Are women by nature the most pro-war since they are not directly involved in conflict?
Eeeeh. I'd need some hard data, but my instincts tell me no. Women are just more easily led, so you'll get pro-war women, you'll also get strongly anti-war women. I don't know how it averages out to men, and I'd cynically imagine it also depends on which party is in power at the time. But I don't think they're necessarily more pro-war outright.
This reminds me a lot of Hillary Clinton.
She's a demon, and not representative of women. Also, women leaders are a whole other beast from mere women, and most are atrocious. Women given power seem to trend toward the tyrannical and absurd even harder than men do.
...they need to break their biological trends much more severely than men do to have that drive. This is probably what leads to Merkel and Hillary, for example.
That's probably part of it, but in some ways I think it's also the inverse; women trend more toward "empathy," and that's not always good in a leader. Empathy + "if it saves just one life" or "think of the children" ends up with some true believer bullshit. They think they know better, since they're in a position of power, and then anyone who questions them is an enemy who is harming the people. It goes back to that C.S. Lewis quote about moral busybodies and robber barons.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
I would argue female leaders trend strongly toward the moral busybody side of things. The people they oppress are Bad People, and their oppression of them are Saving Lives. They're also not as used to exercising such powers, so often they don't even realize how freaking tyrannical they actually are. It's why they can laugh at their critics so genuinely; it's an absurd notion to these dictators that they might be behaving inappropriately...they're saving lives, after all! They've been entrusted by their country to power, they can't even imagine not exercising it all, and the people who question her are insane conspiracy theorists who hurt people. I think it gets all twisted up.
women, being (more) easily led than men, make good true believer puppets. This is probably the case for, say, at least a few of that all-female government from Norway or Finland or something, and Justin Trudeau (sorry).
It's funny, Justin Trudeau often gets thrown in there...but I think it's absolutely apt. This isn't even a dig out how wimpy and unmanly he is...he and his leadership style have extremely feminine energy. It genuinely makes sense to refer to Trudeau when talking about female world leaders.
Eeeeh. I'd need some hard data, but my instincts tell me no. Women are just more easily led, so you'll get pro-war women, you'll also get strongly anti-war women. I don't know how it averages out to men, and I'd cynically imagine it also depends on which party is in power at the time. But I don't think they're necessarily more pro-war outright.
She's a demon, and not representative of women. Also, women leaders are a whole other beast from mere women, and most are atrocious. Women given power seem to trend toward the tyrannical and absurd even harder than men do.
That's probably part of it, but in some ways I think it's also the inverse; women trend more toward "empathy," and that's not always good in a leader. Empathy + "if it saves just one life" or "think of the children" ends up with some true believer bullshit. They think they know better, since they're in a position of power, and then anyone who questions them is an enemy who is harming the people. It goes back to that C.S. Lewis quote about moral busybodies and robber barons.
I would argue female leaders trend strongly toward the moral busybody side of things. The people they oppress are Bad People, and their oppression of them are Saving Lives. They're also not as used to exercising such powers, so often they don't even realize how freaking tyrannical they actually are. It's why they can laugh at their critics so genuinely; it's an absurd notion to these dictators that they might be behaving inappropriately...they're saving lives, after all! They've been entrusted by their country to power, they can't even imagine not exercising it all, and the people who question her are insane conspiracy theorists who hurt people. I think it gets all twisted up.
It's funny, Justin Trudeau often gets thrown in there...but I think it's absolutely apt. This isn't even a dig out how wimpy and unmanly he is...he and his leadership style have extremely feminine energy. It genuinely makes sense to refer to Trudeau when talking about female world leaders.