Women in Society

All forty four U.S. Presidents have been men, and it appears if we get a new president in January it will also be a man. When you think of a president, boss, or other types of people in power you usually think of a man. It makes sense because it's all we've ever really known. For a majority of history, women couldn't hold positions of power. They were looked at as inferior to men. Over time, this stereotype has faded and now men and women are looked at as equals. However, we still don't see many women holding leadership positions. I think that although we view women as equal people, we may not see them as equal leaders. It might not be because we think they can't lead, but rather we've fallen into the commonplace world of only having men as leaders. Some people may have a fear of voting for a women as President. In my opinion, things probably would be different with a female president. However, this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, especially when you look at how things aren't exactly perfect with our current government leaders. When women run for office such as president, they often try to act more like a man; less emotion, more strength, and try to seem as powerful as possible. This could be part of their problem. If they would just act like themselves, they may get more of a following. Society already has their own perceptions of them beforehand, so there's no point in trying to act like someone they aren't. They can't be exactly the same as a male leader, just as a man couldn't lead in the same way a woman could. As seen in the article about Hilary Clinton, the press was sort of making fun of her emotions. A man probably would not have cried in that situation, exposing one of the differences the American public would see with a female president. I liked the quote in The Iron Lady where Meryl Streep said, "I have done battle every single day of my life". This shows that although Margaret had never been to war, she was a fighter and she would fight for her country. The man from the military was talking down to her, but she showed him that she could hold just as much power as any man. I think the title "Iron Lady" is a testament to the strength and fortitude that Thatcher displayed, almost to say that she was "tough as nails". Although society looks differently at women as leaders, they could possibly offer alternative views on issues and improve certain deficiencies in government. I don't believe that society's gender stereotypes will ever be gone, but courageous women can work to improve their images in the public eye.

Can You Learn Anything From a Void?

During the Holocaust, numerous atrocities were committed both by ruthless and cruel Nazis, and those non-Jews who were just following orders. You could say that the ones committing the murders at the concentration camps were "just doing their jobs", but you'd think human decency would overrule these horrific commands. Nonetheless, most of the concentration camp workers followed the orders and followed through with the executions. Are these people worthy of being convicted of murder? In my opinion, they shouldn't be held completely accountable for the murders, but they should be given some sort of penalty for their actions. They are only partially responsible, as they were told to kill, they didn't necessarily want to kill anyone. However, if they truly didn't want to commit any atrocities they should have refused to go through with the executions. This is much easier said than done, as they would probably be threatened to be killed themselves if they didn't follow orders. It really makes you wonder if their time at the concentration camps was almost as much torture and suffering as those who were sent to work at the camps. Now they obviously didn't face the same amount of physical labor and fatigue, but they were most likely emotionally drained from everything they saw and everything they were forced to do. Their consciences were probably torn apart, as they faced many internal struggles on what decisions to make. It sounds really difficult to feel any sympathy for a person who executes thousands of innocent people, but can we honestly say we wouldn't have done the same in their shoes? The account that strikes me the most is that of Dr. Capesius. People he knew from home stared him in the eye and he had to decide whether or not they live or die. It is disheartening to hear about a man sending his own acquaintances to the gas chamber, and I'm sure it was something he struggled to deal with. When Macbeth goes to kill Duncan, he feels a sense of guilt as well. It isn't until Lady Macbeth pushes him to go through with it that he actually commits the crime. As for the "innocent" onlookers, they should also be held accountable for the crimes in some way as they didn't do anything to stop the inhumane deeds. They didn't actually kill anyone, but they didn't save any one's life. Just like the one's committing the murders, they too must have had guilty consciences as they did nothing to prevent the killings. I think the only way to combat the evils would be to work together with others to stop the evil-doing. It would be much more difficult to tackle the power alone. It seems possible as a group to stop the officials in charge. It would take a lot of courage to go against the regime, and it would take a completely moral conscience to do so.