Leadership Knows No Gender

After doing the reading and listening to the presentation on gender in IR, I am not entirely convinced that gender has meaningful implications for IR. As far as leadership positions in world politics go, I think that people have preconceived notions of what they look for in a leader. Most people look for characteristics like strength, honesty, courage, and confidence, among others, when looking for a leader to support. None of those characteristics is any more typical of a man than of a woman. I believe that men and woman can both be aggressive when necessary and passive when necessary as male and female leaders in world history have shown. Again on the issue of leadership, I think that women like Hilary Clinton learn to act like men I just think that she is a person to wants to present an image of strength and seriousness and that requires that she act accordingly. This does not leave her much room to acting compassionate and nurturing. Also, the idea that men are more prone to war than women is interesting considering the fact that Hilary Clinton voted in support of an invasion of Iraq in 2003. There have been female world leaders like President Mary McAleese of Ireland who have presented an image of a more passive and ‘nurturing’ type leader and so have male leaders in the world like Gandhi. Let us also recognize that Hilary Clinton is trying to run for president in a country that is at war and divided over that war and she needs to present a strong image in order to win that office. Leadership is defined by character not gender or sex. When is that last time that you have attended a leadership course of conference where they said that men make stronger and more aggressive leaders than women? Essentially what I believe is that both men and women have the capacity to have all of the attributes of a leader that people will follow, and can tailor those attributes to situation that they face as leaders.