Throughout history, male leaders always lead us to violence and conflict. If a society is governed by female leaders, it will be more peaceful. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

There were a considerable number of male and female leaders in four corners of the world during history. A number of commentators believe that the men who were countries’ leaders encouraged their social members to be aggressive behavior, whereas when society had a female leader, it will be peaceful. I partially support this statement for some reasons. My position is argued further with explanations. Out of all arguments, the foremost one to confirm my view is that the male gender is more willing to be aggressive as well as have a more sense of violence. This is due to the fact that according to scientific research, a sizeable amount of Testosterone hormone is released in men’s bodies as opposed to women’s bodies, which is a decisive factor in being violent. Therefore, males have positive attitudes towards fights in order to expand their lands and benefit from natural resources. The best example was US president Bosh, who had attacked Iraq, Afghanistan, and other parts of the world. However, given the historical evidence, there were plenty of female leaders who benefited from their violent behavior so as to manage their countries and attack a wide variety of territories. A case in point was women called Hillary Clinton and Queen Elisabeth. Those who left no stone unturned to maintain their power and increase the number of countries that were under their control. Thus, to conclude the discussion, it can be finally said that notwithstanding that some women leaders tended to be in more peace, I believe the society led by a man will be more violent because of the feeling of being more aggressive in men rather than women.