r/PoursTea • u/Timbucktwo1230 š« Mod āļø • 7d ago
FeministTeaš©š»āšš©šæāāļøš š„¾ Core Sentiments
Former U.S. President Barack Obama frequently speaks on the value of women in political leadership, most recently reviving these thoughts in a September 21, 2026 talk at Salem State University.
During his discussion with presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, Obama stated that he often fantasized during his presidency about putting women in charge of every government for two years. He expressed a strong belief that while things wouldn't be perfect, "they'd be better".
Similarly Obama took a widely publicized stance at a private leadership event in Singapore in December 2019. He argued that women are "indisputably better" leaders than men and that increased female leadership would yield significant improvements in global living standards, child care and also in general outcomes.
A social media nod from singer Nancy Sinatra expressed her agreement with his perspective.
36
u/The_Ordinary_Mix 7d ago
Kamala could have just sat on that seat for 4 years straight doing absolutely nothing and we'd still be in a better state than we are with Trump.
8
7d ago
I know Kamala wasn't perfect and even unpreferred as the main dem candidate but I wish that was the timeline we were in so bad rn š« I just want to wake up one day before I die to a humanity united
1
u/beenknowntosuckcock 7d ago
What killed her chances was when she said wouldnt do anything different than Joe , while we all watched the genocide in Gaza. And at the time Trump was in complete lieing mode about future wars.
1
u/Ok_Photo_3023 1d ago
I think her campaign was dead long before that. Remember that in her democratic primary bid you could basically count the number of votes she got on one finger. We can all just admit she wasnt a good idea and move forward making better choices, thats absolutely not an endorsement of the current administration or the party that backs it.
1
u/Own_Employment_3866 3d ago
Dont be delusional there is no world where at least the palestine genocide wouldn't happen with the support and funding of the US.
13
u/Buddhas_Warrior 7d ago
He is not wrong!
5
u/clib 7d ago
Hate, bigotry, corruption, immorality, hypocrisy, stupidity and any other shitty trait does not have gender.The following people are women: Lauren Bobert, Caroline Levitt ,Pam Bondi ,Susan Collins ,Laura Loomer etc etc....
Will things be better under a government of those women?
3
u/Buddhas_Warrior 7d ago
While you're not wrong, people are people and all traits span the genders, so far, the majority of our government has been run by men. And how are things?? Maybe it's time to try something else.
2
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
Maybe we should look at their ideas instead of their genitals. Also, who is funding them. That one is pretty important.
1
u/TheLastHotstepper 5d ago
Terrible track record in the UK. Margaret Thatcher is still hated, Lizz Truss is our worst ever PM and Theresa May was just as corrupt as all the other Tory PMs we have been shackled to thanks to English voters.
1
u/ScrambledxEggzz 7d ago
Historically, women have just as much a nack to be poor leaders. Yes, most of the goverment is men, but over 50% of the country are women helping to put them there with their votes.
Saying that things are bad and attributing that to men ignores all the good things men have done in office.
2
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
Funny how the claim includes better education. Maybe if we were better educated, we would be more familiar with the not so great women leaders. Then we can look past this nonsense and see how the system produces such leaders regardless of what they are packing.
1
u/CalHudsonsGhost 2d ago
I get all the education I need from Reddit! Are any of these so called woman leaders that start wars on Reddit? s/
0
10
u/marthewarlock 7d ago
Why these men are afraid of women I'll never understand
-7
u/Null_Fungus 7d ago
We are afraid that their hormones might act up and they do something they are not responsible for
7
3
u/AlmanorDiscard 7d ago
Quiet, piggy.
1
u/Null_Fungus 7d ago
Resorting to personal attacks is exactly the kind of emotional behavior I am talking about.
1
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
As if men don't have hormones? Have you ever been around a woman?
1
u/Null_Fungus 3d ago
Has a man ever killed multiple people and not been held responsible due to hormones?
1
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
Don't think I've ever seen the hormone defense let alone it being used successfully. I can assure you, throughout the entirety of human history, plenty of murderers got away with their crimes.
1
u/Null_Fungus 3d ago
11/12 jurors think that hormones mean you are not responsible for murder. If that's true it would hard to trust a woman presidentĀ
1
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
Wow so according to you, 11 ppl and 1 woman is representative of the entirety of all 8 billion or so humans on the planet. Correct?
1
u/Null_Fungus 3d ago
If someone raises 1 million i'm going to assume a significant portion of society supports them.
1
u/m1stwalk3r 3d ago
1 million is not a lot of money. Get your head out of culture war bullshit pls.
1
u/Null_Fungus 3d ago
So you don't think a significant portion of society believes Lindsey Clancy is not responsible for murder?
→ More replies (0)0
5
u/diewitasmile 7d ago
I donāt agree or disagree. If we had better people that werenāt corrupt and had integrity is the better answer. Who gives a fuck if itās a man or woman, itās the quality of character thatās important.
4
u/MissAmberR 7d ago
The problem is finding somebody who wants to work for the greater good and not their own good
1
2
u/OkComfortable2089 7d ago
More propaganda to divide the people.Ā What he should have said is if we had more incorruptible people in office.Ā
1
12
7d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
5
u/Adventurous_Key_4854 7d ago
Diversity of appearances only apparently
0
7d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
2
u/Adventurous_Key_4854 7d ago
Diversity of thought.
1
7d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/Adventurous_Key_4854 7d ago
The emphasis on diversity is only brought up when discussing two things primarily: gender and race.
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
Diversity is neither a strength or a weakness. So long as there aren't barriers that artificially hold people back, if some areas don't have diversity while other do, then there is no issues.
For example, Nordic countries are seen as the most gender equal in the world, and the jobs that women and men choose of their own volution has widened, not increased. This means a reduction of gender diversity in the workplace but that is neither good or bad.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (51)1
2
3
u/tom1944 7d ago
Mackenzie Scott would be perfect. Another billionaire but one that is not out to be richer but looks out for the needs of society
1
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
She also didn't earn her wealth.
1
u/tom1944 6d ago edited 6d ago
She was an original founding member of Amazon along with her ex husband. You have no idea about the importance of her efforts and success.
She negotiated the first major contract at Amazon. She did many other important work prior to leaving in 1996 to raise the kids. Plus she only received 4% of the company in the divorce.
To say she didnāt earn it is reflective of your idiocy.
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
She got $38 billion from her divorce. Glad I could clear that up for you.
1
u/tom1944 6d ago
Which she earned. Especially since it was only 4% of a business she was a key person in establishing.
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
If you earned it, then you'd have it and you wouldn't get it in a divorce. You're making zero sense.
1
u/tom1944 6d ago
Nonsense. They were married and formed the company together. She played an important role and then left to raise their children. Are you such a weak man that you cannot see that.
4%. Itās foolish to think that was not earned.
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
Personal attacks aren't going to make you less wrong. The fact remains, that if she earned it she would've already owned those resources/value. That she was awarded it in a divorce proves you wrong.
1
u/tom1944 6d ago
So when they started the company she should have just insisted ownership and left with 50%. She was a co-founder
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
Hmmm...not on the list of self-made women billionaires. I wonder why?
→ More replies (0)
3
u/Burgerboy380 7d ago
Based on what exactly?
0
u/Affectionate_Lab_131 7d ago
Other female leaders.
3
u/Burgerboy380 7d ago
Like mary tudor? Or Margaret thatcher? Catherine the great? Cleopatra?
→ More replies (5)
3
u/Daddygamer84 The Timeline Sucks 7d ago
I absolutely support women in leadership roles. But let's not get it twisted: women are just as capable of cruelty. Just look at Kristi Noem.
6
u/Expensive_Range7204 7d ago edited 7d ago
That is complete bullshit, there have been women leaders who have been awful.
I think on average women actually have started more wars then men.
Its not a man bad woman good thing.
Its about finding good leaders who care about normal people, and getting stucktures inplace to avoid corruption that allow the elites to own the goverment.
There can be good leaders among both women and men, the reason countrys like the US is struggling is corruption.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/BovaFett74 7d ago
Iām 52 years old, and I said when I was around 30 this country needed a female President.
Hillary wasnāt it. Neither was Harris. They both just had too much weight from prior administrations.
I would be thrilled to NO END would a female dethrone this piece of shit. Thrilled. Absolutely brilliantly thrilled.
I said what I said. Fuck this guy, period. No leader of anything but his own ass. And Iām not saying that persons name. At all.
Yāall get who it is.
4
u/diewitasmile 7d ago
I would vote for AOC in a heartbeat. The smear campaign on her by republicans has been insane tho.
1
u/Sad_Wishbone_1524 7d ago
Meh Iāve been a democrat my whole life, and she aināt it. It would be a major fumble to let her through the primary. I think about Jackie Robinson and how he was the perfect upstanding citizen. He left zero room for personal scandal because he knew everyone would be looking for it. I think the first female president would have to be similar and it would open the door for others.
Unfortunately, the Lindsay Clancy trial likely set back this becoming a reality in the near future.1
u/diewitasmile 7d ago
For a woman candidate I prefer her leagues over Kamala or Hillary.
2
u/Sad_Wishbone_1524 7d ago
Itās marginal at best. Sheās made herself look unintelligent many times.
5
u/Solid_Mud2025 7d ago
Every female candidate will be saddled with the weight of something else. Not saying itās not deserved sometimes, just that itās the playbook. Theyāll do it to candidates that seem squeaky clean too. Only saying this so we can be ready for it.
2
u/thesanguineocelot Out & Proud š³ļøāš 7d ago
I mean, neither of them would have been ideal, but either would have been mountains better than Trump.
1
1
2
2
u/Affectionate_Lab_131 7d ago
Too bad that the USA chose trump over a woman TWICE! When will we learn?
1
u/Carnal_Decay 7d ago
The women put in that position are worse than Trump.
1
u/Affectionate_Lab_131 7d ago
No
1
u/Carnal_Decay 7d ago
Epstein lover Clinton and DEI hire Harris.
1
u/Affectionate_Lab_131 7d ago edited 7d ago
Hillary did not know Epstein. Harris is a highly intelligent woman. I can see why some fear her.
1
u/Carnal_Decay 7d ago
Explain the fraud case against Clinton's and their numerous mentions in the files.
Also, kamela is a joke. So is Trump. So is your entire political landscape
1
u/The_Ordinary_Mix 7d ago
Trump is mentioned more times than any other person in the Epstein files yet here you are defending him.
1
u/Affectionate_Lab_131 7d ago
Bill Clinton is not Hillary Clinton. They were the most investigated couple in US history and nothing stuck. Not a darn thing. The same people (mostly Republicans) who investigated them investigated Donald trump and shut down his foundation, charity, and multiple businesses for fraud. So these investigators knew what they were doing.
Kamala Harris was a top student in school. She was the deputy District Attorney in one of California's largest counties. She was the DA fir San Francisco. The AG for one of the largest states in the country by population. And was a US Senator. In every roll she was elected and did an excellent job.
1
u/Carnal_Decay 7d ago
You're actually hilarious. There's no point in talking to you. Have a good one mate :)
1
u/NeverNeededAlgebra 7d ago
Literally the least knowledgable take imaginable.
The Republican cult hasn't put up a candidate in decades that would even touch the dirt on either of their shoes. I didn't like Kamala, yet she would have been lightyears beyond anything that embarrassing cult of retards have.
1
2
2
u/universalpoet 6d ago
As long as they're not Republican/conservative /maga/blue dog/ anti science women I can see that.
0
u/SirSafe6070 3d ago
ah, so basically, women yes but only the women I like. how progressive!
1
u/universalpoet 3d ago
I wouldn't support someone running the government just because she's a woman. It's more about political ideology and not denying scientific facts for me.
2
u/Ancient-Worm 2d ago
This is sexist, actually. Towards everyone. Having a Y chromosome doesn't make you evil, and women are complex individuals with the capacity to do bad things.
5
3
u/FrankFankledank 7d ago
Women aren't exactly magically incapable of selling out, look at Pam Bondi or Miram Adelson, but less gatekeeping out of the seniors club all around would be swell.
2
1
u/beenknowntosuckcock 7d ago
Yes , but there are exceptions ,Miriam Addelson cones to mind. Her billions are what is causing a lot if the worlds problems at the moment.
2
u/Solid_Mud2025 7d ago
Her cult membership is a big factor though. But yes, women are human and fallible. However, that isnāt the point of discussion.
1
1
u/greyone75 7d ago
He should just stay quiet at this point. I know people love Obama and admire him but itās not common for the previous president so openly criticize the current administration and divide the voter population even more.
1
u/AlmanorDiscard 7d ago
I know people love Obama and admire him but itās not common for the previous president so openly criticize the current administration and divide the voter population even more.
He never mentioned Trump.
1
1
u/Sufficient-Bid1279 7d ago
I mean women can be narc sociopaths as well but generally yes, I agree with this sentiment.
1
u/Youbettereatthatshit 7d ago
Queen Victoria over saw major expansion of British colonialism. Mary Tudor started the War of the roses and executed countless Protestants.
Iād definitely vote for a female president so long as she was the right person, but the point is flat out wrong. Women have been the cause of immeasurable suffering as well
1
u/Sufficient-Bid1279 7d ago
Yeah I get it. Women can be just as terrible as men. Personally, I have had better experiences with women mangers than men. The men were narc sociopaths that led me to have a mental health breakdown. I am slightly biased.
1
u/Youbettereatthatshit 7d ago
Iām mixed. Iām a guy and have had a total of two female bosses in my 15 years out of college and both were while I was in the military. Both wore the regret of never having kids on their sleeve. One was much more sympathetic and compassionate when it came to family issues but ran a good department overall and the other was very coarse, belittled family obligations and yelled frequently. Iāve only been ripped into by one boss for my job and that was the female commander.
On average, my male bosses have had a much tighter standard deviation around expected behavior where both female bosses were both the nicest yet effective, and the meanest boss Iāve ever had.
Iāve had three jobs outside of college and donāt really think about any other boss/colleague who werenāt friends, but I still hate that woman
1
u/nyar77 6d ago
Never worked in an office full of women have you?
1
u/Sufficient-Bid1279 6d ago
I have but the women I worked with were the best leaders . Thatās just my experience . The men led me to the psych ward . I know not everyoneās situation is the same but the men I have worked for nearly killed me. I still have trauma Iām working on around those narcs
1
u/nyar77 6d ago
Most toxic offices I ever worked in were primarily female staffed.
1
u/Sufficient-Bid1279 6d ago
That hasnāt been my experience personally . Females have propelled me and supported me very positively in my career growth .
1
u/Efficiency-Holiday 7d ago
Yeah as an Italian I need to call bulshit lol.
Then I don't love this rethoric, I think it's kinda paternalizing. Women have the same virtues and vices than men have.
1
1
u/Pinglewingle 7d ago
I don't agree or disagree, but i'm always for supporting womens rights so why not
1
u/Pygmy_Nuthatch 7d ago
Democrats should be killing it in the United States then. They must be at an all-time-high popularity and success.
1
u/Dirtyshopper999 7d ago
If you put a qualified one maybe it can happen. But not AOC. She could give a worse debate than Kamala.
1
1
u/T_J_Rain 7d ago
That would just upset too many men, by showing up their gross incompetence.
Which is why, in the USA, it simply won't happen in the forseeable future.
1
1
1
u/IllustriousPea6950 7d ago
Should we have more equality and accessibility to leadership positions? Yes.
Are they objectively better? No. We are diverse humans, not archetypes. Iām so sick of sexism being solved with even more sexism.
1
1
1
u/generation_fish 6d ago
Meaningless virtue signalling drivel. For example, an analysis of historical leaders of nations who were women, when compared to men, showed that they were involved in war more than men were, and that includes initiating war. Further, education already is largely controlled by women, and we are getting terrible results.
1
u/kugo-phio 6d ago
People who think we need a female president not because of any actual reason or policies but because itās a female president are WHY we donāt have a female president weāre 0-2 because yāall are putting the worst imaginable candidate up for vote
1
u/ScreamingNinja 4d ago
I mean. Hillary wasnt the best candidate but Kamala... yeesh. But seriously, drop the identity politics and find the best person. I couldnt care less what color or sexuality they are. I thought Pete Buttigige was pretty damn good when he did his fox news sit dow. (I didnt watch the whole thing because im not gonna taint my eyes with fox news, but i saw some clips). But because hes gay im sure they wont run him, hell Kamala specifically skipped him over for VP because of it.
1
u/Sugarcoatedgumdrop 6d ago
We already subsidize women in powerful roles and nothing has changed. This is irrelevant.
1
u/pickingbrains321 6d ago
Yeeeah, I've seen plenty of women in government to know this would not be the case.
1
1
u/1Tacochucker 5d ago
Women fail at character and leadership at the same rate as men. I was a naval officer and that became evident as more women became commanding officers and ended up doing the same shit as men (sleeping with enlisted, fired for incompetence, or lack of faith in command, running over bouys, literally "tyranny" at seas, etc.). Obama is wrong this time.
1
u/ScreamingNinja 4d ago
Seriously. Theres plenty of women leaders in this country that have done just as shitty a job as men. The problem is, at least in america, its generally a certain type of person who wants to be president, and its usually not the type of person you'd want in power. Not always, but usually.
1
u/KeyCondition5104 5d ago
A prominent historical study by economists Oeindrila Dube and S.P. Harish, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, analyzed European monarchies between 1480 and 1913 and found that polities led by queens were roughly 27% to 39% more likely to participate in or wage wars compared to those led by kings.
- Married Queens as Aggressors: Married queens were significantly more likely to initiate offensive wars and fight alongside allies. Marriage provided them with trusted domestic cooperation, combined financial resources, and spousal military alliances, increasing their overall state capacity to launch campaigns.
- Unmarried Queens as Targets: Unmarried queens were more frequently on the receiving end of military conflict. Neighboring male sovereigns frequently perceived solo female rulers as weak or vulnerable targets, prompting opportunistic attacks that forced these queens into defensive wars.
1
1
u/Apprehensive_Back_35 5d ago
I agree totally however, he's ONCE AGAIN missing the picture. Pass laws man, when you have power! Dont sit on hands. Expand Scotus dont play fair for the right with a you go I got crap spin. Pass laws like legislatures are supposed too, and stop waiting for the perfect moment to pass one thing that might help the every day ppl
1
u/Ambitious_Article864 5d ago
I donāt know about the the latter three, but for war, there are studies showing that female leaders are just as prone to conflict as male leaders. The only differences noted were the reasons for the conflicts.
1
u/John_Greed 5d ago
Women literally raise our children but I guess they need a military, a treasury, and nukes? Okay, I guess.
1
1
u/SinesPi 5d ago
So I'm no expert on the British Empire... but weren't Queens Elizabeth and Victoria presiding over a significant portion of the expansion of said Empire?
1
u/LifeConsideration981 4d ago
Head of state, not government. If you want a British head of gov, use Margaret Thatcher or Theresa May.
1
1
u/Corlegan 3d ago
There are two things Obama and Trump have in common, beating back the most qualified (including by them) woman ever.
But that won't be popular. Still true.
1
1
u/reddit-user-1877 3d ago
Yall supported a women that violently choked and killed her own 3 children because she was "sad", and you want a women to have access to the nuclear launch codes....that being said the only correct choice for a female president would be Candice Owen
1
1
1
u/Advice-Question 3d ago
What a sexist thing to say. But I guess itās the correct sexism, so itās allowed.
1
1
u/SuperDuperOrk 3d ago
That i can agree to. Too many old men have control.Ā Even then there are peopel who shouldn't be in control in general, but the women who have proven to have strong leadership skills and have respect for the people they lead should be in leadership roles now.Ā
I know women can play hard ball, even now Japan's Prime Minister who is a woman, Sanae Takaichi, is taking on the UN and making demands.Ā I need to read more into the article but this post reminded me of her.Ā
It just sucks how hard it is to unite to make these things happen.Ā We need more women because thats a human person. We can't succeed with out them and we can't truly be happy with out their guidance.Ā
I just wish we can find women who stand out so well from the crowd that speaks to everyoneĀ and she treats everyone they are part of a solution. Thats what Obama did, he made everyone part of a solution than a problem. I'm sure there were women who were liek this and got ignored on the basis of being a woman. Which is bullshit. Reality sucks but we get older and that means more chances to bring more women in.Ā
1
1
1
u/Dense_Cut7072 3d ago
I can promise women would not fix that problem. Now younger men maybe. Bring back gentlemen and ladies and a lot would change.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Adventurous-Sort-808 2d ago
Didnāt he win the presidency over a woman? Why didnāt he just let her win?
1
u/tuhijatambien 2d ago
I live in a country with a female president and several female governors. Don't ask which country.Ā
Of course they implement "gender sensitive" policies, of course!
Murders raised, kidnappings raised, corruption raised, inflation raised, debt raised, censorship is raising... But, but, but, but hey, look, butterflies.Ā
1
u/HyoukaYukikaze 2d ago
Historically, women is charge overwhelmingly dwarf men in terms of starting wars, so... no?
There is a number of explanations for this phenomena (including, of course, blaming men), but facts are what they are.
1
u/Ill-Description3096 2d ago
Or people can be good or bad leaders regardless of sex? If they are indisputably better regardless then surely he would vote for a nut like MTG for President over a male Dem.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/vangogh1313 1d ago
War is the very reason you have a right to say it. Moreso the men and women who defended it and still protect it.
1
-3
7d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
2
u/The_Ordinary_Mix 7d ago
so what's your excuse for Trump starting a war with Iran causing 18 of our service members to die
→ More replies (4)1
u/Fireheart1990 7d ago
So what all the MALE leaders do?
3
u/uncle_creamy69 7d ago
Yeah itās not the gender, itās the flaws of the types of people who want to be politicians.
1
1
0
u/Outside_Mess_Y2Yay 6d ago
Ummm... We all know the jokes about women (that women also laugh at). Therefore, hard pass on the thought of more women in government. Also, by definition, politicians are political liars. So the right answer is "It's gonna be worse" or "No difference." Lol
0
u/SirSafe6070 3d ago
Bold thing to say when Hillary Clinton was one of the biggest supporters of the Iraqi war, even after most people admitted it was wrong.
Also ... sure, you can say anything when you can't prove it. What did Hitchens say about that again?
ā¢
u/Timbucktwo1230 š« Mod āļø 7d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/IKOZeGZvUHuzGjUZst