what people were saying was "unclear"?

I do. And as I recall, I've actually tried to be nice and accomodating to Jambo's posts for the most part.

But this thread seemed to prove what others have already stated (and I didn't listen to them), that Jambo intentionally misreads what people are saying and pretends everything strange he says is a "joke."

 

[nomadthethird]

So these 'extremely bright women who worked very hard' were 'Usually...of average or below-average looks' because nobody (men in positions of power?) could conceive of a 'pretty' female being smart?

'Only makes sense' how? What is it about the 'far right' that should (obviously) make this the case?

Yes, Jambo, that's what I said.

And yes, take a look at the female freedom fighters of days gone by. Susan B. Anthony. Eleanor Roosevelt.

Can you think of a single one who is as pretty as Georgia's new foreign minister?

I can't.

From time immemorial, beautiful women have been under more pressure to "fall in line" with the status quo. The prettier a woman was, the more likely she was to be married off to a rich man. Pretty women really didn't have as much oppression to fight against, at least in their own minds, because they were held in higher esteem socially than ugly "spinsters" were.

This is not something I'm making up. It's a rather obvious example of the ways in which female gender norms have changed.

The reason why it makes sense for far right countries to put prettier females in positions of power is because in far right, conservative countries, many people are very threatened by a woman who is perceived to be "too much like a man": intellectually inclined, not worried about her looks, not worried about having children right away, not in the kitchen. These women are shut out of politic discourse at alarming rates in favor of more palatable "fourth wave" Sarah Palin-esque "feminists."

If you don't believe me, read Paglia's rather disgusting pantings on the subject.

 

[nomadthethird]

great thread.

We've never seen luka pointlessly argue a non-issue. Nope.

 

[waffle]

To the internet!

[Raises a glass]

Shouldn't that be a (political) coffee?


What is particularly striking over the past decade is the increasing feminization of the role and position of the foreign minister, relative to other ministerial roles, government positions, and political offices. The number of female foreign ministers has increased by 200 percent over the past decade, from 10 to 30, while the level of overall female ministerial positions has fallen. So yes, there is a sense in which the female foreign minister's role is purely decorative, ceremonial, ornamental, on the one hand, and a seductive tactic designed to deflect from and trivialize forpol issues (and domestic ones), on the other. And for a huge number of countries, the very first female ministry (and in many cases still the only one) was that of foreign affairs, from Mongolia to Kazakhstan, from Macedonia to Slovakia, from Uganda to Tanzania to South Africa (over 20 African countries have had female foreign ministers, and little else).

 

[ripley]

I haven't looked at the numbers myself.. if that is the case I can see how that could be an interesting trend, but I don't know what it could be correlated with, without even more specifics - what else those particular countries have in common in themselves or in terms of their global political positions and relationships

So I especially don't know that I have thoughts about why an INCREASE in women foreign ministers.. I can see a lot of strategic, symbolic, political reasons that might inspire a particular government to choose a woman foreign minister (alongside whatever specifics a particular woman brings to the job).

But as for an increase? I would guess we would have to look at whatever else is changing in geopolitics - which is so much, actually that I wouldn't have a good way to figure out what could be influencing it across the board. It takes me back to the question of whether the countries who have female foreign ministers have anything else in common..

 

[luka]

i acutualy werent attacking you nomad, i think this time the problem lies elsewhere.