You should spend 40 minutes on this task.
World history suggests that violence and conflict were more evident under male leadership than under female leadership.
So, for peace to prevail, female leadership can be considered as a better option than male leadership.
Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
Write at least 250 words.
The wars and struggles are part of the world history for a very long period. However, with advancement in technology, it has all become much faster. Although, the ware has been evident, some people believe that the world is at more peace when a female is at power, rather than male. In my opinion, this can be because of the characterstics of women, however, it is about great leadership than gender of the leader.
The history has showed us some of the most ruthless rulers, and mostly they have been men. It was Hitler, a male, who contributed significantly for the world war 2. Even more, the first world war was mostly caused by the male ego, assassinations and conflicts of interests among men. Very few female leaders contributed taking decision to have war with other nations in their period of ruling a country.
However, on cannot forget, Queen Isabella of Spain, Queens Marry, a.k.a. Bloody Marry, Victoria, and Elizabeth of Britain, all of them have ruled over vast spectrum of power and they often have done so ruthlessly, achieving goals with an iron hand.
But, there is other side of the coin as well. When the world saw Hitler, it also saw, Winston Churchill, Mahatma Gandhi and when it witnessed Queens Marry, we also noticed, Mother Teresa, Aung Suu Kyi.
Overall, in my opinion, it is the lust of power that causes wars, gender is just a biological existence.