When I was in high school a Geogaphy teacher once told the class that one of the reasons why there is so much fighting between countries in the world today is because most countries are ruled by men. Appparently because men are seen to be more aggresive and prone to violence than women, having them as leaders imply situations solved with fighting. When situations between countries find no other supposed means other than slugging it out, the world finds more and more lethal weapons to boost male leaders' chances of winning.

Hence this teacher of mine said that studies have shown that if women were to rule the world (and I don't mean world domination here), there would be a lesser likelihood of wars erupting. This is because it was regarded that women are more friendly with one another and will talk things out, instead of whipping out their guns and shooting whoever ticks them off. Translated into political leadership this suggests that if more women took to the helm of leadership in countries, there would less fighting and suffering out there.

Personally I do agree that men are more likely to use violence as a swift & aggressive means to conflict-resolution (blame it on the testosterone if you will), whereas women like to talk things out first. However sometimes I see my female peers and the way they act, and this leads me to have doubts about whether are they truly the fairer sex (bullying boys do not make them seem fairer to me).

Thus I throw the question to everyone who reads this thread: do you think if women were world leaders instead of men, there'd be less wars & the world'd be a better place? What do you think?

Collaborating the rulers like king and queen and you'd probably get the best like both women and men maybe the anger or something cancels out? (Combine many people together who differ in the largest range of thinking and something will happen)

Just what I was about to type KradisZ.

Possibly if we had monarchies that statement would make sense, but there is many people behind our leaders.


Bseides, I reckon chicks are much more violent than males. >_<"

Chances are that women would make it more peaceful, but there are still plenty of women who could do things in their own way that would produce the results of men leaders. Like...yeah...I hope you understood what I meant.

No. The battles will only go differently. But there will still be war. In fact, the cause of some major battle on earth is woman. Trojan war... Caesar and Antonius... Vandread... Gundam Seed... :) XD it's a joke.

Actually, I heard a joke about this situation: If we had women as world leaders, we'd have a decent amount of peace...we'll just have to pray that these women don't enter "that time of the month" simultaneously so we don't have a monthly World War.

Realistically speaking, I think female leaders would do a great job leading nations, as well as men can. This does not necessarily mean more peace, but i think any woman can do a better job than the crap Bush is pulling right now.

I second that. :)

Actually, I heard a joke about this situation: If we had women as world leaders, we'd have a decent amount of peace...we'll just have to pray that these women don't enter "that time of the month" simultaneously so we don't have a monthly World War.

funny--didnt you know that the whole time of the month thing is a myth that some women use to excuse their violent or bitchy behavior...smart women dont use excuses to wop ass and can do it at any time of the month....ha ha :)

Maybe its right , why not ?

sabella30

Actually, I heard a joke about this situation: If we had women as world leaders, we'd have a decent amount of peace...we'll just have to pray that these women don't enter "that time of the month" simultaneously so we don't have a monthly World War.

funny--didnt you know that the whole time of the month thing is a myth that some women use to excuse their violent or bitchy behavior...smart women dont use excuses to wop ass and can do it at any time of the month....ha ha :)

lol, and it'd be funny if women leaders used that myth of an excuse in their war declaration:

"We have entered the time for action. No no, not the deadline for Iran's nuclear decision. I mean its time to kick their ass since it is THAT time of the month and they're really starting to piss me off."

Then again, that does not sound any different from Bush's policies with the Middle East. Hey...connection? Ladies and gentleman, the first female president of the United states...

You people are off topic lol. Eh, because of the way democracy runs, a woman president wouldn't really make a difference. If she doesnt end up pleasing the party/Congress/etc, she gets the boot. Is she a figurehead then? Guess so... Because I really doubt there are any major wheels turning in a certain beloved world leader's head right now... (Hmm.. Pet goat.. Yes...Uhh...)

A female dictator... Hmm.

You notice how males would say "You don't really know a guy until you fight him" and other examples of men befriending their former enemies? What about females? When two girls fight, do they EVER look at each other again? It seems females hold grudges as well and use acts of violence if given the right reason. The difference is the reason in itself.

Well, the wars would not end. And I think that if a woman rule, it would be different, might be more peaceful of the opposite.
I saw the Twelve Kingdoms and part of the story there was a queen that killed all the other girls so the guy that she liked would not have anyone but her to love... and the same could happen with a guy, well it all depends on the person in the end.

I don't think it would make *that* much of a difference... there are countries now that do have women presidents and they still have the same old problems... Philippines is currently run by a woman and they are about ready to boot her out! there is still the same old corruption problems etc.
a few weeks after I left there last december there was almost a coup!

I think it's just another stereotype that women are peaceful and men are warlike...
you have to figure the type woman that climbs the ranks to get to that position isn't the same type of woman who stays at home to raise the kids all nice and goody goody... know what I mean?

I think the problem is that the *type* of people who get into politics aren't the type of people that should be running things in the first place - problem is the type of people who should be running things don't want anything to do with running things (don't want to deal with the political crap)! catch 22.

politics itself just attracts power mongers and corruption...

Wars will never end, no matter who is the leader of a country. Wars have always happened, and will always happen, and there's not a damn thing we can do about it.

I think: No. Because it doesn't matter if your male or female there will always be war. Sure some people think women are all for world peace and kindness and all the junk but there are some that aren't so dandy. Fight just another part of nature; Doesn't matter who leads the troops in the battles either...it's never going o stop...just another part of life