“If you are a feminist, I’m guessing you are already pissed by the headline alone (Why Women Shouldn’t Be Leaders) but permit me to make a point, a point that would only seem clear to you if you are open-minded to my premise.”
The above was the beginning of a post published by an anonymous writer on the creative writing platform, Tell! To get into context, you can read the post here: https://www.tellstories.com.ng/why-women-shouldnt-be-leaders/
I am not even a feminist and after reading the article, I was convinced the writer is plagued with delusions of his own pseudo-intelligence and was only interested in propagating misogynistic views, shrouded in “tangible research.” As a result, I wrote this article to constructively criticize the bizarre arguments presented in the said post and also reach out to the anonymous writer who will henceforth be referred to as Anon not only because his/her view is terribly out of touch with reality but also because such views lead to the deterioration of society as a whole.
Anon begins his/her self-serving post with the opinion that “women are beautiful, smarter, more economic–minded and resourceful than their male counterparts.” This sentimental claim reveals Anon’s psych and also defeats his whole argument in one stride. Who do you want leading you? Is it not reasonable to prefer a smart and resourceful leader? Anon further states: “it is encoded in their DNA to be more perfect than men, being God’s latest creation and all.” With this statement, you can begin to comprehend just how delusional our “genius” writer is. Anon actually believes that perfection is encoded in the feminine DNA because they were God’s last creation. Also, this is a last ditch attempt for Anon to convince (confuse?) his/her readers with incoherent feely goody distractions before launching into his/her misogynistic convictions.
“Women can be and should be anything they want to be, but one thing they shouldn’t be is a leader.” The auxiliary verb “can” denotes the definite possibility of an event to take place while “should” denotes a likelihood. Anon admits that it is POSSIBLE for women to become anything, ergo, it is possible for women to become leaders but they must not aspire to become leaders, and then he/she goes into a disastrous plethora of lazy and ignorant, at best, as well as stupid and disingenuous, at worst, reasons as to why we should reason/agree with him or her.
Margaret Thatcher, Queen Victoria, Eleanor Roosevelt, Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Catherine the Great, Elizabeth I; what did all these women have in common? Leadership. They all led major parts of the world at one point or another in human history. What else did they have in common? By their lives, they show that the entirety of Anon’s view on women and leadership is unsubstantial and laughable. While one may conclude that this is a case of hasty generalization, I will insist that this is not the case. From an evolutionary point of view, while men were the leaders of various groups and villages because they were more equipped physically to survive and fight against other men and animals, women would typically find a man strong enough to protect them and their offspring because due to limitations brought about by their anatomies, they could not survive on their own in the wild. But as society took on a more civilized development and survival wasn’t dependent on physical prowess, women were able to transcend and have continued to do so in various climes.
Anon further supplied some highly simplistic and unintelligent reasons why “women cannot be leaders” (really? I thought women could be anything they wanted to be (confused emoji)) mixed with some “high, heart felt, idealistic, opinions” of how women are more important than men. In all honesty, I found most of his/her reasons quite laughable and hardly worthy of academic rebuttal for they can be seen for what they are by most people – the ramblings of an unintelligent and deluded misogynist who believes he has answers. Anon’s whole opinion on this topic can be put into one sentence: Women are fantastic in everything; they are the best human beings, but due to some personal reasons, it is impossible for them to lead successfully.
In conclusion, should women be leaders? Can women be leaders? A leader, as defined by the Merriam – Webster dictionary is “a person who leads.” The traits of a good leader are honesty, integrity, ability to inspire others, commitment and passion, accountability, creativity and innovation, decision-making capabilities, etc. These attributes are not dependent on the XX or XY chromosomes, they are dependent on self-development, upbringing, environment, study, mentorship, imitation. History and reality show men, as well as women as able to acquire these attributes and consequently, able to lead. Yes, Anon, your logic is completely flawed and whether you are male or female, I suggest you reevaluate your thought process, and constructively question your own beliefs. Obviously, you are embarrassed by them or why else did you publish anonymously?
What do you think?