Why not just copy and paste the old feminist chestnut rather than rewriting it? Successful women are perceived as "bitches", whereas successful men are perceived as "driven". You could have saved four paragraphs right there.

But there is no double standard here, just another old wives tale. A hard driving female boss may be a "bitch", but a hard driving male boss is an "asshole." Seriously, how many of you have not had an asshole boss?

I might take this seriously if it weren;t for the fact that Joan Walsh, your very our own Editor-in-Chief, felt compelled to post a series of comments last January celebrating the fact that "women can have balls."

It strikes me that if you want to change perceptions here, you might want to walk down the hall, pop into Joan's office and have a word with her. Because change, like charity, starts at home.

Two words, Salon: Edward Muskie. I wasn't even ALIVE at the time and I know all about it. Exhibit any meaningful sign of weakness and the jackals are all over you.

So now you complain when the XX crowd gets the same treatment the XYers have been getting for the last 100,000 years? Do you even know what equality means?

Seriously, just how "duh" can you get? I think a lot of the writers here would be doing themselves a huge favor by just spending a long week with Bertrand Russell's 'A History of Western Philosophy'. A little less hysterics, a little more common sense, please.

...you consider "mannish" to be an insult.

Hm. Interesting.

only if it's intended as one.

Isn't your name kinda ... girly?

Try though they might, anthropologists have yet to discover matriarchy (society run by women), or at least that was the case when I was last in anthro class.

So men following a female leader may literally be unnatural. Not that we should be slaves to nature, but it can help us make sense of our world. I think we should name our cave man heritage and deal with it rather than tsk tsking with faux bewilderment about lingering inconsistensies in the way we respond to men and women.

It'll be a great day when so-called feminine characteristics -- grace, sensitivity, kindness -- are also equated with leadership.

It will be a great day when decisiveness, strength and good leadership are not considered "masculine" qualities at all, and when grace, sensitivity and kindness are not considered "feminine" qualities. The way society defines masculinity and femininity can be identified as the root problem of almost all gender rights issues throughout history.

"I have the body of a woman but the heart and (mind? stomach?) of a King." (One of the movies.) She's saying, "I'm tough enough to be the monarch in a war."

Yes,yes, I agree. But man/manliness means strong, forceful, decisive, yang. A strong leader needs a lot of yang. Feminine, as you point out, includes kindliness, grace...yin qualities. Bill Clinton was dripping with yin -- and he was a good leader, sometimes, and we never heard him referred to as manly, now did we, except in those areas we really don't want to talk about. FDR also had plenty of yin and he was a great leader. Merkel can be tough, ironlike, yang, can't she? Bhutto seems yinnish to me; we'll see how this goes this time around.

Eventually, manliness and femininity will become somewhat less anchored to biological gender; it's already happening, but slowly. Meantime, well, relax, maybe.

are a fantasy or a patriarchal plot.

Gracious is not any more feminine than assertive is masculine. Assertive is just assertive, gracious is just gracious. Either sex can have the quality; It has nothing to do with being a man or a woman.

.

The real Elizabeth said it too. In armor, astride a horse, in front of her assembled troops. In 1588, as the Spanish Armada approached England:

"My loving people,

We have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit our selves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my subjects; and therefore I am come amongst you, as you see, at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live and die amongst you all; to lay down for my God, and for my kingdom, and my people, my honour and my blood, even in the dust. I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which rather than any dishonour shall grow by me, I myself will take up arms, I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, for your forwardness you have deserved rewards and crowns; and We do assure you in the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean time, my lieutenant general¹ shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over those enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people."

To reference an earlier broadsheet post, QEI had skirt so stiff, it could stand up on its own.

Even when the skirt is an iron farthingale.

Just curious.

When kindness and those other adjectives don't make a man "faggy."

That was a very succint piece on Iron Ladies, I am glad to see it, there are many women who fall into the Class A catagory, I being one of them. I am much more to the softer side of the femals guiles. I know first hand some experiences I have seen first hand at the the Class B catagory, and oddly enough I think both sides get sidelined in their anaylis. It is one thing to be liked because you are nice, and a completely different thing to be liked based on competency. By the same token you can be a Class B type all the way, and get away with a lot more because it is viewed as "you can take care of yourself". I wonder if the pot of gold that is shined by these power types, would be as pleasant if the world had to depend on them for lets say, stuff you would want from the perspective of the Class A person.

The stakes are wrong, for women in power, to take advantage of the other style of women. Heck, I'd bet their are women that darnded well know they have been prejuidiced based upon, simply for the fact, that they come off as sweet, and mommyish even. Is that a crime? that is why when you walk into a card store on Mothers Day, there is always some goofy card, with a women, who is usualy zoftig in size, in a bubble gum pink bathrobe, with curlers and a rubber ducky saying, go ahead Mom, take care of yourself today, because you do a darn good job the rest the of the year.

By the same token, the Class B style women may take into stride, because she is successful that every woman could live up to her standard. It is a hard chip to have on either shoulder, but rest assured it is there, the two stero types have their differences well grounded in society fictional idea of woman hood. There are many areas that are neither black or white in the hiring place, and mind you, the Class A types, that try in vain to portray themselves as anything else, you are what you are, the Class B, just knows it.

Not to sound psychological, but the Class B type, is usually exhuding in confidence, and litterally smells ineptness, and despises it at it's root. So where does that get the Class A type in the job market, a trip to the employment office?

It is time, we open our eyes, just because a person is concieved as nice, dosen't mean they are dumb, and that is part of the implication. We need to recognize there are many hands that join to make our society a success.