Today I had an interesting conversation with my friend, we talked about a lot of ongoing political issues and for most of them we had similar perspectives, and it would have been a pleasant conversation over all if he didnt mention to me about something that had happened earlier on.
It was about how a leader shouldn't be sensitive and emotional, and for as long as they are in the helm, things will not progress. This caused much turbulence in our conversation and friendship as well. Nobody talks about these things when it is a man who is the leader of an organisation. They pretty much don't care about how present/absent he has been, his administrative skills, his ability to stand u for his people and so on, but when it is a woman in that place, its like the yard stick almost automatically changes, you are judged by an entirely different standard. Nobody cares if a man is sensitive or not, but the minute a woman tries to make a point, either she is seen as an authoritarian figure, cold, calculative dictator or she is seen as 'too emotional'. Could the problem be because people are so used to seeing men as leaders and they feel that every leader must act like one the men who have been great leaders, it is not unbelievable that poeple think that because in most popular cultures, strength, power and authority are seen as masculine traits, wheres soft, docile and emotional and weak are seen as feminine traits.
My point is why should someone who is sensitive and emotional not be strong leaders?
It was about how a leader shouldn't be sensitive and emotional, and for as long as they are in the helm, things will not progress. This caused much turbulence in our conversation and friendship as well. Nobody talks about these things when it is a man who is the leader of an organisation. They pretty much don't care about how present/absent he has been, his administrative skills, his ability to stand u for his people and so on, but when it is a woman in that place, its like the yard stick almost automatically changes, you are judged by an entirely different standard. Nobody cares if a man is sensitive or not, but the minute a woman tries to make a point, either she is seen as an authoritarian figure, cold, calculative dictator or she is seen as 'too emotional'. Could the problem be because people are so used to seeing men as leaders and they feel that every leader must act like one the men who have been great leaders, it is not unbelievable that poeple think that because in most popular cultures, strength, power and authority are seen as masculine traits, wheres soft, docile and emotional and weak are seen as feminine traits.
My point is why should someone who is sensitive and emotional not be strong leaders?
Comments
Post a Comment