The Iroquois were ruled by women, so there is a precedent showing that such a state can be successful.
>>536992181Yes they can lead you to ruin.
Yeah, the Iroquois, very successful. Are you high?
>>536992292The Iroquois have the most prosperous nation in the whole world. Don't you know?
>>536992292Before contact they were the dominant tribal confederacy in the entire north east.Today, not so much. I for one am proud of my cannibalistic Mohawk ancestors.
>>536992181Support the premise upon which your conclusion is based. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HaudenosauneeI cannot find truth in this your claim. The wikipedia article says they had chiefs - male.
>The Iroquois were ruled by women, so there is a precedent showing that such a state can be successful.are you woman? if you are not a woman why are interested in seeing old hags rulling over you? whats your tribal and personal interest?
>>536992545Chief was their equivalent for Minister/SecretaryTheir War Chief was your Secretary of Defense, Peace Chief was your Secretary of State
>>536992181They Iroquois were ruled by women because the men realized that the men only wanted to war with each other. It was kind of a revolutionary attempt. It was an attempt, a rational one, to escape the permanent state of war they existed within at the time. If anyone is interested, it came with its own set of problems, and war didn't end forever, anyway. They used the same excuse that's been claimed every time a female president runs. Hillary would have waged war ruthlessly. Kamala would've been a slave, waging every war she was told to wage.
>>536992545I learned in school that Iroquois women held high social status and were responsible for selecting the tribal council.
>>536992181Women aren't people.
>>536992181even women just having the vote is bad enough
>>536992181>ruled by women>literally lived in longhouses
>>536993179Holy shit that's a huge house
Why bring up the Iroquois when we have historically documented (and mostly very successful) female rulers in the West.
>>536992181WOMAN THREADS ARE MADE BY UNIT 8200
>>536992479wokepedoa said Illinois confederacy were bigger in NE
>>536993305must come from ancestral memories of Noahs Ark.
>>536992181>Attosecond blip in history of some unknown obscure whores nobody on Earth ever heard of.Retards who drink nigger sperm: "Can this exception make the rule?"
>>536992257fisty posty bisty
>>536993580Kikes fucking us over for thousands of years.
>>536993580Grow up
>>536992181The Iroquois were bloodthirsty, genocidal freaks.
How are the iroquois tribes doing today kek i bet all the rez are a paradise
>>536992181>successfulWhere are they now?
>>536993774lighten up Hans
>>536992292Only time humans have enough sense to form civilization is typically after mass bloodshed with no winners. Ww2 everyone was so shell shocked they abandoned piracy writ large. Happened with the haudeenosaunee hardcore.>>536992181Man had veto on war matters, impirtant point
>>536992257>Can women lead?NOOlook at das merkel and what she had done to us
>>536992181That is something mentally.
>>536992545Women like Jigonhsasee held dominion within the longhouse, and often sheltered rival tribesmen, they was a peace making and than following a political forcePic related is where all my computers are going in a couple weeks
>>536992181>successful
>>536994055Did you like Angela Merkel?
>>536994270Sorry im not a kraut just in krautlandI was banned from facebook in 2015 for saying merkle was the next hitler for trying to build a european army. This lead to the deletion of my facebook
>>536994353Kek. Were you sued?
>>536994798Nah, i just rage deleted and never went back
>>536994055>women take care of the home and largely influence matters regarding day to day life>men handle the most important things like emergencies and always have the ability to veto a woman to get shit doneSounds a lot like the traditional man-woman experience. The question of whether women *can* lead has always been bait. Of course they can, yet just because you *can* do something doesn't mean you should. Pros and cons to everything. Women's Achilles heel is a lack of discernment and steadfastness, which is pointed out in the first story of the Bible. Being created to "help" men, women are naturally prone to being swayed, which is usually a horrible quality in a leader. Not only that, but women lack agency and their natural inclination to solving a problem greater than them is to find a man to fix it. If a woman is a leader, then there is a man that is propping her up.
>>536996847women also hate personal responsibility and seek consensus before making any decision they also don't want to hurt anyone's feelings in case anyone holds a grudge against them and perhaps seeks revenge in the future all those are bad things in a leader
>>536992181women can only "lead" in very stable societies/nations where power and decisions are decentralized and any idiot could have the top spot without it all falling apart. you will never see women leaders persist or be elected during wars or crises, and its because of the simple fact that men are superior to women
>>536997287When women are given power, they are usually too lenient or too cruel, but never balanced. They aren't mentally equipped to make balanced decisions.
>>536992181I think the correct opinion on this is that women do have predispositions that could make them poor leaders, but there are varying personality types and temperaments across both sexes, which can produce good female leaders. Though it typically requires some kind of trauma or alienation from society in women, whereas men tend to be more varied because nature can afford to be more varied with men. Being the sex that does most of the reproduction means that biology would prioritize and reward traits that keep one safe, and agreeableness and deferring to what most people are thinking are certainly traits that achieve that. This is why propaganda directed at women really focuses on excluding us from the "in group" if we do not support social causes as opposed to any kind of factual argument. This is to say women can lead in contexts other than domestic and local (school board, markets, etc.) but it is certainly NOTEWORTHY if they are, or it should be (they've been propped up far too much in the western world) and typically requires some kind of significant catalyst. But of course humans are all varied and so you will get an occasional natural female leader.
>>536992181Yes, as proven by queen Victoria, Maria Theresa, or Catherine the Great
>>536997257>and seek consensus before making any decisionThere's a difference between querying a panel of your trusted advisors and outsourcing your critical thinking to the online mob - i.e. not all consensus-seeking/coalition building is inherently female coded.
>>536992292The Iroquois were the traitors, they were known and established to be working with expansionist whites,Against other native tribes,They were feared, brutal warriorsThey were stupid to think the whites would keep them or their way of life around.
>>536992181I believe women can lead yes, such as a queen or empress. But perhaps she would need the strength of men to back her up. Like nobility, or military generals. Boudica was a female leader, I think she lost but she was still a strong woman leader who rallied her people to fight the Romans. I think she had very respectable and noble traits as a British queen or leader. The fact remains that men are still stronger than women though, and maybe it's better if a man leads instead of a woman. But women are capable of being intelligent and wise. I believe women are capable of leadership as long as they understand the nature of man and mankind.
>>536992181Women should not be in leadership positions, it will only hurt society. In fact, part of how they cannot lead is why they should not be allowed to vote as well.
>>536993179I would say it has become obvious that civilization is a manmade invention, not woman made. The total lack of any female led civilization anywhere on earth that amounted to more than teepees and mud huts is damning.The amazonians are a greek myth, and every time women have been given power and authority over men we see major decline in the functions and foundations of said civilization. No invading Army conquered Rome until it was a feminine shadow of its former masculinity.Women want to return to the animal kingdom where the men fight over them and only the strongest, tallest man breeds. Men, build cities.
>>536999071Their designed place as supplemental will naturally cause them to outsource decision-making.
>>536998294>usywnbaw
>>536998156having female leaders is like a luxury display for countries, "look we can afford to put this into power and we'll still be fine"
>>536992181>flimsy, irrelevant premise>some other pseudo-similar condition of actual significance must therefore be possibleI'm beginning to feel sorry for the term "faggotry."
>>537001412TOTAL FURRY DEATH
Only one woman could command me.
>>536992181And where are the Iroqouis now? Hmm?
>>537000901I wish
>>536992181>The Iroquois were ruled by womenextreme bullshit.
>>536992181>The Iroquois were ruled by women, so there is a precedent showing that such a state can be successful.question: how successful are the Iroquois *now*? there's your answer.
>>536992181>Can women lead?No.>>536992257>Yes they can lead you to ruin.this.FPBP/thread
