If there were more women leaders of countries in the world, the world would be a much more peaceful place.?

Question

And with women at the helm, real work can be done on poverty, social injustice, racial prejudices, etc etc etc.. Agree? (Please don't agree or disagree on the basis of your own gender but offer valid viewpoints, alternative as they may seem to be... appreciate that!Thank you!)

btw, I am a guy, and I have had enough seeing the guy leaders of the world living in airconditioned comfort while their soldiers are perishing in desert heat or some God-forsaken place on earth..purple hearts can't bring back someone's loved ones you know?

Answer 1

Both genders have their strong points and weak points. When it comes down to it, it is the individual actions that make a great leader, not gender. There are some women who could handle the job and do great things, and some that would complete screw up....just like the men. It is all about what that person, be them man or women, choses to do and how the choose to do it. I think being a good leader is all about timing. A person who is a good leader in war time might not be so good in time of peace when more local issues come out and a leader who handles domestic issues very well might suck as a war time leader. You've got to have the right people at the right time, the problem is you don't know if its the wrong time until it's to late.

Answer 2

I have a tendency to think that it's a myth that women would be less inclined to go to war. I think that leadership of that level always requires a certain amount of detachment, and the "human cost" must always be kept in balance with the bigger picture. Women would probably do that in the same way as men.
I think that women would make more of a difference in domestic policy--we would probably see better programs for families and the poor. But when somebody's bombing you, well, there's only so much you can do.
The best evidence I can offer is to look at our two female Secretaries of State, Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice. Both have presided during wartime.

Answer 3

Okay so I am a woman but have been keenly disappointed in our own gender because I have agreed with you for many years. It seems we are content to take a backseat in humanity's important matters while we care for our own personal important matters.

Time for gender unity for women which is pretty scary because, check out who the opposition is. But real work would be done and progress would be made quickly while good process would be followed.

Women need to look beyond the needs of their children and consider those of their great grandchildren. Only then will their passion ignite sufficiently to ensure the issues you name are addressed.

I am great at parallel parking so I could be a world leader?

Answer 4

Margaret Thatcher was no more peaceful than most male leaders. I think you have a point, but individual men and individual women can be great leaders or horrible leaders. And the women who have the drive to go through all the bitter fighting to become a national leader may not be the most peaceful ones.

Answer 5

No, the world wouldn't be a better place with more women as leaders. That's ludicrous and has no basis in fact. You are a victim of the sexism inherent in today's education system and media.

BTW, we don't need to "work" on poverty. Nearly everyone in the U.S. enjoys real wealth because of our market system and RELATIVELY uncorrupted gov't. The reason for poverty in Africa is corruption and lack of free markets.

Answer 6

men have tunnel vision, and one track minds making us simple and effective creatures. when something needs to get done we put all concentration on that. downfall to that we make ourselves vulnerable due to blind spots. women have panoramic vision some 360 vision and multiple track minds . can take up many tasks simotaneously. minimize blind spots always aware of their surroundings .down fall is they are spread out so thin should a large unepexted thing come up they tend to burn out. With out a doubt women can handle poverty,social situations, etc. smooth but they are human. handling their stress is their downfall. since they see black,white,and grey the diff. shades will add to their stress thus making poor decision in the future because most women remember the smallest details. Men on the other hand only see black and white(most of us anyway) and we tend to forget alot of things thus reducing our stress level not necesarily the wisest decisions all the time but consistent on results. basicly we need to find a balance between both to succeed. one micro manages the other macro manages.

Answer 7

it won't exchange the undeniable fact that different worldwide places have political, social, and fiscal objectives. i does no longer have a situation with the marvelous lady being in fee. It basically won't translate into greater peace basically because of the fact a woman is making the selections.

Answer 8

I don't know. Women have their strong points...for one, they don't need to turn to physical attacks (war) over disagreements. But they can also be very dramatic too and could possibly cause more disputes with their tactics. But overall, I feel that maybe it should be both a man and a woman leading together so as to balance one another out.

Answer 9

Treat others as you would like to be treated.
That may be hard at times.
But they do have hearts and are obviously able to set their mind so if we could give them something great to set their mind on and to teach their children then the warring will stop.
I saw this site. It tells of a way to change the heart and mind.
http://www.peacefulsolution.org/

Answer 10

Well lets see.

Margaret Thatcher of the UK...had wars
Queen Mary of England...wars and killed people
Catherine the Great of Russia..Wars during reign.

3 off top of my head....so doesn't really prove would be more peaceful or better at social issues