Should world leaders be female?

They say women are better communicators. Would the world be a more harmonious place if our leaders were female?Should world leaders be female?
Updates:
1 d ago
Are women more interested in shopping, cooking and cleaning than in leading?

0|0
1573

Most Helpful Girls

  • Yes absolutely.
    Women are exactly as competent as men are.
    Only delusional sexists who are afraid of female empowerment are gonna deny this statement and y’all blue anons, yes I know exactly who you are, literally cannot argue your way out of this one.

    2|3
    1|8
    • 1 d ago

      Oh look at the misogynist downvoting going on ❤️❤️❤️

    • 1 d ago

      Good final some women pitching in. Needed a prod to get going. Response from men is 5x as high!

  • World leaders should be who ever is best for the job whatever gender they may be

    2|7
    0|0

Most Helpful Guy

  • Qualified individuals should be world leaders. If some of those qualified individuals are women then that is fine. If some of them are Male then that is fine too.

    Should we make someone a leader just to fill a female quota? NOPE.

    0|1
    0|0

Recommended Questions

Have an opinion?

What Girls & Guys Said

1372
  • Nothing wrong with women as leaders. One of the all time best was Margaret Thatcher. However, wars don't happen in Western culture because we have more men at the helm. Most western leaders who go to war do so as a result of deliberation and consultation with their military leaders as well as other world leaders. What would women do to avoid war other than follow a course of appeasement, which has failed miserably in the past?

    With respect to extremists, tyrants, despots, and mad men, in non-Western societies, and particularly in Islamic cultures. . . do you think those societies would be open to having female leaders? Most of them don't allow women to drive a car or leave home unless accompanied by a male relative.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Should there be women in Government? I believe so. Should there be women heads of state, etc? I’m fine with that. Would the world be a better place? I don’t think so. Are they better communicators? I don’t know... for the most part, culturally, first world countries seem to claim that women say more. Men tend to be more direct. Is that better? Not necessarily.

    Personally, I see women hug and scream and cry when talking to their “best friend” and then the second that “best friend” leaves, they’re calling each other filthy names and being nasty to each other. I’ve been slapped and punched by more women than guys, had a LOT of female bullies all through elementary to high school and beyond.

    I’m not counting when I was saying something “naughty” and they “pretend punch” on the arm.

    I don’t believe that there’d be no wars, and we’d all be singing kumbaia around a snap cup.

    It might be different, but I couldn’t tell you how, as it would depend on each woman’s reputation, etc with regard to historical events. What would we be like as a culture? Can’t answer that.

    But I don’t think there’d be less violence... they would just probably not be causing it themselves (like many male politicians in history. They make the decisions, but they’re usually not actually leading people into battle when they’re making the decisions.)

    0|1
    0|0
  • Hell yes. That would be far better and probably a brink
    Of doomsday or post doomsday law. Oh wait our male leaders, one markedly to think, would have ended the human species before we arrived to think about it.

    The only factor is tenacity and perseverance to balance their family life with work. Women executives and career women have that mindset and Ability already.

    For others they too will learn fast. Stay at home moms are excellent at multi tasking also.

    Women do communicate with men on financial matters and that is where a team is formed. It’s just that women are definitely diplomatic minded throughout their lives.

    I read somewhere, possibly Scientific American that girls were taught to be socially sensitive and rather encouraged owing to estrogen as it’s hormonal regulating effect on behavior; whilst boys with testosterone and androgen ( its precursor) had upon themselves, a different psychological regulatory effect.
    Boys were encouraged to test outcomes as experimental treatment and to be curious about how things work.
    What was not imbued to young male children was to socially please others nor analyzing others’ expressions.

    On a political scale, merely continuing to perform
    Gender roles though subtly has dangerous outcomes and preposterous laws merely
    Out of unilateral decision making.

    Reading the news just gets gloomier by the day with deep seated fears of a closer than ever doomsday Armageddon.

    That is with the way we operate currently.

    0|1
    0|7
  • No.

    World leaders should not be female.
    Also...
    World leaders should not be male.

    A leader's gender should not factor into the equation.
    What a leader SHOULD be is competant, and compassionate and proactive about meeting the needs of their people.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Nope.

    Im a woman and believe men should run it.

    We run off emotions and men run off logic.

    Do you want an important decision made because you were emotinally biased no.

    Leave it to the men!

    1|5
    1|1
    • 2 d ago

      If Trump was a woman and Kim was a woman and had periods at the same time... it's nuke time😂

  • The question is irrelevant because almost every female world leader thinks and acts like men. They are inculcated into the male dominated system and surrounded by male advisors, military leaders, etc.
    In fact, the only way a female attains a world leader position in the first place is by getting support from the ass holes who are already in positions of power.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Absolutely not. Per "They say that women are better communicators", who is they, and where is their proof? Not only were all great civilizations patriarchal, that idea is utterly opposed to God's will. For my detailed explanation of the true nature of feminism, see Chapters XXXI-XXXII (31-32) on my website: www.thezap.net

    0|1
    0|1
  • They say if world leaders were all female no country would be talking to each other lol
    For some reason I'd believe that

    1|3
    0|1
  • - Should world leaders be female?
    Yes. Why not?
    - Would the world be a more harmonious place if our leaders were female?
    Unlikely. It is possible that the nature of the disharmony will change, but that doesn't necessarily mean the world within be more harmonious.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I want to be a housewife and to cook and clean for my husband whilst he goes to work... I want the age old dream of old fashioned life...
    I totally believe that a mans ego is what powers them and women naturally are empathetic and therefore are more capable of being leaders!

    0|0
    0|0
    • 2 d ago

      How can you live an old fashioned life and be a leader? Women were not leaders in old fashioned life. Something doesn't fit here. lol

    • Show All
    • 11 h ago

      @mistixs well of course. I didn't think we had to specify things that are that common sense. Ie just to be clear the husband cannot chop his wifes foot off for example. I think you are very caught up in semantics and nit picking at the loss of practicality, when we all know how this is supposed to work. Smh.

    • 11 h ago

      @bamesjond0069 okay then I think we are in agreement now

  • Those who say it are equally stupid and gender biased, who say ao just because talking feminism is a trend

    The leadership qualitities including communication skill has not much to do with gender. Even if they do, they are not for polititians as they all go rotten in the mean of time with the exception of very few.

    If you want to confirm, visit my country India. And it will tell the story of terror, horroe, dictatorship mostly in west Bengal state.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Absolutely not. Women have no business leading and having authority over men in society as a nation.

    A women that leads a society as the prime leader the men of those nations become emasculated and pathetically weak.

    Men are the ones that always faught to win a land and start a civilization and to fight in war, bleed and be killed for freedom not women thus women have no right to lead in power and authrority.

    0|2
    1|1
  • I don't see any reason why they "should" be, no. Certainly I don't think they could do a better job simply by virtue of being female, or mothers, or whatever.
    If I'm choosing you to represent my country before the world, I need to be confident that you have true leadership qualities and can make rational decisions under extraordinary pressure. Not many women, or men, have inspired that kind of confidence.

    0|1
    0|0
  • So far nothing shows that women are as capable leaders as men are. Every country that eventually had women get into positions of power went into a downhill-development.

    So for now I will say no, there is no proof to women being as competent leaders as men are based on the results of their leadership.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I actually think the world would be worse off.

    Women are absolutely not better communicators. In my life experience, women have (almost consistently) been sources of needless confusion and conflict. They are more social than men are, but I don't think it's necessarily more productive.

    0|0
    2|0
  • Whoever actually believes women are better communicators, or that communication alone should determine who's in charge, needs their head examined.

    0|1
    0|0
  • History has shown that women can be bloodthirsty leaders just as men can be.

    I don't think they should be leaders simply because they are women, but because they have shown themselves to capable of being leaders. I apply this same logic to male leaders.

    0|0
    0|0
  • God.
    How about, and just hear me out, world leaders being good at…IDK…leading? Caring about those under them? Just a thought.
    I suppose that's not that simple as discriminating based on superficial quality.

    0|1
    0|0
  • I don't believe people are capable of leading other people in all honesty. A woman would probably be just as capable as any man at failing to lead people.

    0|1
    0|0
  • World leaders ought to be the best people for the job, irrespective of gender

    1|1
    0|0
  • Personally no I don’t think they would make great world leaders. Especially dealing with countries that make women wear hijabs. Those countries wouldn’t respect us as much with a male leader, and if she wears a hijab it’s a sign of weakness and submission to another country. It can happen and probably will, but I doubt she will be a great leader. I would support our president no matter gender.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Swedish political leader wanted to apply a tax a swedish males called male tax (that was in 2004). Which basically meant you pay a tax because you are a male and because you are a male you need to pay for eevrything you've done to women. It was prooven that in 2003 that same female who suggested the tax was actually tax-evading. If so many women want to have women leaders why aren't there any? I am not saying men are more capable of being better leaders I am saying some facts thats it.

    0|0
    0|0
  • With the male idiots running countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States, Nigeria, Russia, etc

    I think a woman will do better

    1|1
    0|7
  • When I look at Germany, UK and NZ, I think maybe not, but the male leaders near those countries aren't any better. So maybe we just need more strong competent leaders that actually represent the public, regardless of sex.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No certainly not. Most women in politics are complete idiots as we don´t have a functioning meritocracy. Women are NOT more peaceful nor harmonious than men. In fact, the most violent and brutish societies in history were matrirchies.

    0|0
    0|0
  • The Bible says that men are to be the leaders. But leaders aren't supposed to "lord it over" people under their authority; they are supposed to serve the people under their authority, instead of expecting to be served (Matt 20:25-28) & they're supposed to prioritize the interests of the people under their authority, instead of their own interests (Phil 2:3-4). Leaders are supposed to hold their own interests in such low regard that they're willing to give their lives for the sake of the people under their authority (Eph 5:25, Matt 20:28).

    So if we follow the Bible, and men are the leaders who lead in ways commanded by the Bible, then I actually think women have it better. Especially since women do still have a lot of power; only a few men become "world leaders", but almost women act as primary caregivers & thus primary influences on the next generation of leaders.

    1|3
    2|5
    • 2 d ago

      Now you’re making sense on Biblical leadership particularly as it relates to husbands leading the family. There is an important distinction you make here you were not making in previous conversations.

      They should prioritize the interests of the people they lead above their own interests. That is exactly correct. That DOES NOT equate to servant leadership though.

      It does not because often priorities are viewed differently by the 2 genders. Wifey says she needs a new dress to wear to an event, husband says she has plenty of clothes and the money should be saved for an emergency. Has the husband failed in his duties? No. He’s making provision for the future. The problem with calling a husband leading as “servant leadership” is it leaves exactly enough wiggle room for a debate where there is to be no debate as the wife is supposed to submit. The husband must make decisions for the good of the family. This is a major reason why I told you the wife is to serve the husband. A better word would be sacrificial leadership, not servant leadership lest there be confusion over who is to lead and who is to follow. A good husband would put aside his wants and needs for those of his family. That is sacrificing NOT serving. There is a major difference between the two. The wife serves the husband for lack of better terms and that enables the husband to sacrifice for the wife. That is exactly how it works in the individual persons and the churches relationship to Jesus.

      Also, I think primarily men are to always be the leaders but certainly children are to submit to adult women, even if they’re male children and in the event there are no willing or capable male leaders certainly a woman can lead such as Deborah did in the Old Testament.

    • Show All
    • 1 d ago

      @Exterminatore "ruler of the home etc - meaning: domestic servitude." So you admit that ruler=servant? So you admit that men, being the rulers of their wives (Gen 3:16), are to be the servants of their wives?

      "Rule" can't mean "serve" only when you want it to, which (for you) is every instance EXCEPT when it involves men ruling/serving their wives.

      Yes, the man is in charge of the woman, the woman is in charge of the home. If the man being in charge of the woman negates the fact that the woman is in charge of the home, then the fact that God is in charge of the husband negates the fact that the husband is in charge of the wife.
      If women have no power or authority because they have to submit to their husbands, men have no power or authority because they have to submit to God.

    • 1 d ago

      That is correct, anything God does not command is left to leadership of husband, anything husband does not specify when comes to the household the wife is in charge. At any time the husband may step in just as at any time God may step in and that negates all else

  • World leaders should be centrist, understandable characters who have a logical view of the world and understand how to solve problems as good and achievable as possible, regardless of their sex.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Nope.

    0|2
    0|0
  • gender shouldn't hold someone back from being a leader. I don't think using biology to oppress someone based on gender is right. To tell men they can't be leaders because women are better communicators on average isn't different to telling women they can't be leaders because men are better negotiators e. g. (one proposed explanation for part of the gender pay gap is because men are better when to comes to negotiating salaries). telling someone they can't do something due to a biological basis hasn't really checked out. (black people have lower IQs yet obama is clearly smarter than trump)

    Bernie should be president. he's the most genuine candidate however I also wouldn't mind it at all if elizabeth warren or kirsten gillibrand won. they are many candidates with great qualities

    1|1
    0|3
  • Nope, that's BS. Women have egos too.. and egos clash. World would be more harmonious if people put aside their differences and are ready to make a few sacrifices (not lives of course).

    0|0
    0|0
  • I think so. More intellectually stable and mature earlier, are evolutionarily capable of being calming of a presence to men and tend to be more rational vs emotional reactions by men.

    0|0
    0|0
    • 2 d ago

      We don't have periods

    • Show All
    • 2 d ago

      You too mate. Glad we could agree to disagree.

    • 2 d ago

      Agreed lol

  • In dreams... they destroyed the world without even having positions in the government... if they become leaders of the world, it will be the end of the universe

    0|0
    3|0
    • 2 d ago

      How did we destroy the world? By raising shitty men?

    • Show All
    • 2 d ago

      Well if you live in a culture where women have very little options in life then yes, she need him and has no choice but to obey to live. But in western culture women handle the same (and even more) responsibilities than a man so why would she have to follow him, not walk alongside as an equal.

    • 2 d ago

      @morimeme1 a woman obey her husband not cause she needs him only, but it's because she loves him and he is her entire life...

      Any western girl or a girl from anywhere else, if her husband feeds, provide for her, take good care of her and love only her so much forever, she will die for him!

      It's not obey like master and slave, it's because god wants a woman to obey the head of the house which is her husband and ofc if he's doing something wrong, she will help him to go back on the right track...

      If a girl is a housewife and can't live without her husband it doesn't mean that her husband will treat her like sh*t... in the future i'll marry only a girk who adores becoming a housewife and guess what! It will be the same, i also won't be able to live without her... my wife means myself, we will be one...

      Your talking about men who thinks that raising their wives means that they are the kings and the wives are the slaves... that's totally wrong.

  • We shouldn't be electing our leaders just because they are female, our leaders should elected on merit and who we believe is the best leader regardless of their gender

    1|0
    0|0
  • If they do such a good job why aren't there more? 🤷‍♂️
    Idc if it offends you but I'd rather a man in charge.
    You can't leave 4 women Alone without war breaking out. Imagine a whole country

    0|1
    1|0
  • Sure. Why not? Men can lead just as fine as women. Give women a chance.

    1|2
    0|4
    • 2 d ago

      Giving someone a chance of leadership will make them worse leaders. Earn it

  • Never. Not if they're anything like me, and that goes lol

    1|1
    0|0
  • It's not the gender, but the personality. You can get a*holes in both male and female variants. Good leaders also can come in either gender.

    1|0
    1|0
  • It's been shown that female leaders on average wage war more often than male leaders so, nah there's no reason they shouldn't be but there's no reason they should be either

    0|0
    0|0
  • Once a month there would be total massacres and major war crimes, but tbh I could care less about the gender or race of a leader so long as they're the best for the job

    0|0
    0|0
  • Communication is but a small aid to leadership. It would be an immature suggestion that all world leaders should be female on the grounds of communication.

    The question sounds as if it's a click-bait battle of the genders storm in a tea cup. Men are better at making decisions that aren't emotionally charged. Does that mean all world leaders should be Men?

    Great leaders are not determined by one trait viewed in isolation. Both Men and Women can make suitable world leaders.

    Based on how women are towards each other, and indeed how the left women are towards men; I find it hard to agree that the world woild be more harmonious...

    Brexit anyone?

    0|0
    1|0
  • I'd say that being a woman should not be something that automatically disqualifies someone as a world leader.

    0|0
    0|1
  • Yes, just to see all the sexist right-wingers tearfully rage then kill themselves

    0|2
    0|2
  • No the world leaders should be the people that's best for the job

    0|2
    0|0
  • This may be true but we've seen some horrible female leaders too so I don't know if a gender swap can actually solve problems.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Doubt it.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Angela Merkel has taken a massive steaming dump on the EU.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Hell no. Women don't take initiative as often as men do, plus they run their decisions on feelings. Too emotional to lead.

    0|1
    1|0
  • A persons sex is irrelevant for being a world leader. Besides it’s not like female world leaders don’t exist

    0|0
    1|0
  • Yeah, sure we all see how well women get along with each other.

    0|1
    0|0
    • 2 d ago

      Yeah. They are so vengeful over petty things. Like we guys punch eachother and next week we are best buddies again. Girls try to ruin "the other bitches" life for way longer.

  • Decent people should be leaders and some of them are women.

    1|1
    0|1
Show More
35

Recommended myTakes

Loading...