Democrats, Communists, Socialists, Conservatives etc
Lust for another goods/resources often leads negotiative tactics, who within which party is exhibiting what methods of negotiation? If looked closely every group within any of the above named movements has all types of personalities which is often driven by what who is prepared to stand for ie meaning whose resources has a valid stand over the other and who is willing to implement is what determines a successful campaign. What means are being used in achieving success?
Every family has all of these personalities. To achieve consensus it helps to understand what consequences follow the activities taken. As an older child in the family I consider that It is counter productive to restrict my siblings which includes my cousins and distant relatives who are codependent in achieving a greater good. To achieve the word Us I have always taken decisions that many don't understand. If I ever saw myself as a girl rather than the eldest I will fail my siblings as well as myself hence the characteristics that most consider being particular to being a boy. Is cowardice or bravery a trait that only boys possess or should it be an attribute of a character that takes up principles/decisions that determine the outcome of situations?
Attributing bravery to be exhibited only by boys is detrimental to any family or society. In cases of extreme situations where one is placed constantly between life and death, where in history wars and in current times the wellbeing of a family is in the hands of girls "considering a scenario where all the children are girls" what should the parents do?
On the downside what in the past happened was girls were traded as commodity in order to sustain a family, even looking at the current Queen of England Q. Elisabeth 2, where are the boys? So does that mean that the Royal family is of no use? I suppose Her Royal Highness stands as an example of what leadership demanded of her as a person, maybe that was what was demanded from Diana too? however Prince Charles isn't his father and neither is Diana of same temperament nor was she the head of the family so her views on how to be wasn't in her hands, should she die under someone's shadow? Isn't she a person in he own right? I don't think that she didn't perform under the scope of her duties and capacity, having a dushbag for a husband shouldn't determine her life as a woman. Who is an example better than her? Is her desire to be loved such a huge imposition? Any way lets me not start a war over spilt milk which would be very appropriate as an example to other women what happens when a girl is subjected to rules of keeping up an image rather than developing her own identity.
In the stand of being a child regardless of who is who I presume everyone has a right to their own name and in moments it complements as well as in moments may seem as demeaning the family name, as usual only time can tell who was wrong or right.
A friend of mine wrote to me "for a woman you've got more balls than most men I know"
My answer is this "Presidents or CEO's who have been removed "disrespected" from office were always considered cowards/indecisive by their colleagues and staff which is why it is said The Devil wears Prada "meaning prays or pride" as they are feared for they do what others think but wouldn't for fear of being scorned.
At this point in the worlds economy chicken heartedness would not bring anyone any good. New terrains need to be conquered/explored and that requires kahunas even if it means someone needs to get prosthesis .
Love ya'll, God Bless.
By the way when it's said God save the Queen it means "please don't kill the woman in me" due to the demands of being on the post of service. A Queen is also a woman and her husband can loose his erection for not being able to see the difference between what she has to do and what she needs.
No comments:
Post a Comment