I don't know if anyone really thinks this way... especially not because of emotions. If they do then I'd say it's mostly because they feel insecure themselves and wouldn't make a good leader. I think there's probably more good leaders among men than women but emotions is not the reason.
Also, having both male and female managers I'd say men were a lot more understanding and compassionate, while women tended to be more harsh and strict.
But men (at least in my private experience) were more respected as leaders because they carried things through while women tended to shy away from difficulties and be pushed around more by their superiors. And that tends to happen not because of your sex but because you allow that to happen.
Still, even if statistically there's more good leaders among men I wouldn't worry about it because it's statistics and doesn't apply to circumstances of a specific person who can have different sets of skills and personality traits regardless of their sex.
I don't think it's about emotions so much as the other 50 differences between men & women that tend to mean that more guys will put 70 hours/week into their career (whether on the clock or self-study) than women do. And guys who don't put much effort in their career get the short end of the stick in life. While women who don't put much/anything into career can still benefit from the fact that guys who have achieved something in life almost never require the woman to have achieved as much as himself. So women tend not to invest in becoming the kind of politician that anybody wants to vote for. You end up with 80 male politicians and 20 female. Now even if we say that 10% of each gender are great leaders that means you have 8 good male candidates and only 2 females. The women lost before the campaign even starts. She'd have to do everything right and better than those other 8 guys to have any hope of going to higher office.
Look at Hillary. She was handed everything she needed to become president on a silver platter. She hadn't put in the work to even get elected before - far as I know. Every government job she had was handed to her but she was too lazy (Obama's own words) to campaign in important states/counties & towns that he had worked hard in to win his own office. Think about it.
Speaking of emotions: people make bad decisions when they think emotions are the most important thing. This is a big problem I have with liberals. They often push agendas that make them feel good & then ignore any evidence that shows the tinkering they did with society hasn't achieved the goals they said they had... because admitting that would make them feel bad, I guess. So no, I'd never vote for anybody who puts emotions first, man or woman.
If you think that women are by default more compassionate and kind you don’t understand history or human nature.
Did Margaret Thatcher REALLY need to send British soldiers into the Falkland Islands war?
I’m pretty sure Queen Victoria was responsible for thousands and thousands of deaths all across the world all for the British Empire.
Catherine the Great of Russia was known for her compassion. I found this:
During her reign, Catherine extended by some 520,000 square kilometres (200,000 sq mi) the borders of the Russian Empire, absorbing New Russia, Crimea, Northern Caucasus, Right-bank Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, and Courland at the expense, mainly, of two powers—the Ottoman Empire and the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.”
Did she just “compassionately” happen to extend the territory of the Russian empire? Did she do it with kindness?
No. She did it with violence and war. They all did.
Women are no more compassionate than men. Who knows, they may even be less compassionate.
In my experience female bosses have been the worst.
I had a really bad period and I'm talking about heavy, with vomiting.
It's due to my pcos, its not a usual thing but since I was coming off the pill my body was going through changes.
Anyways I called in sick.
This boss thought I was taking the piss. When I returned she demonstrated how OK it is.
She allowed herself to leak on the chair, waited for me to see then went to change after I told her.
I was embarrassed not because she had her period.
More that she didn't respect me enough to understand I was ill.
Opinion
76Opinion
So I'm really sorry my phone doesn't let me form proper paragraphs but I hope you still read this but
... well there's a history of women being horrible leaders throughout history. From Boudica, Cleopatra, Edoxia, the late Spartan Matriarchy all which led to their people being either put in chains or eradicated from the face of the earth by their strong, ruthless, male rivals. You also have bleeding hearts like Angela Merkel who caused lots of rapes to happen as a result of letting in mass refugees. Elizabeth I is championed for her reign but actually she left England in a downward spiral. Don't even get me started on her sister, "Bloody Mary". Joan of Arc was successful in some ways but it was due to her contact male commanders and her men's superstition. Many times her judgements were questioned and not followed, given to men of experience in war to make the final calls. There is a pattern in recent history and by recent I'm talking the last 3,000-4,000 years that the downfalls of some of the western world's greatest civilizations happened while a woman took power of very shortly after. As such there has not been a good track record regarding female leaders. One of the main reasons Elizabeth I had a hard time taking the throne is because England had just seen a few women in their recent history nearly bring them to complete calamity. The three strong female leaders that do come to mind are Tomyris (who we know little of in how she ruled and her fate), Dido or Elissa (?) Who supposedly founded Carthage which is heavily based on myth and like Tomyris cannot be confirmed as real and Isabella I of Spain who was a legit very strong leader. Sooo yeah not a good track record when you compare them to the great leaders and generals of our past.
You answered yourself. Because Of emotions. And they cloud the judgement. And lead to hasty decisions.
You can't lead a country, while being emotional like 12 year old kid. That's a recipe for disaster. It leads to bias as well. You may know what is right, but you feel like... < Insert anything here.
Or you have a bad day today, and take said decision. Or the day is bad because or period and you suddenly changed your mind. In a fact, many girls I know, may change their minds over a day, 'bout said subject, without being in period either.
Being emotional and reactionary, means also short-sighted decisions.
Whereas being rational, controlled, calculating and cunning is different deal.
The thing is though, that isn’t a case of women/men being good leaders, it’s a case of over emotional people (which in a lot of cases men can be too). I don’t understand where this view of all men being so logical and reasonable came from, when some men act based on ego and anger (a lot of the leaders in the world do this) which leads to poor consequences for the public
@sunflower00
It can vary from person to person indeed. But she asked about genders, not people.
And statistically, on an average, we are more emotional, impulsive and you know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
I personally disagree because I’ve seen a LOT of men act impulsively and based on emotions, although it’s usually different emotions such as anger, but fair enough
@sunflower00
If that's the cases you have seen, I understand you. Then you may understand why I think like I do - because I have seen guys who are so... Held-together, so stable, not bipolar, compared to girls.
Sure, my cases are teen people.
Compassion, kindness and Empathy are actually traits displayed more by MEN, not women. Who fights and dies to protect others? Who sacrifices their time and physical body to support their families and ends up with more injuries from doing that?
In my experience working in schools with many teachers and parents, the main challenge for women being a leader is that they lack self discipline and often don't follow through with what they say. Too many empty threats and hypocritical policies hinder their leadership abilities.
So, I think women can be good leaders.
As a whole? No
Why? Evolutionary biology & history.
Men literally have centuries upon centuries of this.
As well as within their genes to lead, to intimidate, to be followed, etc.
It’s facial structure, size, voice, etc.
Women are beautiful creatures.
Petite, soft, lovely, etc.
It’s hard to think of the latter as a leader as opposed to the former.
Men have their talents
Women have theirs
One is not better or worse than another, just different.
Women can’t lead because they will not start enough wars.
Do you know how profitable war is?
We need logical males who understand that civilian lives are not as important as the billions that can be made off their deaths. Women do shit like care for others, and consider them as people.
That kind of thinking is NOT profitable. Women never think of the bottom line.
***please note the sarcastic tone of this post before losing your shit. Thank you.***
Without war where would society be? Probably dancing around merrily in a field with all different cultures somewhere.
I think it´s less the aspect of emotions it´s rather an experience of relationships. Many guys have made the experience that women didn´t want to iniate dates or didn´t seem able to exactly say how they want to spend the evening.
So taking that experiences of women being unsure and shy and rather hidding it influences a guy´s picture of female leadership.
Also women in leading positions were often called male in the past.
Take Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama or Angela Merkel they all were called masculine in some ways.
I don´t think emotions like kindness or empathy would be much of a problem if a leader has many of them.
I think it´s rather "negative emotions" like gossiping and over-dramatizing some situations or publically shown insecurities that make guys say that women can´t lead.
A lot depends on the woman's Mindset.
Margaret Thatcher did well.
Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, AOC, that islamic congresswoman from Michigan (?), Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, all would be horrible leaders.
To them, their mindset is they want power, and to be obeyed in all things, right or wrong. The Rules others have to follow do not apply to them becoz they are women of Power and Privilege. They all get petty, vindicative, revengeful, and spiteful.
I do not see a woman in charge of the USA.
It isn't that women show their emotions more than men, but that they USE those emotions more than logic to make decisions. That's where their leadership can and usually is VERY problematic.
In a country like the US, where our society is based in law and order, emotions like revenge, vindictiveness, and sympathy generally work against the decisions a woman makes. Being highly emotional during monthly hormonal changes can affect the relationship women have with subordinates and others. I've had several female supervisors.
I've asked MANY women who they'd rather work for, a man or a woman, and 100% of them said they'd prefer to work for a man. What do women instinctively KNOW about other women that they personally would not deal with if given a choice?
It's funny that you ask this. There was a guy who was the CEO of a successful finance business and he found out he had a tumor growing in his brain. He decided to go along with an experimental surgery to remove the amygdala part of his brain along with the tumor. To clarify, the amygdala is the part of the brain responsible for emotion. After he went through with the surgery, he could not make a single decision. He had to give up his business and could not function through life. This just shows that emotions are behind every single decision we make. So anyone who says that you need to use cold hard logic in business is somewhat wrong. You should definitely make logical decisions, but always be aware that they are related to emotions.
On another note, I believe that men do have more leadership traits even biologically. That's not to say women can't be strong leaders, but they need a lot of masculine traits.
It’s not that you have emotions it’s more that women follow their emotions and they dictate your actions more rather then being cold, objective and logical.
Let me be clear emotions like kindness empathy and compassion are needed for a good leader but I wouldn’t want a leader driven by and directed by emotion.
Because when it comes to hard choices you need to be cold, calculating, logical and objective. More then that you need a balance between that and emotion and women a lot of the time don’t have that balance.
They do certainly exist but they aren’t a majority. It’s part of the reason a lot of women make poor CEOs/business leaders and combat soldiers.
Emotion doesn't always lead to positive outcomes. You can't run a country on emotion. Relying on emotion is relying on weakness. It's ok to be weak as long as you're constantly working to leave that weakness behind and replace it with a positive strength. Yet people like to stay weak these days and would rather alter laws to benefit their weaknesses. This is why I think more women tend to agree with the unhinged left in America. We need strong leadership, not emotionally unstable leadership. And majority of today's women are extremely emotionally unstable. An emotionally unstable woman in a position of power would completely destroy any country. They'd lose complete support of their citizens too. Also, having a woman in a position of power just because she's a woman isn't going to help anyone either. Believing this in today's world apparently means you hate women and apparently if you are accused of hating women you hate everything else too. 🤷🏻♂️
Modern life and certainly large state's are soo far beyond what our emotions evolved to respond to appropriately as to make their evolved guidance often counter-productive and ill-advised.
Keep in mind your emotions evolved over hundreds of millions of years to guild you in the "most likely" successful coarse of action for what was essentially a very primitive hunter-gather existence. A world where most everything was right around you and had simple animistic motives.
Yes your emotions can lead to a correct conclusion, but they are as likely to lead you down a disastrous path in the modern world.
Having emotions isn't beneficial for a leader. Nonetheless it doesn't make women not a choice for leadership. Lets go back to American civil war. When the south had general Lee near Pennsylvania to militarily threaten the capital. The north let a new general take the lead there. The butcher, it was needed to win the war and I doubt most women (some would do but very rare) would act the way the butcher did. Its just one of the examples were a lot of cruelty was needed. Also about Lincoln himself, he agreed to many punishments of deserters who were 17, 18 or the like. Not that he enjoyed it but he said, "Its war, baby" so he realized it was needed
Women are emotionless ice queens when it comes to men but they're deeply attached to their children and that's exactly why they'll make good leaders. Also, women don't have anything to measure, so they have no need to send young men against other young men to prove their thing is bigger than that of the enemy. Which is why I think that if America, Russia and other "superpower" countries in the world elect female presidents, that would be an age of peace. Because a woman knows how she would feel if she lost her child and she wouldn't do that to other mothers. That's why she wouldn't send young men to die just to prove who has the bigger dick - which is what Chump wanted to do but didn't have the time and Putin is still doing.
Just like every man that has emotions are gets pissed off as anger issues there are women that get emotional that's okay that does not mean that they cannot defend L I think they could be some of the best leaders because of that emotion and they see things with more insight than guys do
Because of realpolitik, a woman is much more likely to be a weak leader.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WomenAreDelicate
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Realpolitik
That's true and some women have proven to be amazing leaders. Look at how New Zealand dealt with Covid.
But generally speaking, women are the more intuitive and emotional sex. Men make their decisions based off logic instead. Emotion can be biased.
I don’t know men can be pretty emotional about things too. Heck anger is a prime emotion.
@itsalyssaagain There have been great female leaders throughout history, but in my experience, women don't tend to be strategists or long term thinkers. Rather, they tend to act on how they feel in the moment.
You could make the argument that men do as well and we do, I just think men are more logical based.
9 out of 10 times, it is logic that wins out, not emotion - that's for all human activity.
Also, you're comparing apples to oranges to your New Zealand argument.
new zealand is an island. islands always do well in pandemics. leadership had nothing to do with it
The UK is an island too. We didn’t do well during the pandemic. At all.
the UK is not an island, you are too big and too close to other land masses and you literally have connecting tunnels to the land. i can get off of the UK without getting on a boat or plane
another factor that determins how bad a country will do in pandemics is economy. larger economy = more world connected = more dead
It’s still an island
@itsalyssaagain Okay, so I'll start calling Australia, Greenland.
@itsalyssaagain it connects to other land masses. it is not an island
Guys I can’t be asked to debate with you honestly. You can’t stand a good female leader and that’s your problem.
@itsalyssaagain And it seems you can't stand a rational argument and would rather jump to assumptions.
FYI, Margaret Thatcher is one of my favorite leaders in the UK because she was a master at the polarizing game, but she took it too far in the end which is why she lost.
Okay
new zealand didn't have a good leaader they had natural advantages that make them strong in a pandemic. nothing to do with leadership
I think it’s important to compartmentalize and objectify your emotions and also capsulate them so that one issue does not interfere with another, you have to start with the emotions and build the peripheral logic around that which you separate from your core person, otherwise, you will not be able to discern between character and intelligence.
TBH I never thought that however w/ so many new platforms like GAG popping up allowing us to discuss our beliefs w/ women has lead me to believe they are unable to lead. The main reason is that leaders need to be able to understand all POV's and most women aren't able to handle a POV that isn't 100% in line w/ their beliefs.
You need emotional intelligence, but you Also need to put a side personal emotions if the greater good means to do something that goes against your own emotions on the task ahead. If you can do that, then it don't matter your gender. Also if your done having kids then there is nothing that will stop you from leading.
A lot of people don't think that. I have no problem with a woman being president and so do many others, what people have a problem with is a woman becoming president/leader based on the fact they are a woman and not qualifications "cough *Harris* cough".
They conflate us with stereotypes of moody irrationality, and thinking that they, the men, are 9/10 perfectly logical and reasonable. It's nonsense.
Having emotions is extremely important as a leader rather than a cold emotionless person who doesn't have a heart, nevertheless, too much emotion can cloud someone's logical decisions and that can be is very detrimental when a rational correct decision has to be made.
compassion is the enemy of clean streets and safe homes. when we are compassionate we only think of the most immediate suffering. we fail to see that all actions make someone suffer
empathy makes it harder to make tough calls and do things fast
kindness is not a worldview. one day you will end up taking an action that MUST be unkind to someone... and what then? you can't use kindness as a value as every outcome is unkind to someone.
I believe women can’t be leaders because as a result of the fall they’re selfish by nature most women only show interest or pursue things that will benefit them men are way less selfless than women and if you don’t believe me look at the infrastructure of society it’s completely dominated by men look at a man’s role in society did you see the first purge movie Ethan hawke gave his life fought and died so that his family will survive
You are correct about a benevolent leader. But sometimes (for example, in war), a leader has to make decisions without emotions. Many believe that men can do that better than women, though I wouldn't say that's true for all men, or for all women.
Leaders have to make hard decisions. Emotions will paralyze you when others are relying on your judgment the most. Sympathy also makes a weak leader because it allows excuses.
Emotional struggles are the foremost reason for having strict standards. Judges recuse themselves from cases they're too close to. Surgeons don't operate on family members. Nepotism is frowned upon in business. So on and so on.
People confuse woman who have hormone imbalance (which is a medical issue and treatable) as a regular thing for all woman. A common misconception in this day and age. Not all woman suffer from emotional swings.
My favorite leader is a woman who was an Egyptian Pharaoh. Trust me; she is awesome. If women can apply how she was, a lot of ladies would make great leaders. We do have some wonderful women leaders today. But a lot of girls can't handle logic or simple debates when it questions their beliefs.
Who ever thinks that women are more emotional than men should take a look at the difference between men's and women's soccer...
It's not that they can't, it's that most women can't. Women are more emotional usually. Emotions get in the way of logic and that's especially dangerous when you're leading a country. You need to be ruthless. A women can if se relies less on emotion and more on cold hard logic. Your emotions can get you killed.
Because people have never heard of Queen Elizbeth or Katherine The Great and done any history in their life.
Simply because men never bothered tried to understand women and simply saw anything that makes women different from men as a deficiency, such as hysteria.
Also because men wanted to continue benefitting off of women's unpaid labor.
What you don't realize is also how much men are being demoted and have also been facing discrimination for being not a leader material but a lot of them still strive anyways like what some leaders who had been through a lot just to be come one. What you like to see are just those male leaders who actually succeed while you ignore how much men have actually been bankrupt because of those risks they're willing to take without even any homeless shelters to take care of them. And do they even blame it on women? So yeah if you believe women can make better leaders, then why not take responsibility instead of blaming it on men? Your reasoning is basically like "because men don't let them" but i thought you women have it under controlled? If women being better leaders were true then most of them would've ruled from the start. And basically what's stopping a lot of women is their emotions but you just wanna feel the need to blame it on men and be one sided about the situation.
Because women have less emotional maturity than they think they do.
For most women, their emotions are their biggest weakness. But I feel like as a society that's changing.
Compassion in a leader is good. It helps avoid people like Putin. But too much emotion can lead to instability.
I’d argue that Putin is very compassionate
Yes everyone does show their emotions in the same way
Doesn’t
Put yourself in his shoes he is striving for progress by any means it’s wrong and I don’t agree with it but I admire his compassion and belligerence
I also agree that he is being very childish and stubborn
@nata2496 at our core all human beings love what we believe to be right even if it’s something wrong
@Creampiekarl420 Exactly. Everyone thinks they're doing the right thing. And I don't doubt that he loves his country, thinks he is helping it and his cause is the right one. He just doesn't see the harm it causes. But I imagine to some extent we all ignore harm we cause in favour of thinking our motives just.
Because it's been proven that when placed in a position of power women tend to be bigger assholes and abusers than men. Hell, there have been multiple all female work places that have failed in the past due to in house drama, gossiping and just in general toxic work environment.
no no no
there are no real women leaders
their are female actors playing the role of a leader
but GOD has made this clear
from the time of the fall
we now rule over you women
that is part of the curse of the women
and when you women take fake power which has happened
its not long
and we as men just end up killing you women
sorry but its part of the curse
Women are like butterflies, they get caught in the wind. Men are like rocks. We have the capacity to ignore the winds. Men are the anchor. A good leader is a man who listens to his women and together they act as one, but he has the final say
I think most women could do a terrific job as the leaders, minus some I'm sure. Most men are too aggressive. I believe women can work things out.
Because of knee jerk reactions. The media likes to take advantage of peoples emotions, particularly targeting women to sway public opinion and pass increasingly authoritarian laws.
Same reason why some feminists think men can't be good leader because of their masculinity being "toxic" for them.
your question answers itself. Loss of logical thought due to emotion. Sometimes you have to make the decision to let a few people die to save many, etc. "Toxic masculinity" keeps the world from ending or being taken over by dictators
if the woman is like alice marie higgins (daughter of president Michael D. Higgins, Ireland) maybe i will choose her , i admire she
Once a month she will feel icky and if she is the president and has that big button in her office a lot of people could get killed.
Leaders need to be stoic. Level-headedness is needed in order to be able to make better decisions than otherwise.
Not that women can't be stoic but stoicism is generally considered to be toxic masculinity.
Thanks to Elizabeth Holmes women won't be getting any help in Silicon Valley for quite some time.
Haha. The cold merciless ones are the ones that stay in power longer.. if you are compassionate to your enemies… all of them, you will not live to see the next sunrise.. there is a delicate balance
Yeah the ones that stay in power longer, like Putin, but that doesn’t mean they’re good leaders 🤨
You are correct
There’d be a war once a month when her frickin period started!
Even though all wars have currently been started by men. But that’s not the point!
He’s debating with himself again.
If being emotional madeyou a bad leader, then sociapaths and psychopaths would be great leaders
... they are. all good leaders are sociopaths
There is a difference between being unemotional and being willing to do evil things.
Those are traits that any leader should have... Sadly most people prefer to have rulers rather than leaders.
I think it's uncommon for women to be good leaders.. On that same token, and I know she is fictional.. I would follow capitan Kathryn Janeway to hell and back. If a lady had her leadership ability.. She would get my vote for president.
same with major Kira on deep space 9.
I think it's a rare woman who is a good leader, although I have worked with/for a couple.
Except women have changing emotions depending on the time of the month.
No, I don't think so. Men and women both can be good leaders. If you have those leadership skills, people will see your potential and make you a leader. You answered your own question.
Women are commanded to be that kind of leader of they're houshold. To build they're home through kindness. Question is.. what are you talking about other than what you were as a woman commandex to do?
there's a lot of reasons besides emotions but women do not make good leaders. Besides, i feel sorry for the poor husband and kids who dont have mom home and pleasant to take care of them.
women can't go to war when it is needed. I have seen two good women leaders , Israel's second PM and Thatcher of UK.
War is never needed outside stopping an evil dictator.
There have been plenty of great women leaders, in business, education, sports, politics, etc. Men are just as emotional as women.
Women aren't "emotional" than men and men aren't more "rational" than women. That's a myth. Anyone with the right personality can be a good leader.
High ranking women are less generous towards same sex subordinates than men.
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
