Do men make better leaders?

[dulaney0330]

Growing up in a Christian community, it was taught that man, as the head of woman, was to lead the family. Not only that, it was only a man who could have leadership roles in the church.

Women, known for their nurturing and caring skills, were created to assist men. A woman's primary role was to care for the children and keep home.

In 2010, women are asserting themselves in many leadership roles, including the church. While I agree with this, there are many men (especially Christian) who believe men are more effective and natural leaders.

Does male leadership depend solely on the biological differences of the sexes? Do you think that men, generally, make more effective leaders?

Men: Do you feel uncomfortable with a woman who has more authority than you?

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Do you think that men, generally, make more effective leaders?

Nope.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by Liz Caitlin

Nope.

Why do you think this? '

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Why do you think this? '

Haha was it too obvious I was avoiding trying to explain this?

Women ARE leaders. A very natural Christian role for a woman, for instance, is that of a mother. Is there anyone who doesn't embody the very definition of a leader more than a mother?

And I just know so many female leaders in my personal life...I really think gender doesn't make a difference. There are plenty of female governors, senators, etc. - they seem to do just fine. The second person in line to the presidency right now is a woman! And of course, there are my personal favorites, Cleopatra & Elizabeth I. Excellent leaders. Our style may differ from men sometimes, but women are excellent leaders.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by Liz Caitlin

Haha was it too obvious I was avoiding trying to explain this?

Women ARE leaders. A very natural Christian role for a woman, for instance, is that of a mother. Is there anyone who doesn't embody the very definition of a leader more than a mother?

And I just know so many female leaders in my personal life...I really think gender doesn't make a difference. There are plenty of female governors, senators, etc. - they seem to do just fine. The second person in line to the presidency right now is a woman! And of course, there are my personal favorites, Cleopatra & Elizabeth I. Excellent leaders. Our style may differ from men sometimes, but women are excellent leaders.

Do you believe the biological differences of the sexes have made male leadership more effective?

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Do you believe the biological differences of the sexes have made male leadership more effective?

I think in a situation where brutal strength is what counts, sure, men were more effective.

But nowadays displaying any aggressiveness is highly frowned upon. Alexander Hamilton was getting in duels back in the day; it's a different society now. Obama, for instance, displayed a lot of traditionally "feminine" styles of leadership - he was sensitive, empathetic. While he was running for office his main focus was about seeking common ground & minimizing conflict - he always talked about how he wanted to bring the parties together. Feminine traits are actually valued now even though just a few decades ago they were still scorned.

So no, I don't think men's testosterone makes them more effective. Women's ability to communicate and emphasize make them invaluable leaders. In fact, a recent study showed that female CEOs are perceived as more competent than male CEOs:

Women Well-Suited To Be Leaders | Psych Central News

So in short, to answer your question, no.

[180]

I remember reading that women are more suitable leaders in certain circumstances.

For example, in times of peace, or in times where unity requires proactive creativity or community, women made superior leaders. This was actually backed up by surveys from corporations and companies. If I remember correctly the survey asked companies their satisfaction level with their female leaders and compared it to companies where men were the leaders.

They found out women were more community and peace centered and fostered better environments. Men tended to be more narcissistic and belittled their employees which actually resulted in drops of production.

In times of war and belligerence or threats, men made superior leaders. The reason purported was because men were more fearless and suitable in taking logical action against threats.

If I can interject my own personal opinion, I believe this is to be true as well. I've noticed in times of threat or perceived threats... women go off the wall panicky. I remember a time there was a "fire" in our restaurant. All the male managers were on lock down and all the female managers were flipping out. Of course this is anecdotal, but what you'll find is that because women are more emotional, if the environment is threat induced, they will react full force to it.

The way the world is moving towards is towards female leadership though. Times of war has mostly ended and we're looking for creative ways to produce more.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by Liz Caitlin

I think in a situation where brutal strength is what counts, sure, men were more effective.

But nowadays displaying any aggressiveness is highly frowned upon. Alexander Hamilton was getting in duels back in the day; it's a different society now. Obama, for instance, displayed a lot of traditionally "feminine" styles of leadership - he was sensitive, empathetic. While he was running for office his main focus was about seeking common ground & minimizing conflict - he always talked about how he wanted to bring the parties together. Feminine traits are actually valued now even though just a few decades ago they were still scorned.

So no, I don't think men's testosterone makes them more effective. Women's ability to communicate and emphasize make them invaluable leaders. In fact, a recent study showed that female CEOs are perceived as more competent than male CEOs:

Women Well-Suited To Be Leaders | Psych Central News

So in short, to answer your question, no.

Like I mentioned in one of our messages, the only real difficulty I have with christianity is it's teachings that men are supposed to be leaders over women.

Thousands of years ago, this makes sense. A totally different culture than the one today. In primitive nations, like Africa or the Middle East, you see this type of thinking much more.

There is a certain quality of male leaders I can appreciate: their strength, power, or mere presence. A loud, booming voice or stern appearance that many women find attractive.

I do think that boys, especially, need a strong, confident male role model that he can look up to. I think a girl can do this with either sex but it seems a boy needs more of that father figure.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by 180

In times of war and belligerence or threats, men made superior leaders. The reason purported was because men were more fearless and suitable in taking logical action against threats.

This makes sense, especially considering physical size, speed, and strength. I want my husband to lead when there is a crisis, especially one that involves strenous activity or life threatening situations. He's much more calm in stressful situations. I don't have a problem admitting his leadership.

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Like I mentioned in one of our messages, the only real difficulty I have with christianity is it's teachings that men are supposed to be leaders over women.

Thousands of years ago, this makes sense. A totally different culture than the one today. In primitive nations, like Africa or the Middle East, you see this type of thinking much more.

There is a certain quality of male leaders I can appreciate: their strength, power, or mere presence. A loud, booming voice or stern appearance that many women find attractive.

I do think that boys, especially, need a strong, confident male role model that he can look up to. I think a girl can do this with either sex but it seems a boy needs more of that father figure.

Very true. In a psych class we learned that cultures in harsh environments - like, say, parts of Africa, the Middle East, or the desert early Jewish ancestors were in - tend to have highly concentrated power of men and higher subjugation of women. It just makes sense.

Now, however, we live in a different world, especially in western culture. So females can lead. It's actually fascinating to me to see the evolution of our culture as we grow increasingly secure: look at how "feminine" we've become! Of course I see no problem with that.

As for boys needing strong role models - couldn't agree more. I think seeing a man who can control his impulses and baser instincts to achieve something greater sets an important example for young men who will inevitably be confused by their hormones and conflicting desires.

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Like I mentioned in one of our messages, the only real difficulty I have with christianity is it's teachings that men are supposed to be leaders over women.

Actually, this just reminded me of something else as well. A lot of those teachings regarding women not teaching men and remaining silent in church are in Paul's letters...I think it was Corinthians, but I'm not sure.

Anyway, he wrote those things because apparently the poor guy was quite fed up with women chatting loudly in church. He found them irritating and wanted some peace and quiet. So he wrote specific rules about that in his letters, but it was really just his own bias.

I read the Bible at a fairly early age and found many New Testament passages baffling, so Bible study classes helped a lot. Unfortunately, many churches still teach that women should submit to men even though the actual Bible passage states they should submit to each other. They have different roles to play, sure, and I'm submissive myself so masculine authority in some areas isn't an issue for me, but I think the Bible's meaning has been largely misinterpreted. And of course, in the Gospels I don't think Jesus ever said anything about women being less capable of leading. Most of the stuff in red - some Bibles color Jesus's words that way - make perfect sense to me. He was awesome

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by Liz Caitlin

In fact, a recent study showed that female CEOs are perceived as more competent than male CEOs:

Women Well-Suited To Be Leaders | Psych Central News

A study has showed that men are often are percieved to have a higher IQ's than women of similar intelligence.

Does this say anything about the IQ of men/women?

No.

So I fail to see why this has any relevance. I wonder if this article showed that men are percieved as better leaders, than it would exalt male qualities and how they can be so great to have in a leadership role. And if the title of the article would be something like «Men Well-Suited To Be Leaders». Oh wait, what am I saying, of course it wouldn't. Than it would be evidence of how woe is woman faces great obstacles in the corporate world.

Anyway, I wrote more about it than this. But I decided it would be largely off-topic to this thread and posted the Behemoth here instead.

[rei]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

In primitive nations, like Africa or the Middle East, you see this type of thinking much more.

PC police! Well, afaik, neither Africa nor the Middle East are nations. They are more like regions... But they are not really primitive, are they? There is a rich culture there, even if there is also a more, um, conventional idea about the role of women.

I'm sure there's Africans and people from the Middle East who would say America is primitive in some way...

Anyway, no I don't think men make better leaders. I think things move more toward connectivity when women are in charge - and often in a Christian household, the woman IS in charge, and she just pretends that the man is running things And the kind of woman who would be a natural leader is not the kind of woman who would have one week out of the month where she terrorizes everyone under her

To me, leadership is not really about gender or biology. But it's true, women who are naturally dominant are often conditioned to think it's wrong to be that way, or called controlling or something like that. Men may be more easily accepted as leaders because so many follow social conditioning, but I don't think that means they are better suited to the task.

[Cochonette]

In high school, I heard some conservative students say that they thought women were too emotional to be President (speaking of Hillary, who had just announced her plan to run). I was like, really? In the 21st century people are saying this? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what their parents told them. Especially the girl I heard say that. Yes, she was Christian.

Men make better leaders when it comes to killing people.

[SatvikBeri]

I worked at a woman-owned company once. There were 30 employees, 2 males, one of whom was head of sales and thus often away, and the other one was me.

It was awesome. The culture was fantastic, and they clearly believed in concepts like lowering employees' stress and helping the employees do what they wanted to do. It was a very fun, very productive place.

I've read several studies that show that women-owned companies do better than average. I could completely believe this. In an era of knowledge workers, women just seem to be more in touch with the things that help people be their best, like helping employees do the work they enjoy, making a good place to work, really knowing how to motivate people etc.

Seriously, I would love to work at a woman-owned company again.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by Cochonette

In high school, I heard some conservative students say that they thought women were too emotional to be President (speaking of Hillary, who had just announced her plan to run). I was like, really? In the 21st century people are saying this? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what their parents told them. Especially the girl I heard say that. Yes, she was Christian.

Men make better leaders when it comes to killing people.

On an internet forum, I read someone say that men make better leaders when it comes to killing people. I was like, really? In the 21st century, people are reducing male excellence in leadership to malevolence and brutal force? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what some radical feminist had told them. And then it hit me DUH, THIS IS THE 21ST CENTURY. This IS the time of female-biased feminism. This IS the culture in which people can get away with making misandry-loaded one-liners.

[Cochonette]

Originally Posted by Elrond

On an internet forum, I read someone say that men make better leaders when it comes to killing people. I was like, really? In the 21st century, people are reducing male excellence in leadership to malevolence and brutal force? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what some radical feminist had told them. And then it hit me DUH, THIS IS THE 21ST CENTURY. This IS the time of female-biased feminism. This IS the culture in which people can get away with making misandry-loaded one-liners.

Dude, get over yourself. "Men" is a social construction anyway, and if men are better at killing, it's mostly because they are taught to fight and women are not. Most people on this forum probably believe in the concept of gender more than I do.

Also, learn something about feminism. "Female-biased feminism" mostly died out 2-3 decades ago, but pop culture pretends it's all feminism is. When I think "men," I mean the social construct of men, which is different from most people here. It's the feminist in me.

[Elrond]

Maybe the people that said that women are too emotional to be leaders, meant women as a social construct? So they may have meant that it isn't women as people, but the stereotype of women that is a subpar leader?

Sooo... perhaps get over yourself? (this reminds me of the delivery of my last post somehow...)

I believe that you genuinely meant 'men as a social construct'. But I still see that one-liner as a misandric statement, choosing to emphasize the malevolent forces of men, whether they were conditioned through society or not - doesn't matter. It still shows contempt by emphasizing the destructive forces often channeled by men rather than the constructive. I don't see how you can possibly slither yourself out of that. I will not participate in mincing words, certainly not a definiton so uncommon and radical... well, it wouldn't be radical if it were accompinied with some explanation. But obviously there is no room for explanation in one-liners...

And about "female-biased feminism", look at all of my posts in the "is it a male dominated society?" thread. And use google.

[James81]

Originally Posted by Cochonette

Men make better leaders when it comes to killing people.

Wow. Just. Wow.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Men: Do you feel uncomfortable with a woman who has more authority than you?

I actually find it sexy when a girl is high-powered and has authority. I've always liked centered, confident businesswomen. I'm definitely not uncomfortable around that kind of girl.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Cochonette

In high school, I heard some conservative students say that they thought women were too emotional to be President (speaking of Hillary, who had just announced her plan to run). I was like, really? In the 21st century people are saying this? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what their parents told them. Especially the girl I heard say that. Yes, she was Christian.

Men make better leaders when it comes to killing people.

The funny thing about Hillary is she is so manly.

Sarah Palin is a much better example of a feminine leader. Hillary is just one of the guys.

I've had female bosses who were very manly like Hillary. They do a fine job but they tend to actually alienate people due to their hardcoreness.

I've also had female bosses were were very feminine. They keep everyone happy and get stuff done but they just use a totally different energy to do it.

I think both types have their role. The manly type of woman is better at getting something done NOW, or at making the really harsh decisions like firing someone who everyone likes but who is a bad employee.

This probably sounds really cliche but it's like the difference between growing something organically like tending a garden and building something concrete like erecting a pyramid. The manly type of leaders get their pyramids built to within perfect proportions. The feminine type of leaders grow big organic gardens that flourish but are unpredictable and messier.

And I think we need both pyramids and gardens. So I think we need both.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by yossarian

And I think we need both pyramids and gardens. So I think we need both.

I wouldn't mind having a pyramid in my back yard.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

I wouldn't mind having a pyramid in my back yard.

Just to be clear. (Since I'm a pyramid builder and I love to be clear)

You're saying you'd like to be ****ed in the ass occasionally, right?

(I don't mean that in a bad way at all, honestly, I swear. I sounds like a ****ing ruhtard, in hindsight.)

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by yossarian

Just to be clear. (Since I'm a pyramid builder and I love to be clear)

You're saying you'd like to be ****ed in the ass occasionally, right?

(I don't mean that in a bad way at all, honestly, I swear.)

Lol WHAT. That is *not* what I was thinking there.

I was thinking of an actual pyramid, here in my back yard. I have plenty of space for a small one.

I wonder where I'd get pyramid stones, these days.

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

Lol WHAT. That is *not* what I was thinking there.

I was thinking of an actual pyramid, here in my back yard. I have plenty of space for a small one.

I wonder where I'd get pyramid stones, these days.

See everything you say I interpret as innuendo.

And putting a pyramid into your backyard is pretty clear innuendo to me.

We've already established that pyramids represent masculinity. The backyard represents the an intimate, personal place sheltered from the public where people like to have fun. In the back.

Nothing wrong with being bi. Maybe it's Freudian. You seem like the type who likes to **** everything/anyone so you're a good candidate for bisexuality.

Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking. Lulz.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by yossarian

See everything you say I interpret as innuendo.

Lol. Well, that's probably sensible.

Originally Posted by yossarian

And putting a pyramid into your backyard is pretty clear innuendo to me.

We've already established that pyramids represent masculinity. The backyard represents the an intimate, personal place sheltered from the public where people like to have fun.

Nothing wrong with being bi. Maybe it's Freudian. You seem like the type who likes to **** everything/anyone so you're a good candidate for bisexuality.

I've thought about it. I might like to take a man; but I doubt I'd like to be taken by a man. I've had the opportunity several times, and there's just no turn-on there for me. If there were, I wouldn't be shy about it.

For some reason, females do it for me, and males don't.

I seriously cracked up. I had no idea what I was posting would sound like that, but it totally does.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by Cochonette

In high school, I heard some conservative students say that they thought women were too emotional to be President (speaking of Hillary, who had just announced her plan to run). I was like, really? In the 21st century people are saying this? It sounded to me like they were just regurgitating what their parents told them. Especially the girl I heard say that. Yes, she was Christian.

Men make better leaders when it comes to killing people.

I've noticed that Christianity and Islam both focus on how "emotional" a woman is and how that merits restriction. For example, Islam requires two female witnesses verses one male because women get carried away by their emotions. In Christianity,male leadership is justified since men are typically more level headed and objective.

[givejonadollar]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

I actually find it sexy when a girl is high-powered and has authority. I've always liked centered, confident businesswomen. I'm definitely not uncomfortable around that kind of girl.

I would love a dominating woman if she could earn it.

Do men make better leaders?

Of course.

Otherwise women would be leading.
(and I wouldn't have a problem with that)

[Piercetheveil]

Leaders do not pretend someone else is running things. They either say that someone else is or wait for it....wait for it....

They lead.

Leaders lead.

People that lead have to... well, LEAD. The people that lead get followed. If the majority of women were better leaders well...they would have more followers which would mean less in the spots.

But, it is not that simple, now is it?

[Liz Caitlin]

Originally Posted by givejonadollar

I would love a dominating woman if she could earn it.

Do men make better leaders?

Of course.

Otherwise women would be leading.
(and I wouldn't have a problem with that)

There...are women leading. There are less women leaders in, say, governments and corporations, but they're not non-existent. So...there are women leading. Which by your logic means...women are fine leaders.

And...is running a household leadership in your book? Cuz there are a lot of mothers out there who are "leading" households in my mind. And lest you say a man actually runs that household, keep in mind how very many single moms there are out there.

And finally, even if there were NO women leading, your logic would still be completely faulty. It's like going back in time 50 years and saying, "Are men better at earning college degrees? Of course. Otherwise women would be getting those college degrees!" So to your faulty logic, if not to your point, which I also happen to disagree with