point in case, (female) south Korean prime minister Han Myoungsook, opposition party leader and strong presidential prospect (female) Pak Kunhye. Even the very conservative Japanese royal establishment is debating whether a female can succeed to the throne - it may not happen, but at least it's being discussed. And further back, in the 1880s and 1890s up till her assassination, Queen Min of Korea was a major force in staving off foreign fiddling and takeovers, really walking a perilous tightrope between at least three competing major powers. Opinions of her legacy are mixed, helped in part by some of the histories having been written by those powers she sought to keep out. And for another Asian leader of that era of the female variety, look no further than the Dowager Empress of China. She was also a decidedly mixed story, and was at least lucky enough to die of old age, unlike Queen Min.

Whether the boss is male, female, or transgendered.

Tough as nails. This is nonsensew that women aren't as tough as men - does anyone think Hillary Clinton would be "nicer" than stupid George Bush? Is Condi Rice nice? I work in a company run by women, and believe me, these are not "nice" people - decent, and fair, but nice? Sillyness. I hope that we elect a wpman next time around - I'd like to see what Hillary or Condi could do...

of female monarchs and other heads of state. Does anyone seriously claim that they were any less warlike than their male counterparts? Catherine the Great would be highly indignant, I bet.

She certainly brought a stabilizing influence, especially given the length of her reign. Perhaps it was this stability that provided an environment where a more civil society could develop. Under her reign, reform movements in England started to ameliorate some of the excesses of the Industral Revolution; it also saw a certain amount of political reform. Victoria's promotion of family and morality could also be considered a civilizing influence (it was certainly quite a change from some of her predecessors!), especially since these values were put into practice and spread by the emerging middle class.

But ask the Zulus whether Victoria's "civilizing" influence was really such a good thing. And the Boers. And the Ashantis. And the Afghans. And the Indians. And the Russians. And the Chinese. And the Egyptians. And the Sudanese. Being civilized by the sword and the flame is anything but.

In any case, what civilizing influence Victoria might have had was due to her actions and influence as a monarch, not her gender. I don't buy into this mystical theory of female virtue. For one thing, it can be turned against women to make us into "angels in the house" who are too virtuous and delicate for the rough and tumble of public life (thereby removing us from it). Women are flawed humans, with the potential for good and bad that is inherent in any being that can exercise free will.

What including women in the halls of power does bring is a different set of perspectives and experience to the table. It's this diversity of thought that can prove advantageous -- if it's used! Being able to see more than one side of an issue can lead to better decision-making in just about any context. Also, a society that allows all of its members to participate and develop their skills and ambitions has a much deeper talent pool to draw on than one that arbitrarily excludes certain groups. (And this doesn't just apply to women; insert the name of your favorite marginalized group here.)

By the way, I enjoy wargaming and board gaming and know a number of other women who do, too. But it's true that we're a small minority in this subculture. (I am not exactly sure what this has to do with women ruling the world, but since someone brought it up I figured I'd reply.)

I posted this on another thread:

Here's a quote from Sex in History by Reay Tannehil:

"When the frockcoated and increasingly bewhiskered gentlemen of the Victorian era, in the grip of this strange medieval nostalgia, cultivated the stilted and excessive courtesy toward "the ladies" that they fondly believe reflected the chivalric ideal, they also -- though without malice aforethought -- reduced them once more to the status of spectators at the tournament of life. What Harrient Martineau said of American men in the 1830's was equally true of Europeans -- they gave women indulgence as a substitutte for justice. And regrettably, women encouraged them, finding it pleasant to be worshiped, cherished, and deferred to, flattering to be considered vulnerable, virginal and remote; pure angels to whom a man might turn for respite from the rought, cruel world of business realities."

could hardly be characterized as feminized nations under Thatcher, Meir and Gandhi. And while she might not number among the greatest leaders in the politial world, Corazon Aquino certainly didn't make as much of a hash of things as Ferdinanc Marcos or his shoe whore wife.

Power is neither masculine nor feminine. Same with intelligent wielding of it. Good leadership is an amalgam of traits of a person, not a gender.

if males usually keep females from sharing power that is a differing leadership result based on gender. I don't see how you can categorically rule out that there could be other differences, or that none of them would apply to women.

Rosa Brooks makes as many questionable assumptions as Fukuyama.

As a stay at home dad, I can testify that many men think women have had the better deal for centuries. Will we jump into changing diapers? As soon as women let us we will do so with a happy chuckle, and leave running the world to whoever is foolish enough to want to.

Unfortunately for most men, most women aren't going to relinquish the cushier option anytime soon. Even though they are earning more degrees, women are still much more likely to want to stay home, and pack hubby off to be a wage slave.

Nor do most women seem remotely eager to pursue political careers. It's not that they are being marginalized, they just aren't that keen on the idea. (With a few notable exceptions.) You can lead a horse to water, but you still can't make it drink.