In the history of humanity since ancient time the most powerful civilization on the planet has never had a woman in charge while they were the most powerful civilization on the planet.
Wu Zetian and any number of Qedar queens. (Or the other ones already cited in the comments.) You have lean really hard on 'most powerful civilization' to avoid an awful lot of women.
If your point is that she didn't go to war I guess you and I determine the success of a nation by different standards. She ruled during one of the most prosperous times in England's history. Hence why she remembered and celebrated to this day as a great leader.
So to make that grand statement is in fact your own sexism. I'm not a psychologist but when your first response to people not wanting to elect Kamala is well women have never run a country when it's at it peak implies women can't run in country when it's peak. That's your biased showing through.
You are seeing what you want to see. I said 5 million dems won't vote for a woman, and that is consistent with the fact that no nation put a woman in charge while they are powerful since ancient times. I never said that was a good thing.
But it has nothing to do with whether a country is at its peak of power. There is really no way to make that statement since women make 1% or less of all the world rulers.
If you are saying that was not what you meant-then okay. My bad I misinterpret your motives. So that circle's us right back to we live in a patriarchal society that does not like to put women in positions of power. Things are changing. Mexico's a good example. They're just not changing fast enough.
Women rulers maked up 1% or less of the rulers throughout history. Rulers were rarely elected most of them obtain their power by birthright or conquest. Thus most weren't chosen. And since we live in a patriarchal world women were never chosen-ever. If they obtain power it was through birthright.
That would mean Queen Victoria. That's when England had its biggest reach. But you're going to discount that and say she wasn't in charge. So let's get to what you're implying. Women make terrible rulers. Which is ridiculous. The truth is women rarely rule because we live in a patriarchal world.
The distinction between head of state and head of government is not at all thin
It's the difference between real power and being in charge of ceremonies
Comments
It's the difference between real power and being in charge of ceremonies
Anyway, are we sure we're the most powerful these days?
Also, I submit that it's debatable whether we're a "civilization."