nourishing obscurity

Given this blog’s past posts on women leaders such as the Hewlett Packard pair Fiorina and Dunn and on the appalling women in the Labour leadership [it needs no comment from me], it might surprise that I was hoping Tsipi Livni would be Israeli PM.

She seemed to be the one to lead Israel in a less gung ho and yet very conservative manner and yet the same sorts of criticisms came up as did with Segolene whom so many liked in her heyday.  Now her star has faded and Tzipi Livni’s appears to be doing the same.

The knives are out and the party N2 has openly come out and distanced himself and many in the party from her.

“This means this group of MKs doesn’t acknowledge Livni’s leadership, and they have doubts about her ability to lead in general,” a Mofaz associate quoted him as saying. “The fact that not a year has passed since the election and people are already looking to flee Kadima is a clear challenge to her leadership and [indicates] that they don’t see her as a future leader.”

There are quite a few MPs threatening to leave, feeling unrepresented and that she took the party too far left.  They cite her manner.  Her supporters say that they were marginal MPs and were not the type to keep anyway.  Mofaz is no marginal though.  Those close to the Premier say she’s a hypocrite:

Livni slammed Netanyahu on Wednesday over his courtship of Kadima MKs. That prompted associates of both Mofaz and Netanyahu to accuse her of hypocrisy, saying she herself has been busy trying to woo Labor MKs to Kadima. “Livni’s problem isn’t Netanyahu, but her own lack of leadership,” added one of the premier’s senior associates. “Someone who isn’t capable of running her party shouldn’t come crying to the prime minister.”

Before going further with this gender thing, one must consider people like Maggie Thatcher, Indira Ghandi and Golda Meir, all who led their countries and had much support.  I look at Headmistresses I’ve had in the past and the women administrators in Russia, both at school and at university.  My Dean and Head of English were two of the best admins I’ve ever seen and Cherie is the best current day admin I’ve seen, male or female.  With these people, the moment anything falls into their laps, you know you can stop worrying because it is going to be done right.

Then we should look at the worst leaders imaginable, from Hitler through to Gordon Brown and all the male incompetents along the way  – hopeless people who can’t lead.  Motivating people is only the first step in leading them.

Whether it’s the necessity to do twice as well as men because of the prejudice of male colleagues or whether there is something intrinsic in the way a woman approaches things, who can say?  Leaving aside for now my intense dislike for what the feminazis have done to society, looking only at the leadership of women over the years, there are some common elements.

Though all have been approachable, male or female, I’ve found that under intense pressure, men wilt, shout or get plain brutal but women get shrill and emotional, fighting that tendency in themselves and tending to see everyone against them, thwarting their “quite reasonable” plans for the organization they’ve been promoted to lead.  This was certainly the case with Fiorina, Dunn and Royal, the latter having it exploited in the national pre-election debate.

Segie countered that of course she was emotional, who woudn’t be with the state of the country but alas, it didn’t wash.  then the Left went and threw her over for a woman who had never inspired anyone so one wonders.  I’d prefer Segie because at least she seemed open and coud inspire when at her best.  This is only a personal view but for a sex which is known for its capacity for intrigue, manipulation and deception [what are cosmetics?], I would have thought they’d pay the game of politics better.

Yet it seems to be the godless moguls, the J.R. Ewings, Carnegies, Usmanovs and the like who seem to have the necessary brutality to survive in the vipers’ nest of politics – Obama can’t though.  Women can be determined and pugnacious, pushing through their plans and dreams and brooking no opposition but they are, shal we say, on the whoe, more brittle.  They’re vulnerable, especially the moment any male brings gender into the issue – it’s not hard get under the guard that way.

I’ve always found women more reasonable, more fun to talk with, leaving aside the obvious biological attractions but then again, can one leave them aside?  When I sit at a table with some lady the other side of it, call me sexist but there’s something in the way she moves, talks, smiles, the softness of her voice which is very pleasant and brings out the best in my behaviour too.

I’ve always found women the most unreasonable people on earth, impossible to use logic to reason with and once they bring emotion into it, that’s the end of any discussion.  Then again, judging from the reaction to some of my posts from males, many of them, especially those of a leftist bent or any ideologues for that matter, are just as impossible.  They don’t get shrill – just cutting or angry.

I saw it in Sicily – a candidate for mayor whom I supported but she was so womanlike, so feminine and yet so strident and pigheaded and determined to get her way without fully understanding the brutal nature of the game and that people in that cut-throat business were going to smile to her face, use her and then stab her in the back that when it became apparent that they were not embracing her vision, she burst into tears and I felt terrible for her.

She had such a good heart and was open and inspirational in what she wanted to do and yet she was also good at using people.  She wasn’t above using her feminine wiles and her kiss [on the cheek, mind] was very nice and would have had me voting for her for sure, so who’s being logical here and who’s not?  Whenever I’ve had leaders, it’s the females I’ve enjoyed the most, maybe because they are so easy to deal with [I find].  One puts up with the total lack of ability to see reason but that’s a small price to pay when you have the chance to see and feel [at a metre's distance, of course] that lady at close quarters the whole time.

Was it an accident that two of the most inspirational leaders in England were Elizabeth and Victoria?  I woud have done a Drake and Raleigh too, sailing to the ends of the earth and bringing back booty for my nation, just to earn a smile from my Queen.  No question there.

What about a Queen Harriet of Harman or a Queen Polly of Toynbee though?  You’d have to be kidding.  A few carefully placed words and they’d be reduced to tears – how could anyone respect that?  Now why is that?  Why do some women inspire and the rest you simply enjoy winding up?  Looking at Mandelson and the other dark lords, I woudn’t even bother winding them up – I’d just cook their goose for them or if I couldn’t do that, simply kill, with very little emotion – hang the bastards high on Tyburn Hill.

Why?  Why the varying reactions?

And back to Tzipi Livni – why is she so brittle and why is she lashing out like a Carly Fiorina or a Miss Ulgine Barrows?  Why is she following this same path as other leaders of her gender when many wanted her to do well?  Why is she feeling so hemmed in and beset by the bulls of Bashan?  Why does unflappable descend into being pig-headed?

Why do I even care about the Israeli opposition leader?

Filed under: Politics & economics, Society & human issues