Running the World
This paper shall outline on the feminist commitment to social constructivism which shall be detailed from both literary article by Francis Fukuyama’s and Anne Tickner. This paper shall outline both f this literary materials to be able to analyze if women can be compatible rulers in the world of politics. This shall draw a definite conclusion which shall be outlaid from both the authors of this fine literary material which debates the competency of women as rulers other than the men dominated political sphere.
Women and the Evolution of World Politics
In this masterly literary article authored by Francis Fukuyama which is well research and argued from a primatologist point of view, it articulate that from the evolution of politics men have dominated this sphere and they have affiliated it with wrangles and chaos leading to loss lives in negotiable situation due to egoism. Further more Fukuyama exemplifies that from the primatologist point of view and other analytical facets which he has complied to accentuate his argument, he documents that female even in the animal kingdom are usually very peaceful and they act as mediator between quarrelling male factors. Here Fukuyama articulates that women are more peaceful as he compares the alpha male aggressiveness with that of chimpanzees from GombePark in Tanzania. Here he notes that “only male chips and male human usually have the penchant of forming murdering peers,” he further exemplifies that it is rare to find female in such coalition of confrontations. However, he dictates that men should be put in the system to reinforce security against those civilizations that would not adapt this feminist kind of rule.
Why Women Can’t Run the World: International Politics According to Francis Fukuyama
This scholarly literary publication that is authored by Ann Tickner is mostly a critic of the article by Francis Fukuyama’s “Women and the Evolution of World Politics.” The authored question the capabilities of women as rulers rather than men. Further more the aspects of the feminist loyalty to social constructivism are also addressed and competency questioned. The author laments that Fukuyama views are conservative and thus his claims only deviate from more important feminine matters based on sympathetic attitudes subdue to politics. Tickner notes that “Fukuyama efforts in the theory only offers effects which would help keep women from politics.” Further more Tickner elucidate that Fukuyama only centralizes on the recent event of wars which have encompassed the western civilization and addresses them as equality means which should justify women participation in politics in full force.
The debate which is being outlaid by both of these authors is the competencies of women as rulers and dominators in politics. The commitments which can be achieved through feminism are the main issues that the two authors are in debate about. Fukuyama details in his article that women can make best leaders more than men as they are peaceful and reason matters through, he further exemplify the rule of man from a sociobiological point of view. This he aligns with the aggressiveness of the dominance by men like those of chimpanzees and how they settle their differences through warfare to determine who is the strongest. This facets Fukuyama notes that claims loss of lives while women have a spot of reasoning which would determine matters through mediation instead of physical or combat confrontation. Tinckner argues that women have little knowledge on how to handle matters when they are pressing and thus would prove to target to male dominated civilization. This she attempt to refute the claim of Fukuyama as just equality as he articulate that women dominated civilization should be securely reinforced by men. Thus making men subject to providing security and this bias the whole concept of women being dominance and thus only create the notion of equality which is practiced all over the world as there are women politicians.
Both Sides Claim Bases
Fukuyama sounds that women can prove more peaceful leaders than men and gives the best thesis for his article facts based on the primatologist angle. This he articulates that women can make more peaceful ruler than men through the concept that women are not prone to indulge in egoism manners of confrontation but rather through negotiation and mediation on contentious issues. This he articulate that men approach on aggression is with a more powerful aggression creating chaos and damage which could have been withheld with dialogue or reasoning.
Tickner criticizes this saying that women can never make good leaders due to the gender structures and the aggressiveness in the sphere of politics. Tickner further notes that Fukuyama ideology is bias and bases it arguments on equality which is already taking place and there are women presidents in the world. However, complete take over by women would prove disastrous as men would rebel against women and then make alliance and rebels against other women leaders making the world a rowdy place filled with chaos and no governance. She notes that using men for security particularly show that women are weak and cannot handle some affairs by themselves as they are mainly dominated by men. In the same context she argues that civilization dominated by men would attempt to oppress civilization mostly dominated by women.
Appropriate convincing theoretical framework
The most appropriate convincing theoretical framework which is convincing in this study is the Tickner theory. This theory best exemplify how Fukuyama only attempt to incorporate which is already there equality. This I found convincing because in Fukuyama theory it all goes back to men being the protector apart from being accused of egoism in confronting matters. Although the concept of women being more peaceful, this I clearly refute because women are very emotional and they tend to reason through emotion and this could have dire effects if they were allowed to lead.
Both of these literary articles hold a probable and impressive thesis concerning women rule and dominance in the world of politics. They offer angles which leadership should be viewed and executed. However, because of the current hostility in the world filled with terrorist attacks and threats then the aggressiveness of the male is essential to mitigate these facets. Thus women rulers would be less effective in ruling a man dominated world however peaceful they may be assumed or are occasionally.