Full Version: Women at the state legislature
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, women will hold 1,660 state legislative seats this upcoming 2005 session. That equates to roughly 22.5% of all legislative seats.
For election info, click here.
For a map of each individual state, click here.
Questions for debate.
1.)Does this percentage show that women have finally gained equal status with men politically at the state level?
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
For election info, click here.
For a map of each individual state, click here.
Questions for debate.
1.)Does this percentage show that women have finally gained equal status with men politically at the state level?
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
1.)Does this percentage show that women have finally gained equal status with men politically at the state level?
I don't think so, not at the state level here in California at least. Even though California has a higher percentage than average (30%), there don't seem to be a lot of women in positions of leadership within the California legislature. In California, that's where the power and status lies in state government. Interestingly enough, three of the most powerful women in national politics all come from California - Sens. Feinstein and Boxer and Rep. Pelosi. I could add a fourth with Rep. Jane Harmon to that list as well. But, that's on the national scene, not much on the state scene here.
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
There is probably still some cultural things going on, but I think mostly it's an evolutionary process and takes some time to work one's way up the ladder especially in state politics. Once again looking at California as a model, there seems to be a trend of "jump-starting" particularly brilliant women who emerge in politics into the national level right away. That's what happened in the case of Diane Feinstein who went from Mayor of San Francisco to running for Governor and losing to running for Senator and winning. Now, she's virtually unbeatable in this state (unless she runs against Arnold).
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
Huh? Is this one of those tongue in cheek kinds of things?
I don't think so, not at the state level here in California at least. Even though California has a higher percentage than average (30%), there don't seem to be a lot of women in positions of leadership within the California legislature. In California, that's where the power and status lies in state government. Interestingly enough, three of the most powerful women in national politics all come from California - Sens. Feinstein and Boxer and Rep. Pelosi. I could add a fourth with Rep. Jane Harmon to that list as well. But, that's on the national scene, not much on the state scene here.
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
There is probably still some cultural things going on, but I think mostly it's an evolutionary process and takes some time to work one's way up the ladder especially in state politics. Once again looking at California as a model, there seems to be a trend of "jump-starting" particularly brilliant women who emerge in politics into the national level right away. That's what happened in the case of Diane Feinstein who went from Mayor of San Francisco to running for Governor and losing to running for Senator and winning. Now, she's virtually unbeatable in this state (unless she runs against Arnold).
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
Huh? Is this one of those tongue in cheek kinds of things?
QUOTE(nebraska29 @ Dec 6 2004, 10:33 PM)
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, women will hold 1,660 state legislative seats this upcoming 2005 session. That equates to roughly 22.5% of all legislative seats.
For election info, click here.
For a map of each individual state, click here.
Questions for debate.
1.)Does this percentage show that women have finally gained equal status with men politically at the state level?
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
For election info, click here.
For a map of each individual state, click here.
Questions for debate.
1.)Does this percentage show that women have finally gained equal status with men politically at the state level?
2.)With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
3.)Why does Montana and Texas have a high percentage of female office holders?
I am responding to question #2: With women outnumbering men numerically, why isn't the percentage of female state legislative office holders higher?
I think the answer is simple. Most women at the age where they might enter politics-- have kids at home. Their focus is primarily on raising their kids. Many are either stay at home moms or working part time. Being in politics requires the ability to be very flexible in your schedule and when you have kids at home, that is just not possible. I do see more women entering politics after their kids have gone off to college and this makes sense.
in response to #3:
from vague to vivid:
because montana is the biggest state which borders the US' northern border, and texas bein' the biggest borderin' the southern border.
they both have a completely opposite climate (and just about everything else), yet they share the a very important similarity. they border other countries, and they are huge. all that space, would encourage people to spread away from eachother. and through the nature of the two opposing forces.. you're left with high concentrations of people in very few cities.... and those cities.. bein' spread apart very far from one anotha.
the two opposin' climates in montana/texas encourage lots of sex (via frustration passed down by the snow/frigid cold (montana) and humidity/extreme heat (texas). (i won't elaborate on why they do, it's self explanatory)
so since sex is encouraged to such a high degree (I know this for a fact, as the young teenagers have extremely high sexual partner counts.. e.g. 16 yo female in houston, 6-8 partners is average)... what you end up w/.. is acknowledgement by males.. that females are the superior (which they are in general)... thus givin' the two states... the highest female male/female ratio in legislature.
from vague to vivid:
because montana is the biggest state which borders the US' northern border, and texas bein' the biggest borderin' the southern border.
they both have a completely opposite climate (and just about everything else), yet they share the a very important similarity. they border other countries, and they are huge. all that space, would encourage people to spread away from eachother. and through the nature of the two opposing forces.. you're left with high concentrations of people in very few cities.... and those cities.. bein' spread apart very far from one anotha.
the two opposin' climates in montana/texas encourage lots of sex (via frustration passed down by the snow/frigid cold (montana) and humidity/extreme heat (texas). (i won't elaborate on why they do, it's self explanatory)
so since sex is encouraged to such a high degree (I know this for a fact, as the young teenagers have extremely high sexual partner counts.. e.g. 16 yo female in houston, 6-8 partners is average)... what you end up w/.. is acknowledgement by males.. that females are the superior (which they are in general)... thus givin' the two states... the highest female male/female ratio in legislature.
in reply to #1:
no. and they never will. atleast 26 states will always have a higher male mf count in legislature.
why? because women are the believers (expanding the ideas).. and men go out and present them... and enforce them...
example: i believe it was a "rumor" that hilary was president.. and not bill.. yet most view bill as bein' a "good" president....
and women (even males) can't effectively "believe" (in order to create/expand laws etc blah blah).... while they're at a JOB. this needs to be done at home... in a natural setting... where such ideas are relayed to her man... thru their relationship
no. and they never will. atleast 26 states will always have a higher male mf count in legislature.
why? because women are the believers (expanding the ideas).. and men go out and present them... and enforce them...
example: i believe it was a "rumor" that hilary was president.. and not bill.. yet most view bill as bein' a "good" president....
and women (even males) can't effectively "believe" (in order to create/expand laws etc blah blah).... while they're at a JOB. this needs to be done at home... in a natural setting... where such ideas are relayed to her man... thru their relationship
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.