Whistler, it sounds to me that you are getting your nickers in
a twist over a bit of semantics. Women are no more supervised
then are men.

If some word in the constitution upsets you, no doubt it could
be changed to "people". No need for a seperate female legislature.

As to having babies and having a career, sure women choose.

Fiona Woods, brilliant career - 6 kids

Gail Kelly, brilliant career - 4 kids

The list goes on. Just because some of you girls can't cope,
does not mean that others can't. That is a quesiton of your
personal failings, not of the system.

>>a female Governor-General, under male supervision<<

Pericles, Australia's men's legislatures appoint a Prime Minister to advise the Queen on the appointment of Governors-General.

> Women are no more supervised then are men.

Yabby, that's not what the Constitution says.
there are no women in Australia not under the supervision of men's legislatures.
the provision of women's legislatures would achieve what you claim.

Whistler, in that case the wording of the constitution can be
changed, to reflect the reality of today.

Anyone can stand for parliament, etc. etc. Genitals have nothing
to do with it.

For that you don't need a separate female legislature, just a peoples
legislature, where all compete and anyone can stand for office.

As the evidence shows, the present legislature is not a mens legislature, but littered with aspiring females. Fair enough.

Your little girls exclusive club is a pipe- dream, that is the reality.

What you are calling for is an insult to your gender.

> If some word in the constitution upsets you, no doubt it could
be changed to "people".

Yabby, a Constitutional amendment to the effect that what once were men's legislatures are now people's legislatures poses the question as to why women aren't allowed legislatures ever?

Whistler, I remind you that women are people and we have spent
alot of time and effort to get rid of discrimation based on race,
gender etc. Now you want to reintroduce it.

In sport we accept that we separate genders based on the fact
of a biological difference in strength etc.

There is no evidence that women are less intelligent then men,
so unless that is what you claim, no reason to discrimate
based on gender, when it comes to intellectual pursuits.

Hey whistler, what specific law changes do you think women would legislate for themselves? How would the laws for men and the laws for women differ?