Many are of the opinion the male inclination towards violence is the root of many international conflicts and societies ruled by women might be more peaceful. In my opinion, this is likely true.
The reason that some oppose this seemingly sexist viewpoint is based on past examples of female leaders. The sample size is much smaller but leaders like Margaret Thatcher, Cleopatra, Hilary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, Queen Elisabeth I, Joan D’Arc and countless others have started, maintained, and escalated violent conflicts. There are very few examples of peaceful female leaders and those that exist can be matched proportionally with male leaders. The claim that women are more peaceful is not supported by historical evidence. A major caveat is that these are the exceptions and women rulers have held power in a world otherwise dominated by male hierarchy.
Furthermore, men are naturally predisposed towards aggression. This stems from both biology and society. Men produce more testosterone than women and this has been shown to increase aggressive tendencies and violent behaviour. Men can curb this instinct, but it has the potential to undermine their better nature at any moment. There are also societal forces at work that play on men’s pride. From a young age, boys are raised to be tough, to not back down, to not compromise and to idealise violent heroes. The majority of male role models are violent, ranging from historic figures to action stars and even video game characters.
In conclusion, males are more violent and women would likely be more peaceful given the opportunity to rule wisely. The question of the desirability of ending all conflicts and its global impact is another matter.
Many
are of the opinion the male inclination towards violence is the root of
many
international conflicts and societies ruled by
women
might be more
peaceful
. In my opinion, this is likely true.
The reason that
some
oppose this
seemingly
sexist viewpoint
is based
on past examples of female
leaders
. The sample size is much smaller
but
leaders
like Margaret Thatcher, Cleopatra, Hilary Clinton,
Condoleezza
Rice, Queen Elisabeth I, Joan D’Arc and countless others have
started
, maintained, and escalated
violent
conflicts. There are
very
few examples of
peaceful
female
leaders
and those that exist can
be matched
proportionally
with male
leaders
. The claim that
women
are more
peaceful
is not supported by historical evidence. A major caveat is that these are the exceptions and
women
rulers have held power in a world
otherwise
dominated by male hierarchy.
Furthermore
,
men
are
naturally
predisposed towards aggression. This stems from both biology and society.
Men
produce more testosterone than
women
and this has
been shown
to increase aggressive tendencies and
violent
behaviour
.
Men
can curb this instinct,
but
it has the potential to undermine their better nature at any moment. There are
also
societal forces at work that play on
men’s
pride. From a young age, boys
are raised
to be tough, to not back down, to not compromise and to
idealise
violent
heroes. The majority of male role models are
violent
, ranging from historic figures to action stars and even video game characters.
In conclusion
,
males
are more
violent
and
women
would likely be more
peaceful
given
the opportunity to
rule
wisely
. The question of the desirability of ending all conflicts and its global impact is another matter.