Social Question

imrainmaker's avatar

Why is there no female US President yet?

Asked by imrainmaker (8375points) February 10th, 2016 from iPhone

Major democratic countries like UK, India had female Prime Ministers long back. Even Burma is now having female leading the country.Still there is none in United States till date and still seems distant with current results. What may the reason for this?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

13 Answers

filmfann's avatar

In 1972, Shirley Chisholm ran for President, and said she faced more opposition because she was a woman, than because she was black.

trolltoll's avatar

Because women are seen as emotional, hormonal, irrational, unstable, inherently incompetent, etc.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

Canada Had a female prime minister too.

gorillapaws's avatar

I signed a petition begging Elizabeth Warren to run, but she didn’t. I haven’t seen a female presidential candidate I want to vote for yet. I will vote for Clinton if she wins the primary though she’s not my first choice.

I would also add that because the US president is the commander in chief of the US armed forces, some feel (not me personally) that the role isn’t suited to a woman. Women have only recently been fully integrated into the armed forces, so it’s “still new” (to older generations especially) to see women in charge of military operations.

imrainmaker's avatar

I don’t see that as valid reason if you consider strong personalities like Margaret Thatcher, Angela Morkel, Indira Gandhi who has led respective nations successfully for many years.

Zaku's avatar

US Presidential elections are dominated by two corporate-corrupted political parties, largely because the US has a screwed up voting system where there are only allowed to be two candidates with one vote per person, and so there is a prevailing logic that any candidate must be from those two political parties. Those parties being corrupt, they tend to pick their candidates not on the basis of being good people for the job, but due to opaque political considerations.

Those parties have offered very few female choices, partly because the USA also has strong sexist elements, and the sophistication of the conversations around its elections are horrifyingly crude and stupid.

Shirley Chisholm ran but was not chosen by the Democrats. In 1972, racism and sexism were stronger than in recent decades.

When Geraldine Ferraro was a Vice Presidential candidate, she didn’t win, but at least she was intelligent and competent.

When Sarah Palin was a Vice Presidential candidate, it marked a low point at the time in the intelligence of US politics, as someone who didn’t know basic world geography or other basic facts was allowed to be the VP candidate.

Now we have Hilary Clinton as a potential candidate, and I think in theory she might be electable, but unfortunately she is clearly not an honest candidate for change and for the people the way Bernie Sanders is. Also, many people hate her for a variety of reasons, only some of which are sexist.

msh's avatar

Women can’t even get equal pay by law.

Face it.
Every politician is on a first name basis with the devil.
It just depends on how much they discuss…

If people don’t understand international politics, it doesn’t matter who you put in the Whitehouse. That’s why you better have somone who already knows the players, the score, and how to bluff.

JLeslie's avatar

Not many women have run for President in the US. People harp on us not having had a female President, but really if only 5 have run out if the 200 men who have run (I completely made up those numbers) then it’s statistically less likely to have a female president.

Back in history women could not vote, and they just weren’t in national politics at all, it was because of the typical male dominated society. In the last 50 years more women have entered politics, so it definitely will happen. I think one thing working against women now is the Middle East is such a hot bed geo-politically, and at least a portion of Americans believe the Arabs and Persians don’t respect or receive women well politically.

Seek's avatar

What @Zaku said.

Kropotkin's avatar

And let’s hope there isn’t one till at least 2020.

Hillary is fucking odious.

I also don’t think it matters. So what that a small proportion of women are in politics? There’s not many in mining and construction either. I’d rather abolish these power structures in the first place, rather than give them gender parity. True democracy is from the ground up, not from the top.

And women who seek political power are often as venal and self-serving as their male counterparts. Hillary is a good example of that. Thatcher was atrocious, and probably the most divisive and reviled PM in British history.

ucme's avatar

I’ve said before, Hellary does not deserve the historical accolade of being the first female President.
Would be entirely wasted on her wild eyed, self serving, disingenuous arse.
She, in my opinion, would be your (American) Thatcher & trust me, you don’t want that!

Lightlyseared's avatar

Because the American people haven’t voted one in.

rojo's avatar

We are a little backwards, you must forgive us.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther