• AnotherNother

    Turns out men and women are not equal. You know how I know this? Sexual dimorphism.

    Species in the wild that have less differences then the other sexes become androdygenous (same), because it serves them no function to be sexually different other than for reproduction, but their core functions of survival stay the same.

    Humans however, are highly sexual dimorphic, and this happens because in the wild we live in a system of trade offs.; this idea of trade offs coasts on the idea that for one thing that men are good, women are also equally good at another. Evolution favors particular traits, and phases out ones that don’t work, dimorphism exists to calibrate the sexes into a system of trade offs so we maximized survival. If man and women were the same, evolution would have pushed us to becoming the same and eliminated dimorphism, but it turns out that it did not, and we are infact not equal as a whole in the way we think.

    Politics were invented by man, lead by man, and usually ran by man. So when women enter this realm, they are entering a realm that men traditinoally built and lead, digging deeper into our evolutionary past, we can see that these served core functions for men to lead and maximize group survival, and this implies then, that women are trying to step into something that they are indeed not suited for. So, naturally, it can be posited that men are better politicians then women, because the trade off did not suite them, but it suited men.

    We are equal in the sense that women complete us in sectors we do not usually stay in, but we are not equal in the sense of women entering male dominated realms as those realms existed because we as men used them as functions for our survival, just as women used certain realms of theirs to contribute to overall survival.

  • Logan

    Love this article. I fully believe that a great candidate won last years election. the victory was not based on his gender, he won because he had a great platform and ran an awesome campaign. That being said, there are undoubtedly barriers that woman face in politics. Particularly in the media.. In last years election I was often referred to by the gazette as “little logan” this characterization instantly undermined my credibility. This description bestowed upon me the attribute of a child. I cannot control my stature. Being female it is natural for me to be smaller than my male counterparts.. However what the heck did that have to do with the election? Neither my height or weight has any bearing on my ability to lead a student council. It is the media’s portrayal of women that perpetuates the sexist stereotype that woman are inferior leaders to men. It is this subtle undermining of women’s credibility that makes it so hard for us to gain access to the “boys club”. Perhaps so few woman run for this position out of fear that they will be attacked and judged for attributes that are out of their control. Being a 5’6 blonde should have had no influence on the way that the media portrayed me as a candidate .. However.. Unfortunately it did.

  • Hunter

    Maybe she didn’t win because her platform was absolutely ridiculous? Instead, the student body elected someone with a platform that made sense and wasn’t shallow.

  • George

    This article is completely ridiculous. Without the ’75/’76 data, the author is just making wild speculations.