The media is getting the public ready to have the first female US president by declaring in many instances that if we had more women in power, the world would be a better place. An article from the BBC reports:
"Studies also show that women also lead differently than men. They're more likely to be collaborative, inclusive and team-oriented, all characteristics that tend to be effective, particularly in today's less-hierarchical, fast-paced, innovation-driven world.
'I think it's fair to say that women are a little more collaborative in their approach overall, and a little less driven to conflict as opposed to driven to working out problems,"'says Janet Napolitano, the US Secretary of Homeland Security.
Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland, says that women also bring an inter-generational perspective to their work. 'We need to take decisions now that will make for a safer world for our grandchildren and their grandchildren, and I think women are more likely to do that when they come into positions of leadership.' "These are easy assertions to make when the public ignores female violence and female leadership when it comes to war times. But history can tell us otherwise, it can give us better perspective to female leadership when we analyze brutal war times in human history. A very telling study investigates female rulers from since the 15th century to the 20th century. The study called Queens let us know that this concept of female perpetual benevolence is a downright myth:
And while this study focuses on a time period from the 15th to 20th centuries, here in the 21st, we can get a glimpse of female brutality by all-female ISIS brigades who are killing women and torturing them.