Do people here believe women are less capable and poorer leader?

[lux7]

In the article on “how not to be a simp”, Chase writes that bad media includes:

• That women (in general) are capable, strong, selfless, courageous, and independent
• That men (in general) are clumsy, weak, selfish, cowardly, or filled with self-doubt
• That women are as capable as men, or more capable than men
• That teams of women are everywhere, in leadership roles, doing great things

It’s obviously nonsense to imply that men “in general” are clumsy or filled with self-doubt (or clumsier than women: men just tend to occupy more extreme positions).

But I’m curious, do a lot of people here think that women are less capable than men, or that female leaders are less good than men are?

For the record, reality is more complex.
There are large surveys that show that women in managerial positions are rated as more capable and “better managers”.
Manager is different than leader, very different (it requires more "conscientiousness" and "tending/befriending")

However, there are also plenty of female leaders who are doing a great job.

This is a tytpical nonsense sensationalist article from Forbes, but it shows that there are at least some highly capable women in leadership positions who are doing great things leading countries.

To me, this mindset that (almost) all women need a man feels like hiding behind the old "girls are silly and cute" thing.
No, many women aren't desperately needing for a man to rescue her.
Or at least, they don't need men more much more than the average man needs a woman to make them feel like they are the protectors.

 

[Chrance]

women is a platonic idea, hence why we can distinguish what is a drawing of a proper woman from a proper man. Leadership qualities and grand capabilities (in the sciences, the arts, etc) is not a property of the platonic idea of a woman. Ergo it doesn’t matter - zilch - if a woman has leadership qualities, it doesn’t make her superior in any way to a woman who does not have them. The proof is in men’s direct sexual selection of the ideal women (the theoretical physical manifestation of the platonic Idea of women), which is expressed through terms like “the perfect woman” or “HB10”.

so having leadership qualities as a woman is like adding zero to one. Who gives a shit. We only care if the women’s capabilities are very practical to use. Otherwise, doesn’t matter. What is practical and what is proper are two different things. It is not always practical for a woman to be very feminine. It’s just what makes for the best woman, like the best dog, the best horse, etc. Animals in nature, like birds, follow the same principles.

in general woman will not have leadership qualities because the temperament that gives rise to those qualities is not a property of an ideal woman, so men will either ignore or avoid women with that temperament. Men simply do not find sexy or attractive those leadership qualities. Who cares lol. She might as well be good at twiddling her thumbs.

This is hard to understand if you don’t know what a platonic idea is. Geometry has a lot of examples. Beautiful art or timeless peices of art are also examples, like Greek statues, paintings, and story characters.

in a club, with competition, or really in any venue where there’s competition and alternatives, leadership qualities in a woman will go completely unnoticed. who cares that she’s good at telling people what to do. The ideal woman doesn’t go around commanding people except her family members maybe. The ideal man does or at least has the potential to (specifically beyond family).

if your son lacks the ability to lead in any way, this means you have a shitty son, which says something about your genetics.

if your daughter lacks the ability to lead in any way you won’t even notice. She’s just being a girl. “Girls are cute and silly” after all.

PS: this is just my explanation. But observe other animals, how they treat and select each other, especially the intelligent and attractive ones. I don’t want to rule out leadership as having absolutely nothing to do with the character of a woman, but clearly from the dawn of the species to now, we can see nearly all people’s from nearly all civilizations don’t give a shit about woman’s leadership skills. Using third world nations as a counter actually serves the point lol.

 

[trashKENNUT]

Zac:

Women are Great COOs. Not CEOs.

 

[Fluxcapacitor]

@lux7 dude! Typically speaking women are bad leaders, they're indecisive, emotional, (mood swings), cute and silly and they need guidance. This doesn't say some girls can't be better leaders than some men.

Men are typically stronger, but that doesn't mean you won't find a woman that's physically stronger than you. This woman will usually be unattractive to you, and you'll most likely be unattractive to her. There are exceptions to this rule some men like being dominated and some woman want to be in control. This isn't the norm though.

Girls who are really good leaders look for guys that are more dominant. This usually reduces her pool of options especially for a LTR. There's a LR somewhere where the dude had to be less dominate to fuck the girl because she wanted to be dominant and seduce him. He fucked the girl he wanted but he realised how shit it was being in the feminine role.

Girls need a man in their life, they can drink the feminist kool-aid all they want but they'll wake up one morning realising they've fucked up and they want a man. Ironically there's a post on the boards discussing the pandemic and a lot of feminists have had a oh shit I want a man moment.

Dudes need to lead, so if the girl is a strong leader she'll need a stronger man. Due to this very nature girls are worst leaders than their Male counterparts dude.

 

[trashKENNUT]

but it shows that there are at least some highly capable women in leadership positions who are doing great things leading countries.

My answer is short and i am trying to address this as a topic in my journal.

But here is an analogy. Just because women do not have statistical violence numbers high, does not mean that there is no violence. In fact, it was noted that it is 50/50. Still need to research on this though.

I spoke about this with the Girlschase guys on women who becomes "weird" when they like you. Because while she looks strong on paper and looks strong infront of her tribe,

She still do not have validation from men. You will see this phenomenon with older women and women in charities, events,
Now, Similar to men and porn. Porn is important but that does not equate to real life sex. Porn is not the problem.

So yea, are women terrible at leadership? I will tell you this. Yes, given that i have work with many female bosses and that converging of realities, mainstream reality and dating reality.

It's a lot to write. So yeap, it's short for now.

 

[lux7]

@lux7 ...

I'm not convinced about this at all, man.

Frankly, I think this is manosphere wishful thinking where men like to tell themselves that "women need them".
I don't buy it.

This made-up fantasy cuts two ways:

1. Women need men (often true, but also depends on woman and age and what you mean by "need". And forgets to add that many men also want/need women)
2. Women can't lead / need a man to forge the way (it's contextual)

Which style is more effective in terms of leadership is contextual.
Men make for better leaders in times of turmoil, when new paths need to be forged, and when "strong" leadership is needed.

Women make for better leaders in time of peace -like most advanced democracies tend to be-.
And like teams within companies, tend to be.
There is data for this: it was direct reports that evaluated female managers as "better leaders" than their male counterparts. Ignoring this reality is ignoring, well, reality, so that one can cling to the feel-good mantra of "women are silly and cute".
I think a man with high self-esteem doesn't that BS. Women can be as capable as men -most men are not that capable, anyway-. And that's great because I don't want idiots as partners.

And this is all on average, of course.
Averages make go out the window the moment you eventually meet the individual within each gender.

P.S.:
Beyond this all, I agree with you that women prefer guys who are "more" than they are, especially in terms of dominance. That's for sure.

 

[Velasco]

manosphere wishful thinking where men like to tell themselves that "women need them"
what you mean by "need"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1272967792258670596

Ignoring this reality is ignoring, well, reality, so that one can cling to the feel-good mantra of "women are silly and cute".

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271508415915995137

 

[lux7]

Doesn't prove anything, Velasco.
As much as pictures of LAN parties of pimply teens and incels shooting women wouldn't prove that men are poor leaders or "bad".

 

[Velasco]

much as pictures of LAN parties of pimply teens and incels shooting women wouldn't prove that men are poor leaders or "bad".

Those are males. Not men. I posted a video of girls being girls. Not girls trying to be something they're not (men).

In times of crisis, when shit goes down (cause "peace" dont last forever), you'd want a man to be leading the ship. But idk, maybe u different.

 

[Carousel]

The Manosphere itself is ironically probably the best example of how men in general are both irrational and incompetent.

You don't need to look far to see the enormous amount of "men" who try as hard as they can to NOT take advice that would entail an ego-hit or, god-forbid, doing something outside what they are used to. Or resort to whining instead of action.

 

[Chrance]

Women make for better leaders in time of peace -like most advanced democracies tend to be-.
And like teams within companies, tend to be.
There is data for this: it was direct reports that evaluated female managers as "better leaders" than their male counterparts. Ignoring this reality is ignoring, well, reality, so that one can cling to the feel-good mantra of "women are silly and cute".
I think a man with high self-esteem doesn't that BS. Women can be as capable as men -most men are not that capable, anyway-. And that's great because I don't want idiots as partners.

being a “leader” in a peaceful situation isn’t saying much about your leadership skills lol. Like no shit, when things are fine telling people what to do is easier.

Also, it is the course of the sexes due to sexual selection, not merely an average. So no, the differences will not go out the window when you meet someone who appears different from their sex. The differences will continue to perpetuate into future generations.

Men with high self estime are simply going to choose women who are hot (ie feminine ie submissive to some degree) just like every other man lol. If you want to prove your own point then take one for your team and knock up some domineering nagging dykes.

 

[Chase]

This is an interesting topic. I'm considering doing a proper article on it... because there's a ton of different ways to slice this apple.

There's a good speech by Roy F. Baumeister I think every man should give a read to on some of the differences between the sexes:

Denis Dutton

I think some good questions to consider:

• Why are women so underrepresented in leadership roles throughout business, political, and military history?
  
  
• If it is due to oppression, could women have... led their ways out of oppression? If so, why haven't they been able to lead men into not oppressing them?
  
  
• If it is due to disinterest, is it possible that a sex that is generally disinterested in a specific profession is also likely to be as good at it as another sex? e.g., would we say that men are equally as nurturing, caring, and patient as women are, in general?
  
  
• When examining various great men of history (say... Lycurgus. Or Cyrus the Great. Or Hammurabi. Or Qin Shi Huang. Or Caesar. Or Patton. Or Steve Jobs), can we imagine a woman stepping into his shoes and performing the same actions, and doing so as effectively and admirably? Why or why not?

On the frequency of women in middle management roles, and why women are often rated as good managers, the best analysis of the manager role I've seen is here -- I think this is necessary reading for anyone who wants to analyze capability by looking at folks in management roles (it doesn't go into sex, but it does flesh out the actual role of manager quite incisively):

The Gervais Principle, Or The Office According to “The Office”

www.ribbonfarm.com

Anyway. Curious topic -- I don't want to get too deep into it here, because it's an emotional thing for a lot of people, and it's hard to frame your argument right to not come off as a simp (to folks who think women are terrible leaders across the board) or a misogynist (to people who think women make fine leaders).

But I may write something on it, if I think it'll be relevant enough to guys' day-to-day lives and I can frame it properly.

Chase

 

[Velasco]

When examining various great men of history (Steve Jobs), can we imagine a woman stepping into his shoes and performing the same actions, and doing so as effectively and admirably? Why or why not?

Steve Jobs, Theranos' Elizabeth Holmes, and when the 'reality distortion field' fails | AppleInsider

The disgraced Theranos founder modeled herself after Steve Jobs, in everything from speaking style to wardrobe. But, as an acclaimed new book about the debacle shows, Jobs-like vision couldn't mask a product that didn't work.

appleinsider.com

What Happened When Marissa Mayer Tried to Be Steve Jobs (Published 2014)

The inside story of how Yahoo’s C.E.O. lost her way.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Fluxcapacitor]

@lux7 dude! @Velasco and @Chrance both made very good replies when you said you disagree with my thoughts. Your comment about slicing the apple of men needing women and women needing men goes hand in hand but not in the way of leadership.

This isn't a wishful thinking manosphere belief that women need men, men lead interactions and are typically better leaders.

I suggest you re read my post again, I didn't say women can't lead and that they can't be better at it than some men. If you meet a women that's a great leader you've met a women that's a great leader. This isn't impossible, but they usually don't pursue top leadership roles.

You stated yourself that men are better leaders in time of war, uncertainty and instability. If you want a man at the helm during difficult times you've just admitted that men make better leaders (even if only in one scenario). You covered yourself that democracy is usually peaceful which is why you feel women make better leaders.

Women are usually very socially savvy, emotionally aware, have empathy and are able to relate. These are good management traits to not rock the boat but doesn't mean men can't have these traits. The issue with not wanting to upset people and rock the boat is occasionally you have to and if you're not willing to make these decisions you can fail.

Business is about succeeding, a business that isn't making profit is usually failing (most businesses fail within the first 5 years, it usually takes 5 years to make profit).

@Train has a great thread about nice guys being made for the business world. Chase even said when he's hiring back ground staff he looks for nice guy traits. If you're filling up your middle management women are usually perfect to not rock the boat in these roles. Again this doesn't necessarily make them better leaders dude.

 

[ulrich]

Not to be an ass, @lux7 but it seems to me that you are a little stuck at taking what women say at face value.

Yes, some women are great and capable leaders.
But let me tell you something... power in a woman is often unattractive.

Think about it... are Hillary Clinton or Angela Merkel any more sexy because they have power?
Not at all.
Actually many people resent them for that.

Most women know this at least subconsciously.
That’s why they usually don’t go for positions of power (at least during their single years) because they know it makes them less attractive to men and repulsive to women.

Some of the most attractive women I have met were super intelligent and they had the habit to downplay their intelligence because they knew some men and some women resented for that.

So it’s not that they can’t.... it’s that usually it’s inconvenient for them.

Think about the archetype of “powerful woman leader” you see in the media.
They are either: 1) Old hags, 2)Workaholic women

For women, leadership is a suboptimal strategy, even in modern days.

———
I agree with you that “a woman needs a man” is perhaps an overstretch nowadays
But women need some feelings that they can’t get or that they can more satisfactorily get from men than from themselves (feeling safe, cherished).
Don’t forget that.

 

[Fluxcapacitor]

@lux7 dude! This is derailing from women as leaders but In response to "wishful thinking that men think women need them"

"While Silver has shaped her brand around being “an advocate for single women as whole, happy beings,” she recently penned an essay for Refinery29 in which she wrote about the challenges of being alone during the coronavirus pandemic. After experiencing a serious bout of depression, she wrote that she suddenly felt “an instinctual, threatened, terrified loneliness that needed a hug and an apocalypse partner and neither were available. I didn’t know how long I would be alone for, and for the first time in a very long time, I cared.” In other words, it made her think, “I just want a f***ing husband.”"

Full article can be read:

Coronavirus has changed online dating. Here's why some say that's a good thing

In the midst of a frightening global event that has negatively affected people’s lives in many ways, some have found that connecting through online dating is a rare bright spot.

www.pbs.org

Under the sub heading missing connection.

Women are still silly and cute. Some men can also be idiots. This is another argument altogether.

Discussing leadership:

"different individuals are differently suited to different situations, and context is, as ever, king. To that end, a study published recently in the journal of applied psychology aimed to add a more nuanced insight to the ‘male vs female leaders’ debate. By analyzing the results of 99 different studies that measured leaders’ effectiveness from 1962 to 2011, the researchers were able to unpick the situations in which male or female leaders excelled."

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the results suggested that the culture of the organization makes a difference: in traditionally male dominated, masculine organizations like government or the military, male leaders were more effective while women triumphed in more ‘feminine’ environments like social services and education "

Going back to your article where they suggest women are better leaders, it was never mentioned if this was in a feminine environment dude. You can select any statistic you want to make the point you want.

 

[Mr.Rob]

I tend to view it from the simp and the misogynist side.

On one hand are women capable of being a good leader in the corporate world?

Yes absolutely. Businesses aren't that PC yet to the point of hiring women who are less capable and losing the business money because of it, so clearly women can be good managers/leaders in a business otherwise only the most PC corporations would hire them.

My cousin is a senior manager who leads projects for one of the big comm companies, has climbed the corporate ladder well, and just crushes it and is great at what she does. Makes a large chunk of change for it too.

From what I see the women that are motivated enough to be that ambitious to make it in the corporate world that high are not your average girl. Their usually very dominant, high T women.

But those roles for man or woman are incredibly demanding and soul sucking and require a massive amount of motivation/desire to do it. Men are motivated by money/power/status but what are the women motivated by?

I don't know 100% for sure but it seems its partly a mating strategy (get access to higher tier more dominant/higher status men [think Dagny Taggart pairing up with Hank Reardon in Atlas Shrugged]), partly getting sucked into the social narrative from a young age (nd once their in they rationalize it doesn't suck because if they quit they lose social status), and partly some women very well thrive and excel at the role and do it for a purpose they believe in.

I think its a very small few outlier women that fall into the latter category. The women who are corporate leaders that I've talked to never seem to be truly happy and passionate about being in the corporate world. My cousin said she wishes to have kids and be a writer, but doesn't want to lose the money/lifestyle she gets... Women are much more tuned into keeping up with the Jones's and buying into the social narrative that's fed to them day in and day out (happiness comes from being a powerful leader!). So there they stay.

Chase even said when he's hiring back ground staff he looks for nice guy traits. If you're filling up your middle management women are usually perfect to not rock the boat in these roles.

Right, middle management is all about keeping things steady and not rocking the boat. Women are the ultimate nice guys in this instance and not risk takers which means they'll take the orders and stick to the proven plan.

This is exactly why you see many women in middle management and not CEO's and entreprenuers.

Once a business becomes an established corporation all the beauracracy and policies are in place to keep things status quo. Who's better to keep status quo than a competent woman.

When examining various great men of history (say... Lycurgus. Or Cyrus the Great. Or Hammurabi. Or Qin Shi Huang. Or Caesar. Or Patton. Or Steve Jobs), can we imagine a woman stepping into his shoes and performing the same actions, and doing so as effectively and admirably? Why or why not?

Exactly. It's almost hilarious to think of a woman stepping into a role of such.

Can you imagine a woman studying rocket science and putting a massive amount of their net worth at risk to build spaceships with the intent of moving mankind to Mars?

It's a preposterous thought.

But did you know Elon Musk's president of SpaceX is a woman who he loves having in that role? Says he loves the job she does and is perfect for the role/responsibility.

So I think women are certainly equally capable in managerial role and some even leadership, but the vast majority of women aren't going to enter those roles and if they do won't be happy/fulfilled doing it.

To me, this mindset that (almost) all women need a man feels like hiding behind the old "girls are silly and cute" thing.

Well if it helps I still always viewed the women in management positions as "silly and cute".

Lol I remember in the exclusive business program I was in during business school that was supposed to be building the future business leaders of America... the group of girls were always talking and giggling about how powerful they feel with a pant suit and high heels (and their tits hanging out).

Its silly and cute because they're basically emulating men... but they have makeup and their tits hanging out. Idk it's just kind of silly to think "wow she's really powerful" in comparison to an actually powerful man.

If it is due to disinterest, is it possible that a sex that is generally disinterested in a specific profession is also likely to be as good at it as another sex? e.g., would we say that men are equally as nurturing, caring, and patient as women are, in general?

The women in leadership/management roles is the same concept as men being stay at home dads. (Or "SADS" as I like to call them)

Sure men are capable of being the mom. 'm sure they are equally capable of doing just a fine job changing diapers and helicopter parenting their gender neutral child as any woman... But is that where they thrive and are their happiest?

I don't think so. Just like these men fall for the lie that being a cuckhold mom is the right thing to do and bring them happiness, I think many women fall for the lie that being a powerful coproate girl will bring them happiness.

I think for a small outlier subset this may hold true (feminine men/dominant women) but I think the vast majority are just swept up by social narratives that aren't meant to serve them as much as the institutions that created them.

 

[ulrich]

I’d really like to see the calculations on those studies that claim women are in average as good leaders as men.

I suspect they equate “being liked by your underlings” to be an effective leader.
In my experience, that is a very poor predictor of effectiveness.

 

[lux7]

Think about it... are Hillary Clinton or Angela Merkel any more sexy because they have power?
Not at all.
Actually many people resent them for that.

This is a very different topic, man.

And you're absolutely right!
A strong / dominant / powerful woman struggles in dating.

It's difficult to combine femininity and power.

And it's difficult to find eligible men as their power increase (women want more powerful men and the higher they go, the fewer men above them. So they often end up with more submissive men, who on the other hand make for more stable long-term partners).

That's one of the reasons why fewer women reach the real top of organizations, by the way: women instinctively know there is a trade-off between hierarchical power and "dating power".

But many attractive and feminine women don't even want/need hierarchical power: they can get a top-grade man and enjoy power through him (a different form of power, sometimes even more effective).

But it's not that these women are (necessarily) less capable (or less intelligent and "silly and cute").
They're just going for a different strategy, using different skills and covering different needs and drives. And, in a way, they let the man do all the hard work .
I actually respect those women: they're top grade partners, perfect "first lady material".

being a “leader” in a peaceful situation isn’t saying much about your leadership skills lol.

Knock on the board of directors of your company next time they have a meeting, and tell them "we're not at war, it's easy being a leader, so let me take the helm, please".
See what they say.
90%+ of human history is not wartime.

But I'm not interested in a diatribe on "who's better" leader.
That's my whole point: men (and women) who get stuck in "who's better" diatribes have personal ego-issues that they project onto the opposite gender.

I don't, and I recognize that typically male and typically feminine dispositions both have a place and time in which they can perform more or less well.
And open-minded men can learn to embrace both styles, so to be more effective in any condition (Robert Greene talks about this in "The Laws of Human Nature").

Avoid "LOL" When Discussing

And personal a suggestion: try to avoid the "lol" when you disagree with someone.

The "lol" makes you come across as passive-aggressive and low-power (I know because I used to do it a lot as well).

Plus, it's a cheap power move to get under people's skin, which communicates "I'm not discussing, I'm just trying to unsettle you and show myself as superior".

------

On domineering dikes, I'm with you.
But I usually just avoid them, saves time and energy .

-------

Anyway, yeah, interesting topic.
But usually, the larger a topic gets, the harder it is to have a good dialogue.

My point is that the manosphere / red pill often exaggerates the case of women "needing" a man and/or being unable to lead or handle life on their own.
And some men embrace the "girls are cute and silly" as mental crutch, because they fear strong and more independent women (which makes sense, in a way: strong and independent women do not respect most men lower in dominance).

These men self-identify with the group, blend their ego with "men" as a group, and then start cheering for "men" because their own personal ego is at stake.

 

[ulrich]

This is a very different topic, man.

And you're absolutely right! A strong / dominant / powerful woman has a more difficult time in dating.
It's difficult to combine femininity and power.

It’s not a different topic.
My point here is that women actually have NEGATIVE INCENTIVES for pursuing leadership.

A woman can be as good leader as a man, but she has to pay a price for that:
+Resentment by some men and women.
+Decrease in her attractiveness.

Even those who pay the price have to live with it.
I don’t expect most women leaders to be as good as most men leaders for the simple reason that there is a real handicap at play.