In all of recorded history, a "female leader" of anything consequential is extremely difficult to find.
Oh there are a few; however, how many were actually successful ON THEIR OWN, sans either riding the coat tails of some man; or successful at the end?
Bodeaca fought the Roman army, but in the end, she LOST the war.
Theodosia was smarter than her husband, but wouldn't have any say so on her own.
Queen Elizabeth I was GREAT; rare exception.
Should we count Joan of Arc? Yes, she was a successful "leader"; however, when all was said & done, her side LOST and she was denounced, tried, and burned at the stake.
Catherine the Great wouldn't have had any power at all, if she hadn't married a Czar and then refused to remarry; not that her reign was anything to shout about.
Queen Victoria was also a marvelous "LEADER" ( though she didn't have a whole lot of power ) on her own.
Maggie Thatcher was GREAT!
Florence Nightingale was a true "leader" and ahead of her time.
Oh sure, some women, throughout history have been as intelligent/more intelligent than men, and very clever; but, were not "leaders" of anything at all.
When all is said and done...of course people see men as "leaders"; it's only natural!
Read your review and you said Liz I was great.
The girl in me is screaming she was cruel and acted like a man! Daddy’s sadistic coat tails. The adult in me knows she advanced her country and her people.
Thatcher was fabulous!!!!!! Her, Regan, JPII. The planet lucked out.
Yep
I think Queen Victoria was very dependent on Prince Albert.
After he died she seems to have lost the plot.
You forgot Cleopatra, a very ambitious clever woman who was a disastrous leader for her people and herself.
In the end she committed suicide, her children were executed and her body was paraded through the streets of Rome.