In the past, many male leaders have led our society to conflicts and violence. The world would be better governed and more peaceful if it was ruled by women. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is a controversial perspective heating a debate over the fact that men leaders had created a wave of conflicts and

violence

in the old days.

Therefore

, some make a statement that women would better the global peace when they lead the

world

. In my opinion, I absolutely consider myself a complete opponent of

this

school of thought. It cannot be denied that there are some main culprits leading to the common thought that men easily evoke adverse

violence

when being a leader. Obviously, men are generally considered pretty aggressive by nature with a high-tempered mind, which makes them have a tendency to resort to wicked

violence

to achieve their goals or handle serious conflicts. To illustrate, in years gone by Adolf Hitler who was a German dictator, he initiated

World

War II, was directly involved in the malignant genocide of a wave of Jews and other victims.

In contrast

, women are mostly judged to be born with sensitive emotions so they may prefer non-

violence

and harmonious ways

such

as compromising or convincing to pursue their desirable results.

However

, in fact, the decisive determinants for a great leader in the

world

leadership to avoid

violence

depends on personality and individual's ability, rather than genders. It is

such

a common norm that a person who possesses a multi-dimensional vision, communication skills and intelligent mindset can be able to operate a country. They can flexibly make up their minds to indicate the most appropriate remedy in the right situations to prevent arguments as effectively as possible. To sum up, despite the common thought that empowers women in

world

stability, I would contend that a ruler should be recognized with decent ability in lieu of genders.