Think some more about how a 100% white male congress might have a negative impact on campus and on the nature and practice of democracy on campus. If you're focused on gender differences in interpretations of Mason's Manual then you're (maybe intentionally?) missing the point.

It would be interesting to see the statistics for members of student congress broken down by major to see which majors are most represented. I'm guessing this wouldn't be representative of the UNC population either.

The only reason I felt a need to comment on this article was because I /was/ one of the "leaders" mentioned, and I feel as though you may be misunderstanding what I was getting at. I do not think that there is any sort of gerrymandering involved here. What I meant when I said this was, quite simply, that there is a flaw in the way individuals seek seats in that, for some reason, we do not have a representative population seeking seats in Congress. This is a flaw in the system insofar as we, as a body, are not appealing equally to our constituents, which probably means that we aren't representing them totally fairly.

And who is to say how Congress' behavior would change? I personally like to think that more women would fundamentally change the atmosphere of Congress, as it changed the atmosphere of Jamestown, or the settlements out West. Not as dramatic, but you see what I'm getting at.

"for the past few decades, extremist feminists have been trying to whitewash the fact that there are differences in the sexes"

do you care to cite these extremist feminists, or are you just making this up?

"there aren’t enough women in Congress. No reason is given as to how this possibly affects Congress negatively."

Do you think a 100% male or 100% white Congress would be just fine? If you can't think of any ways that this would negatively impact Congress itself or the student body as a whole then you're not thinking very hard.