A woman's suitability for leadership is inversely proportional to her femininity. Face it, a woman who wants to lead - for real - cannot be like your average woman; the world will walk all over a sensitive, nurturing, emotionally-dominated woman without a man to shield her.
A female leader needs to be someone that the men around her can respect and trust. She'll need to be disciplined and practical when she needs to be, but human when she can be. She'll have to be seen as sympathetic to her followers, but without giving them power over her in the process. She'll have to be steadfast in the face of obstacles, but without becoming a slave to "the plan", and thus able to adapt quickly when things go wrong. She can't micromanage her subordinates or the process, nor can she blind herself to the big picture by becoming personally involved in things. Finally, she cannot take any attack or praise personally, nor can she expect to be loved ...
... and like countless would-be male leaders, if she thinks she can rely on her position to inspire confidence, loyalty, and obedience, she's doomed.
The problem a lot of women have with power is that it's not natural to them - a powerful woman basically has to fake it in order to make it. This repressed, deliberate, ego-driven state makes them not only impractically rigid, but often dangerously extreme as well - like born-again Christians, who live their religion in the same rigorous and deliberate way. This means that women generally don't handle power very well; they either burn out, or turn into outrageous stereotypes of power (selfish, callous, tyrranical, irrational, and uninhibited) - ironically, everything the feminazis accuse men of being, but a million times worse since the woman ends up thinking it's what she needs to be, and therefore takes it as far as she can.
A female leader needs to be someone that the men around her can respect and trust. She'll need to be disciplined and practical when she needs to be, but human when she can be. She'll have to be seen as sympathetic to her followers, but without giving them power over her in the process. She'll have to be steadfast in the face of obstacles, but without becoming a slave to "the plan", and thus able to adapt quickly when things go wrong. She can't micromanage her subordinates or the process, nor can she blind herself to the big picture by becoming personally involved in things. Finally, she cannot take any attack or praise personally, nor can she expect to be loved ...
... and like countless would-be male leaders, if she thinks she can rely on her position to inspire confidence, loyalty, and obedience, she's doomed.
The problem a lot of women have with power is that it's not natural to them - a powerful woman basically has to fake it in order to make it. This repressed, deliberate, ego-driven state makes them not only impractically rigid, but often dangerously extreme as well - like born-again Christians, who live their religion in the same rigorous and deliberate way. This means that women generally don't handle power very well; they either burn out, or turn into outrageous stereotypes of power (selfish, callous, tyrranical, irrational, and uninhibited) - ironically, everything the feminazis accuse men of being, but a million times worse since the woman ends up thinking it's what she needs to be, and therefore takes it as far as she can.
