Women make better leaders than Men?

[dawg80]

Well, that's the opinion of one researcher anyway. Here's an interesting paragraph from that article: This is consistent with the finding that leaderless groups have a natural tendency to elect self-centered, overconfident and narcissistic individuals as leaders, and that these personality characteristics are not equally common in men and women. In line, Freud argued that the psychological process of leadership occurs because a group of people — the followers — have replaced their own narcissistic tendencies with those of the leader, such that their love for the leader is a disguised form of self-love, or a substitute for their inability to love themselves. “Another person’s narcissism”, he said, “has a great attraction for those who have renounced part of their own… as if we envied them for maintaining a blissful state of mind.”

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Well, that's the opinion of one researcher anyway. Here's an interesting paragraph from that article: This is consistent with the finding that leaderless groups have a natural tendency to elect self-centered, overconfident and narcissistic individuals as leaders, and that these personality characteristics are not equally common in men and women. In line, Freud argued that the psychological process of leadership occurs because a group of people — the followers — have replaced their own narcissistic tendencies with those of the leader, such that their love for the leader is a disguised form of self-love, or a substitute for their inability to love themselves. “Another person’s narcissism”, he said, “has a great attraction for those who have renounced part of their own… as if we envied them for maintaining a blissful state of mind.”

I love it! And this is probably so true!!

[dawg80]

I love it! And this is probably so true!!

Umm, can you think of someone this could describe?

[maverick]

Well, that's the opinion of one researcher anyway. Here's an interesting paragraph from that article: This is consistent with the finding that leaderless groups have a natural tendency to elect self-centered, overconfident and narcissistic individuals as leaders, and that these personality characteristics are not equally common in men and women. In line, Freud argued that the psychological process of leadership occurs because a group of people — the followers — have replaced their own narcissistic tendencies with those of the leader, such that their love for the leader is a disguised form of self-love, or a substitute for their inability to love themselves. “Another person’s narcissism”, he said, “has a great attraction for those who have renounced part of their own… as if we envied them for maintaining a blissful state of mind.”

Interestingly, the original article in which your bolded statement appears is here: http://www.farmteam.org/2013/08/29/w...ecome-leaders/
and is entitled "Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders?"

There's little room in research for opinion, btw.

[Dirtydawg]

Interestingly, the original article in which your bolded statement appears is here: http://www.farmteam.org/2013/08/29/w...ecome-leaders/
and is entitled "Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders?"

There's little room in research for opinion, btw.

You're kidding, right?

[dawg80]

I don't place much, really "any," substance in the writer's contention that men think they [we] are smarter than women, and that's why men act in certain ways in supporting other men becoming leaders. Men are just men. We don't do anything (okay, not very much) with a thought on how it might affect, or not, women. Women don't figure in the equation at all. By that I mean, when considering who to vote for in politics, or who (whom??) to support when an organization is grooming candidates as potential leaders, etc... men generally don't say to ourselves, hmmmmm, I wonder how this might impact women. The point is, as a group, men are more self-absorbed. NOTE: I'm not doing a very good job of trying to express this point right now. More later....

[dawg80]

Oh! but all of this does beg the obvious question, why do WOMEN support incompetent men as leaders??? And this is aimed at all those women who voted, twice, for obummer. Women hold a majority. If every woman age 18 and up, eligible to vote, would vote the same way for candidates, women could fill EVERY political seat across the nation. You have only yourselves to blame, ladies .

[arkansasbob]

most women are too smart to run for public office...

[ChipDog]

Maybe there is something there - Maggie Thatcher was sure one heck of a great leader, second only to Ronald Reagan. So I would agree with 50:50

[maverick]

Oh! but all of this does beg the obvious question, why do WOMEN support incompetent men as leaders??? And this is aimed at all those women who voted, twice, for obummer. Women hold a majority. If every woman age 18 and up, eligible to vote, would vote the same way for candidates, women could fill EVERY political seat across the nation. You have only yourselves to blame, ladies .

Another question: do men who support incompetent leaders do so for the same reasons as women who do?

[maverick]

You're kidding, right?

Well, in a perfect world, which we don't have, of course.

Opinion, or maybe bias, may help formulate the research questions, but shouldn't taint the design, data collection, analysis, and reporting. It may reenter at the point of drawing conclusions; but, ethical researchers check their biases at the door.

[dawg80]

Another question: do men who support incompetent leaders do so for the same reasons as women who do?

Chauvinism. (sp??) The true definition of it. Which is, humans, ALL of us, place more value and more TRUST in people we are. The term "chauvinist" has been incorrectly connected only to men, being "pigs." But, it is true of all. Women confide and seek advice ONLY from other women on many issues, because in their minds, ONLY women truly know. We also see this across racial distinctions, and religious beliefs, and cultural groupings, and age groups, and socio-economic levels, etc, etc etc etc... Besides, many men are self-assured and arrogant to the point where we KNOW we can survive and thrive no matter what incompetent fool is holding office. But, keep in mind. obummer lost the male vote both times, it was women that made the difference. This one is on you gals.

[maverick]

Chauvinism. (sp??) The true definition of it. Which is, humans, ALL of us, place more value and more TRUST in people we are. The term "chauvinist" has been incorrectly connected only to men, being "pigs." But, it is true of all. Women confide and seek advice ONLY from other women on many issues, because in their minds, ONLY women truly know. We also see this across racial distinctions, and religious beliefs, and cultural groupings, and age groups, and socio-economic levels, etc, etc etc etc... Besides, many men are self-assured and arrogant to the point where we KNOW we can survive and thrive no matter what incompetent fool is holding office. But, keep in mind. obummer lost the male vote both times, it was women that made the difference. This one is on you gals.

Wrong --another word that can apply equally to men and women. Would Obama have been elected without the men who voted for him? This one's on every person who voted for him, not just the "gals" (a term some may say is chauvinistic).

As to your other post: "Men are just men. We don't do anything (okay, not very much) with a thought on how it might affect, or not, women. Women don't figure in the equation at all. By that I mean, when considering who to vote for in politics, or who (whom??) to support when an organization is grooming candidates as potential leaders, etc... men generally don't say to ourselves, hmmmmm, I wonder how this might impact women." Speak for yourself.

[dawg80]

Oh, so you do hope your actions impact women. Nice. BTW, I thought you were a woman.

[maverick]

Oh, so you do hope your actions impact women. Nice. BTW, I thought you were a woman.

I am.