Debate this.

No. Women are emotional.

Look at Sarah Palin and you'll get your answer.

@Op most of your topics seem to give the impression that you believe women are better than men. Isn't that a reverse notion of the same social injustice that femanism was meant to overturn? The notion that men were better than women?

...And he is a male too...so that's kind of weird O.o

Chaos wrote:No. Women are emotional.

Prove it.

jj16802 wrote:Look at Sarah Palin and you'll get your answer.

I dont understand. Are you saying no or yes?!?

Paradox wrote:@Op most of your topics seem to give the impression that you believe women are better than men. Isn't that a reverse notion of the same social injustice that femanism was meant to overturn? The notion that men were better than women?

I only made two topics in the Debate Room. Plus since your a female shouldn't you be happy that i am fighting for your rights?

@Lev: http://people.umass.edu/monaco/BarretRobinetal1998.pdf

And what rights LMAO? Women could ALREADY become politicians

interesting debate...i think that it is vital to define "better" in the question. There have been some awesome female leaders, and some not so awesome men ones and vice versa. Tell me what exactly are you looking for in this debate (diplomacy, management, head of government. etc).

Plus since your a female shouldn't you be happy that i am fighting for your rights?

If I were a selfish person yes, However I do not approve of degrading others social rights to improve my own social rights.

On topic Sarah Palin is truly awful but I have no doubt that there are several brilliant and female minds who do not rely on shock value and radicalism to pave the path to their success.

Chaos wrote:@Lev: http://people.umass.edu/monaco/BarretRobinetal1998.pdf

And what rights LMAO? Women could ALREADY become politicians

We aren't talking about rights you noob we are talking about. Plus Hassan has a point. lets say head of government. but before we the debate define "better"

Lev_93 wrote:I only made two topics in the Debate Room. Plus since your a female shouldn't you be happy that i am fighting for your rights?

Lev_93 wrote:We aren't talking about rights you noob we are talking about. Plus Hassan has a point. lets say head of government. but before we the debate define "better"

Thanks for calling yourself a noob

Better=More efficient

Let's compare England under Margaret Thatcher or Pakistan under Benazir Bhutto to the present. England was better under her then under Brown (Cameron needs some more time) and Pakistan was slightly better then too (but it was not great, and now it is doing not so good).
By efficiency, do you mean getting the job done or being able to maneuver your way out?

How were they better Hassan?

Thatcher left when UK's image was improved then when she came in...Bhutto wins on the comparison as Pakistan is not doing great right now...that's why we need some fundamentals in the debate.

"...UK's image..."

How about reality?
----------------------------------
Well that doesn't mean she was good. That just means the current one is worst.

Chaos wrote:...And he is a male too...so that's kind of weird O.o

Ahmed thats off topic. And how do you know i am a male? o_0

I don't you woman. I suggest you fix your gender sign and put on a proper picture

Ahmed, that's why I am questioning what do you want to debate on?

i sort of agree... they're both the same IMO...

IMO means what again?

IMO is my word. Marwa steals my words for some reasons.

It means: In my opinion

thanks.
so are you saying in your opinion men and women are equal politicians?

Nope. The Prophet (SAW) said a women leader leads to a downfall.

Hassan wrote:thanks.
so are you saying in your opinion men and women are equal politicians?

yes

Hadith?