Originally Posted by <-Dying_to_Live->
Originally Posted by ///James///
well go on then wise guy, name the countries of the world and the leaders who have a non-curropt status aswell as having a male in power. there may be more then 3 countries sure, but jesus there isnt too many (keep in mind you will be naming african, asia and even some new-european countires)
corruption doesnt have anything to do with it, nor can it analyzed objectively because everyones opinion on the matter differs. here ill give you an example. alex thinks george bush is corrupt, politically wrong and insane. i dont.
so now what? i cant just name people who i think are corrupt because u will disagree with me, and even if i WERE to name names, and even if we WERE to come to a consensus, you would still end up with more than 3 EFFECTIVE male leaders.
also, if u already acknowledge there will be more effective male leaders than 3, whats the point?
I Can see where you are coming from. in a way I have the whole way though. But what I would like to know is, in say 10 years time, or 20 years time ect, will your opinion still be the same? Like if there are more woman leaders, will you change it? Like cos thats what I am seeing: you only think men are better becouse there are more of them in power?
If Bush was a woman, would you be saying differnt? If Tony Blair was a woman, would you be saying differnt? I guess you would, becouse they are in places of high power, while others are in "small, un-important" nations.