439 views
0 votes
0 votes

In the past, many male leaders had led our society to conflicts and violence. The world would be better governed and more peaceful if it were rule by women.

To what extent do you agree or disagree.

 

Learning from history, many people argue that the world's instability was caused predominantly by male leaders' decisions and that women's leadership would lead the world to a better place. However, I do not fully agree with this opinion.

First off, there are several reasons why males are chosen to be a leader, and it is not always true to say that all of the male leaders led our world to war. For example , people believed that they are calmer, more assertive, and healthy than women for high positions. In our history, very many great men also helped to ensure world peace and prevent conflicts. Therefore, if female leaders have the same qualifications as male leaders, they absolutely could become leaders.

Furthermore, it is not true that a world governed by women would be more peaceful and stable. History also teaches us that many ruling women were direct or indirect causes of wars or conflicts. Taking Wu Zetian as an example, she was engaging in a series of battles on the Korean Peninsula during her political and military leadership period. However, many outstanding female leaders in the world also contribute their lives to world peace like Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the woman who received a Nobel Peace Prize in 2006 to support women's rights. These affirm anew that it depends on the leaders' ability and ideology to protect world peace rather than their gender.

In conclusion, the idea that women as world leaders can bring a more peaceful world is intuitive. From my perspective, empowering women or men do not affect the stability and wealth of the world.

by
17 points

Please log in or register to answer this question.

1 Answer

0 votes
0 votes
bài tốt nhưng góp ý tí là hai đoạn thân hơi chênh lệch
by
161 points

Related questions

0 votes
0 votes
1 answer