i don't really believe that the world would be that different if women ran it compared to men. alot of people have been saying how women would not do the things that men do but i think that this is not fair to say. the reason is that we don't know what women would have done if they were in power. one can easily say that the reason that women are not in power is because they don't act like men.
Act like men how?
How many female loggers have you met?
Woman are not in power because men are physically stronger than woman. Period.
Napoleon was a little guy, still managed to bend a huge army to his will. It's got nothing to do with physical strength. It's about aggression and competitiveness. Men produce more testosterone and thus are more aggressive, which is why they'll fight for power. Women, as you said, are more nurturing, which is why they will compromise for the sake of harmony. That is why men have the power, because they want it and won't back down to get it. It is also why we need women's perspectives in power, to provide restraint on the natural inclinations of men. On the flipside, men provide the impetus for taking a stand and fighting for it, as opposed to making too many concessions for the sake of peace.
But I don't think it's just about men. My gf works in an almost all female (plus a few gay men) workplace and I hear horror stories daily... just general cattiness.
My wife, typically, is a nice, normal woman. She has made at least one mortal enemy at every job she's ever had. This mortal enemy is always, without fail, a woman.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
One thing that I was thinking today is that it probably wouldn't change much if women were our leaders, because of the type of person (male or female) who wants to be a leader, and is good at it.
Most of our leaders (in the political sense) have the same traits... competitiveness, a drive to succeed, an ego, etc... I don't think that it matters what sex a leader is, they pretty much have the same psychological/character make up.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
"It is getting harder to escape the sense that most of the trouble in the world – whether it's coming out of the Senate, a mortgage lender, or a tank turret – can be traced to one overriding problem: too many men steering. Had our economic, domestic, and foreign policy been more informed by women, we might be enjoying a safer ride?"
Would the world be a softer place with more woman at the wheel? In tribal cultures, women ran the village while the man were away doing the physical work, obtaining food.
I think women have much to bring to the table....
What....You mean like Sarah Palin :shock: . Or Maybe Margaret Thatcher
I would have to go with their would be no difference if women ran the planet! You can say that women are more caring, etc, where as men are more agresive,etc. But you forget the one fundimental point that is, it is us as a sociecty that dictacte how our leaders act and the things that the belive are important. Let alone the powerfull people behind them, who aid them to get into power.
Peace will never be achived, as much as I would love to see it. It will never happen which is sad so very sad, is that not more important then who is currently telling us what to do.
Rod Laver Arena - Feb 18, 2003
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
But guys will typically shrug that stuff off. You have a fight with a good friend, walk away, and an hour later you're having a beer together and it's all forgiven once it's happened. It seems women hold onto that stuff more, so instead of venting and then moving on, people vent and then let it poison the atmosphere with hurt feelings.
this is true. that's kind of what my point was.
men are more black&white with the ladies it's all different shades. and some ladies are grudge holders.
It’s just a different atmosphere in a room full of women. I find myself on alert or uptight if I’m surrounded by other women. As if they might use anything I do and say against me at some point later down the road.
I find am able to be myself in a room full of guys thou.
But maybe that’s just me.
I just feel like guys couldn’t careless and that takes the pressure off.
Some male leaders are the worst back stabbers in the cosmos.
i get what you're saying.
i mean women will do it on a more personal level.
Some women are very critical of other women to the point of being counter productive to the women’s movement.
(I not crazy about using the term women’s movement but oh well.)
I can agree with this. I've played guitar for years. I've never met so many bitchy, horrible, evil girls during that time. The guys are always mostly chilled and relaxed and non judgemental. I treat the guys and their girlfriends equally, but for some reason the girls are much harder to get along with. I can almost feel the knives going in my back. I feel like saying 'settle petal, i'm not here to steal your boyfriend, i just want to play guitar you know'. i just don't understand. it's very weird. one girl in particular was especially rude, it took me nearly 12 months for her to accept me. we are good friends now, she is a great girl, but i don't think i'll ever understand why she acted like she did. i don't have any issues saying i find another girl beautiful, or nice, like some girls seem to. i think if you are happy and accepting within in yourself, that's all that matters. i don't have any need or desire to tear others down.
Since I dont believe in any essentialist explanation on the difference in behaviour of the two sexes, AND I believe that power corrupts, then I'm sad to say I dont think it would have been that much different, actually.
Peace
Dan
That's absurd to think there are no differences in the behaviors of the sexes. We're built different and function different and respond to phenomena different.
Er, I think it's a bit complex. There are genetic factors that determine people's sex/evolutionary preogratives/basic behaviour but there are sociological factors that determine people's gender/sense of social constructedness as a man, woman or whatever in between. And there's probably a big splodgy overlap between sex and gender. And we'll never answer this on A Moving Train. At least, I hope not, because I'd fall asleep.
Since I dont believe in any essentialist explanation on the difference in behaviour of the two sexes, AND I believe that power corrupts, then I'm sad to say I dont think it would have been that much different, actually.
Peace
Dan
That's absurd to think there are no differences in the behaviors of the sexes. We're built different and function different and respond to phenomena different.
Er, I think it's a bit complex. There are genetic factors that determine people's sex/evolutionary preogratives/basic behaviour but there are sociological factors that determine people's gender/sense of social constructedness as a man, woman or whatever in between. And there's probably a big splodgy overlap between sex and gender. And we'll never answer this on A Moving Train. At least, I hope not, because I'd fall asleep.
Sure there are social differences, but there are real physical, biological differences too. To act like men and women are exactly the same is absurd, and kinda ridiculous that the comment came from someone who later said men have power because they're physically stronger and then pulled the birth card... two of several biological differences and process that makes clear distinctions between men and women. There is also the reactions to sexual activity, hormone levels, the fact the women have more inter-lobal neural connections, etc. There are plenty of concrete differences between the sexes. Granted, there are far more commonalities and social conditioning plays a huge role in our behavior as well... probably a bigger role. But let's call a spade a spade... men and women are not the same. They're built different and they behave different in notable ways.
One thing that I was thinking today is that it probably wouldn't change much if women were our leaders, because of the type of person (male or female) who wants to be a leader, and is good at it.
Most of our leaders (in the political sense) have the same traits... competitiveness, a drive to succeed, an ego, etc... I don't think that it matters what sex a leader is, they pretty much have the same psychological/character make up.
this pretty much sums it up for me. also, we as a society would have to have a pretty fundamental shift in our collective desires and expectations of leadership, and of living life in general, for any substantive change to occur in how the various countries of the world are run...and that is way beyond merely what gender our leaders are.
can I ask what do we look for in a leader? answering that will help you define the qualities in a person that we look for to elect into office! then you need to ask you is the person willing to do it!
Rod Laver Arena - Feb 18, 2003
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
....how can humanity not make peace our number one goal?
How sad to perpetuate the idea that peace isn't possible, not even on this thread. It's mostly men against woman.
peace is not possible due to own nature, someone some where will be suffering due to some one else. this suffering my be physical,mental,emotional, etc.
Rod Laver Arena - Feb 18, 2003
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
The flipside is that we probably wouldn't have survived the Cold War. It's easy for women to think they'd be a softening influence on things, but ask any man who's lived with one how peaceful things are around the house for those few days at the end of the month... you can't blow up on a nuclear armed enemy because you can't control your hormones and are feeling "bloated and emotional." I can see more wars because women in charge were feeling super sensitive one day and Russia was being a total bitch and who the hell does Russia think it is?
As someone who has a lot of major medical problems related to female hormones, I think I can argue that this scenario would never happen, and is a very silly excuse men use as to why it's a good thing women aren't these positions. I would never underestimate the power of female hormones in changing one's behavior or personality, and rationality at that-I have experienced the absolute worst of it. However, most commonly, the aggression is generally taken out on the self- the woman in question would not want to blow up the world, rather, she would probably get very anxious and experience deep self-loathing. Her "irrational" act would probably be to demand she be taken out of her position of power because she doesn't deserve it.
Luckily we also have medication that can help with these things now, so it shouldn't even really be an issue. The problem continues with ignorance about women's health issues, and lagging of the medical community to devote resources to exploring these issues. I almost can't tell if the post I quoted is joking or is just displaying some ignorance on the issue, but from what I've gone through, I just find it to be a very difficult thing to joke about.
More importantly, the question is: would we even HAVE nuclear weapons if women were in charge? You really have to wonder. I don't know many women who chose to work in weapons fields, and there are less women in the military than men. I don't think we care as much for war, I honestly don't. And I'm not one to really stress a difference in the sexes- I never buy into the whole men are from mars women are...thing. But I think there are some broader issues that...maybe.
if a woman doesn't have a job or family, it's going to hurt her candidacy by leaving her vulnerable to accusations of inexperience or the dreaded "mannish woman" accusations (because a woman that isn't obsessed with kids is too weird for middle America).
This is really a huge point. People often accuse single female politicians of "not having lives." It doesn't matter if you live a full, happy life full of friends and family and ambition and accomplishments- if you are not married with children, you don't have "a life." On the flip side, if a female politician DOES have a husband and kids, she will be accused of not having enough time to devote to the position.
Men sometimes get this too, however, I don't think it's as bad. They are expected to be married and have families, but since the women are at home picking up their dry cleaning, it's ok.
On a personal note, yes being a woman who is not obsessed with kids is a really weird position to be in. People assume that you are; employers STILL tend to assume that you are just waiting for the right man to come along, and as soon as does, bam, you're out of there. I got into some conversation with my boss about not being interested in getting married and having kids (he made the assumption that I was waiting for both, and I needed to correct him just to point out that it's not a safe assumption to make about every woman you meet), and I know he thinks much less of me after that.
"It is getting harder to escape the sense that most of the trouble in the world – whether it's coming out of the Senate, a mortgage lender, or a tank turret – can be traced to one overriding problem: too many men steering. Had our economic, domestic, and foreign policy been more informed by women, we might be enjoying a safer ride?"
Would the world be a softer place with more woman at the wheel? In tribal cultures, women ran the village while the man were away doing the physical work, obtaining food.
I think women have much to bring to the table....
and in these tribal villages the women have to walk 6 miles every day for clean water... and yet its never occurred to them to relocate 5.9 miles further towards the water source?
has it never occurred to you that the water source is in a flood plain or some other place not compatible with building a village???
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i don't really believe that the world would be that different if women ran it compared to men. alot of people have been saying how women would not do the things that men do but i think that this is not fair to say. the reason is that we don't know what women would have done if they were in power. one can easily say that the reason that women are not in power is because they don't act like men.
Act like men how?
How many female loggers have you met?
Woman are not in power because men are physically stronger than woman. Period.
i don't think you can say that women are not in power becuase men are physically stronger than them. i know soem women who are stronger than men. i believe that people who get into government have a strong desire to succeed and will do anything to succeed. alot of people in society still believe in teh old sterotypes that say that men are the hunters and women are the cooks. i believe that this is fully entrenched in our mindsight. for a women to get into power, she must act as the sterotypical man. of course that doesn't work either, i think Hillary can be a good example o fthat. she doesn't act like the sterotypical women and people saying she is a bitch and when she crys and people ask if she could handle being the president.
"It is getting harder to escape the sense that most of the trouble in the world – whether it's coming out of the Senate, a mortgage lender, or a tank turret – can be traced to one overriding problem: too many men steering. Had our economic, domestic, and foreign policy been more informed by women, we might be enjoying a safer ride?"
Would the world be a softer place with more woman at the wheel? In tribal cultures, women ran the village while the man were away doing the physical work, obtaining food.
I think women have much to bring to the table....
and in these tribal villages the women have to walk 6 miles every day for clean water... and yet its never occurred to them to relocate 5.9 miles further towards the water source?
has it never occurred to you that the water source is in a flood plain or some other place not compatible with building a village???
vast majority of african water is sourced from wells... not flood plains... flood plains would contaminate the water.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
and in these tribal villages the women have to walk 6 miles every day for clean water... and yet its never occurred to them to relocate 5.9 miles further towards the water source?
has it never occurred to you that the water source is in a flood plain or some other place not compatible with building a village???
vast majority of african water is sourced from wells... not flood plains... flood plains would contaminate the water.
oh i see... so all tribes are from africa????... how stupid of me... what was i thinking.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
has it never occurred to you that the water source is in a flood plain or some other place not compatible with building a village???
vast majority of african water is sourced from wells... not flood plains... flood plains would contaminate the water.
oh i see... so all tribes are from africa????... how stupid of me... what was i thinking.
everyone is from Africa
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
oh i see... so all tribes are from africa????... how stupid of me... what was i thinking.
everyone is from Africa
well yes of course we are. in origin... but at this particular juncture in mans history we are quite
widely dispersed.
this is true. my point that all water sources from flood plains would most likely be contaminated still stands.
my other point is that the wee winking fucker at the end of a sentence normally means i'm joking... so i dont genuinely believe that those women who walk 6 miles per day for clean water are doing it for the sheer fun of it...
oh if women did indeed rule this village called earth it would be less funny... put it that way
i did the winking guy there... christians have free will... i have the winking fucker
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
this is true. my point that all water sources from flood plains would most likely be contaminated still stands.
my other point is that the wee winking fucker at the end of a sentence normally means i'm joking... so i dont genuinely believe that those women who walk 6 miles per day for clean water are doing it for the sheer fun of it...
oh if women did indeed rule this village called earth it would be less funny... put it that way
i did the winking guy there... christians have free will... i have the winking fucker
what the fuck are you on about scotsman???
in regards to the thread. and for the sake of integrity... i am of the opinion that given time women would resort to the same ways as men. you can not fuck with my children and expect to get away with it. same goes with women ruling the world. when push comes to shove we will defend it with all the violence that men have thus far. anyone that thinks otherwise is deluded.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
"early hunter-gatherer societies were essentially egalitarian, with men and women fulfilling distinct, complementary roles of equal perceived value and worshipping goddesses as representative of women's reproductive power. With the shift to agriculture seemingly came increased male control over the public sphere and ultimately the subordination of female deities: typically they were recast as the consorts or mothers of male gods, then absorbed into a coed but male-controlled pantheon."
again, as I said in another thread....'our culture is killing us.'
The fact that no one can even visualize peace on this planet, is sad indeed. :?
"early hunter-gatherer societies were essentially egalitarian, with men and women fulfilling distinct, complementary roles of equal perceived value and worshipping goddesses as representative of women's reproductive power. With the shift to agriculture seemingly came increased male control over the public sphere and ultimately the subordination of female deities: typically they were recast as the consorts or mothers of male gods, then absorbed into a coed but male-controlled pantheon."
again, as I said in another thread....'our culture is killing us.'
The fact that no one can even visualize peace on this planet, is sad indeed. :?
i agree that it is our culture that is kiling us.
BTW, i can visualize peace on the planet, i just don't it is as simple as saying that the world would be better if women were running it. what we need is a code of ethics not a code of morals.
"early hunter-gatherer societies were essentially egalitarian, with men and women fulfilling distinct, complementary roles of equal perceived value and worshipping goddesses as representative of women's reproductive power. With the shift to agriculture seemingly came increased male control over the public sphere and ultimately the subordination of female deities: typically they were recast as the consorts or mothers of male gods, then absorbed into a coed but male-controlled pantheon."
again, as I said in another thread....'our culture is killing us.'
The fact that no one can even visualize peace on this planet, is sad indeed. :?
i agree that it is our culture that is kiling us.
BTW, i can visualize peace on the planet, i just don't it is as simple as saying that the world would be better if women were running it. what we need is a code of ethics not a code of morals.
too true.
i do think it is possible, though more than likely...improbable. the history of humanity does not seem to be entirely 'peaceful'....and just like many other animals on this planet, we fight over territories and resources, the best of everything. it's got nothing to do with gender, and everything to do with humankind, overall.
Comments
Napoleon was a little guy, still managed to bend a huge army to his will. It's got nothing to do with physical strength. It's about aggression and competitiveness. Men produce more testosterone and thus are more aggressive, which is why they'll fight for power. Women, as you said, are more nurturing, which is why they will compromise for the sake of harmony. That is why men have the power, because they want it and won't back down to get it. It is also why we need women's perspectives in power, to provide restraint on the natural inclinations of men. On the flipside, men provide the impetus for taking a stand and fighting for it, as opposed to making too many concessions for the sake of peace.
....how can humanity not make peace our number one goal?
How sad to perpetuate the idea that peace isn't possible, not even on this thread. It's mostly men against woman.
My wife, typically, is a nice, normal woman. She has made at least one mortal enemy at every job she's ever had. This mortal enemy is always, without fail, a woman.
for the least they could possibly do
Most of our leaders (in the political sense) have the same traits... competitiveness, a drive to succeed, an ego, etc... I don't think that it matters what sex a leader is, they pretty much have the same psychological/character make up.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
What....You mean like Sarah Palin :shock: . Or Maybe Margaret Thatcher
Peace will never be achived, as much as I would love to see it. It will never happen which is sad so very sad, is that not more important then who is currently telling us what to do.
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
Er, I think it's a bit complex. There are genetic factors that determine people's sex/evolutionary preogratives/basic behaviour but there are sociological factors that determine people's gender/sense of social constructedness as a man, woman or whatever in between. And there's probably a big splodgy overlap between sex and gender. And we'll never answer this on A Moving Train. At least, I hope not, because I'd fall asleep.
She's not a woman.
Sure there are social differences, but there are real physical, biological differences too. To act like men and women are exactly the same is absurd, and kinda ridiculous that the comment came from someone who later said men have power because they're physically stronger and then pulled the birth card... two of several biological differences and process that makes clear distinctions between men and women. There is also the reactions to sexual activity, hormone levels, the fact the women have more inter-lobal neural connections, etc. There are plenty of concrete differences between the sexes. Granted, there are far more commonalities and social conditioning plays a huge role in our behavior as well... probably a bigger role. But let's call a spade a spade... men and women are not the same. They're built different and they behave different in notable ways.
Nevermind a penis, check for steroids.
this pretty much sums it up for me. also, we as a society would have to have a pretty fundamental shift in our collective desires and expectations of leadership, and of living life in general, for any substantive change to occur in how the various countries of the world are run...and that is way beyond merely what gender our leaders are.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
peace is not possible due to own nature, someone some where will be suffering due to some one else. this suffering my be physical,mental,emotional, etc.
Rod Laver Arena - Nov 13, 2006
Adelaide Oval - Nov 17, 2009
Etihad Stadium - Nov 20, 2009
BDO Melbourne - Jan 24, 2014
New York - May 02 - 2016
Powered by Pearl Jam
As someone who has a lot of major medical problems related to female hormones, I think I can argue that this scenario would never happen, and is a very silly excuse men use as to why it's a good thing women aren't these positions. I would never underestimate the power of female hormones in changing one's behavior or personality, and rationality at that-I have experienced the absolute worst of it. However, most commonly, the aggression is generally taken out on the self- the woman in question would not want to blow up the world, rather, she would probably get very anxious and experience deep self-loathing. Her "irrational" act would probably be to demand she be taken out of her position of power because she doesn't deserve it.
Luckily we also have medication that can help with these things now, so it shouldn't even really be an issue. The problem continues with ignorance about women's health issues, and lagging of the medical community to devote resources to exploring these issues. I almost can't tell if the post I quoted is joking or is just displaying some ignorance on the issue, but from what I've gone through, I just find it to be a very difficult thing to joke about.
More importantly, the question is: would we even HAVE nuclear weapons if women were in charge? You really have to wonder. I don't know many women who chose to work in weapons fields, and there are less women in the military than men. I don't think we care as much for war, I honestly don't. And I'm not one to really stress a difference in the sexes- I never buy into the whole men are from mars women are...thing. But I think there are some broader issues that...maybe.
This is really a huge point. People often accuse single female politicians of "not having lives." It doesn't matter if you live a full, happy life full of friends and family and ambition and accomplishments- if you are not married with children, you don't have "a life." On the flip side, if a female politician DOES have a husband and kids, she will be accused of not having enough time to devote to the position.
Men sometimes get this too, however, I don't think it's as bad. They are expected to be married and have families, but since the women are at home picking up their dry cleaning, it's ok.
On a personal note, yes being a woman who is not obsessed with kids is a really weird position to be in. People assume that you are; employers STILL tend to assume that you are just waiting for the right man to come along, and as soon as does, bam, you're out of there. I got into some conversation with my boss about not being interested in getting married and having kids (he made the assumption that I was waiting for both, and I needed to correct him just to point out that it's not a safe assumption to make about every woman you meet), and I know he thinks much less of me after that.
has it never occurred to you that the water source is in a flood plain or some other place not compatible with building a village???
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i don't think you can say that women are not in power becuase men are physically stronger than them. i know soem women who are stronger than men. i believe that people who get into government have a strong desire to succeed and will do anything to succeed. alot of people in society still believe in teh old sterotypes that say that men are the hunters and women are the cooks. i believe that this is fully entrenched in our mindsight. for a women to get into power, she must act as the sterotypical man. of course that doesn't work either, i think Hillary can be a good example o fthat. she doesn't act like the sterotypical women and people saying she is a bitch and when she crys and people ask if she could handle being the president.
vast majority of african water is sourced from wells... not flood plains... flood plains would contaminate the water.
oh i see... so all tribes are from africa????... how stupid of me... what was i thinking.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
everyone is from Africa
.........................
well yes of course we are. in origin... but at this particular juncture in mans history we are quite
widely dispersed.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
this is true. my point that all water sources from flood plains would most likely be contaminated still stands.
my other point is that the wee winking fucker at the end of a sentence normally means i'm joking... so i dont genuinely believe that those women who walk 6 miles per day for clean water are doing it for the sheer fun of it...
oh if women did indeed rule this village called earth it would be less funny... put it that way
i did the winking guy there... christians have free will... i have the winking fucker
what the fuck are you on about scotsman???
in regards to the thread. and for the sake of integrity... i am of the opinion that given time women would resort to the same ways as men. you can not fuck with my children and expect to get away with it. same goes with women ruling the world. when push comes to shove we will defend it with all the violence that men have thus far. anyone that thinks otherwise is deluded.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
again, as I said in another thread....'our culture is killing us.'
The fact that no one can even visualize peace on this planet, is sad indeed. :?
i agree that it is our culture that is kiling us.
BTW, i can visualize peace on the planet, i just don't it is as simple as saying that the world would be better if women were running it. what we need is a code of ethics not a code of morals.
too true.
i do think it is possible, though more than likely...improbable. the history of humanity does not seem to be entirely 'peaceful'....and just like many other animals on this planet, we fight over territories and resources, the best of everything. it's got nothing to do with gender, and everything to do with humankind, overall.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow