The Dance of the Masculine and Feminine: Leadership is Human

Leadership isn't about gender dominance – it's about neural optimization. (created in Canva)

Recently, Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Meta (Facebook and Instagram), touched a nerve with many by proclaiming that the “masculine energy” has been sucked out of the workforce and corporations need to bring that “aggression” back.

“I think a lot of the corporate world is pretty culturally neutered.” Mark Zuckerberg on a Joe Rogan podcast, Jan 10, 2025

Similarly in a recent article in the Financial Times, top bankers are quoted as “We can say ‘retard’ and ‘pussy’ without fear of getting cancelled … it’s a new dawn.”

Why are so many offended by this?

It champions outdated gender roles and stereotypes, while suggesting that men have been emasculated and are therefore less able to conduct business. Is being able to call others “retard” and “pussy” important in the conduct of business?  Would Facebook be more powerful had the men in corporate offices been able to more freely belittle each other?  Economic and gender experts warn that this kind of rhetoric can push women and marginalized voices out of the workforce after hard-won progress. It suggests some leaders, like Zuckerberg, see inclusivity measures as threats to the “old-boy” vision of masculinity.

This is not a new arena of discussion, but I have a different take.  Two years ago, I shared a thought experiment with a group of writers at Hood Canal, Washington, about reframing how we think about gender and its influence at work.

I had noticed that in business circles, especially those composed of female entrepreneurs, there has been much discussion around celebrating and embracing the assertiveness and strength (the masculine) in women and the traditionally feminine traits of empathy and compassion (for men).  In a world where the glass ceiling is a very real thing, I was intrigued by this conversation.  I should note from the beginning that this includes all genders regardless of how you identify.

My personal opinion is that we have the language wrong.  See if this makes any sense to you.

Rather than masculine and feminine, I think what is really implied is whether we are taking on the role as “leader” or “follower”.  Tying masculine traits to leadership and feminine traits to following is simply limiting and lazy.  Our language is full of generations of cultural nuances and subtle hierarchies that imply that these roles are assigned by gender.

But, why is leadership defined by gender?

The biggest reason? Tradition.

Men ARE most frequently acknowledged as the leaders.   Leaders of countries, companies, armies, and economies.  Historically, It is usually when men are not available, that the role falls to women.  The invention of "Rosie the Riveter" is one such example. Many women built warships as talented welders and riveters when there were no longer enough men to do so, but were fired once the men came home from war.

Let me be clear.

I love the beautiful differences of all genders and am not an enemy of any.

I am an explorer of mindsets and the mysterious unseen forces that drive them.

I would like to suggest that we set the simplistic ideas of gender aside and substitute the terms masculine and feminine with leader and follower, each of whom have the flexibility of mind to be both when it makes sense because, in my opinion, leadership should NOT be defined by gender.  It is human.

When operating as an entrepreneur, the sheer volume and breadth of tasks are overwhelming.  Each of us have strengths and weaknesses, but the most successful have done work on their self-awareness and let others take the reins where they are less suited.   As Eric Emeandes states, "If you want to have a good business, work on your business,…. But If you want a great business, work on yourself."

The relationship between leadership and gender roles became very clear to me while I was taking salsa lessons.  Dance is one of those activities that teaches me constantly. In Wyoming, there are always more women than men in salsa classes, so some women have to take on the “leader” role. This is not uncommon in a state that first adopted women’s suffrage.  Wyoming is full of tough females that can ride a horse, and climb rugged mountains with a full pack.

In Colorado, a Latin bar I visited had far more men wanting to dance than women.  There was an expectation that men already knew how to lead. My aching toes told a different story.

As I rotated partners, I experienced many levels of dance experience.  I have always been grateful to those leading while I learn a new dance.   It takes an agile mind to think ahead and cue the next move while dancing at the same time.  After fumbling through steps cued too late, or spinning the wrong direction with men who didn’t know how to lead, I began to harken back to the Wyoming instructor when she was showing the leader steps AND the follower steps.

Lo and behold, there were times I needed that knowledge to instruct my leader how to lead ME.  Sometimes followers need to guide leaders in the dance between partners.  Business books often refer to this skill as “leading upward.”

How much more important is this in complex business teams?  In families? In communities?  And in our global society.  Is it possible to set aside the value hierarchy to recognize the importance of each member in creating success?  Leaders cannot succeed without followers who support and inform, and they certainly cannot win battles without soldiers.  The soldiers sometimes need to become leaders when the top tiers become incapable of leading.

Leadership should NOT be defined by gender

If the leaders (like many women I know) are too stubborn to follow when needed, the dance will also be a complete disaster.  Unless we can accept that we need the ability to be both and the wisdom for when that should happen, we are all failing.

I would like to suggest that we should celebrate and embrace our masculine and our feminine facets and de-polarize the conversation by accepting we are both in different measures as leaders sometimes and followers sometimes, too.

Why don’t we?

An unspoken obstacle is the value and isolation we assign to leaders.

When we assign too much value to leaders, without recognizing they do not exist without those who follow and support them, we diminish the power of community, teams, and leverage of the group as a whole.  When we also hold leaders to an expectation of perfection and omnipotence we hamstring their ability to truly understand how to grow as leaders and learn in times of change and uncertainty.  We stop giving honest feedback because sometimes it is dangerous and considered disrespectful.  The consequence is that we deprive them of the ability to become an undercover boss who has much to learn by becoming a follower.  One of the biggest obstacles leaders experience is a lack of self-awareness because they are not getting honest answers.  The emperor has no clothes, but thinks he is wearing the most fashionable attire of the season.

Perhaps if we recognized that our masculine is really our leadership abilities to take charge, build, protect, and forge new territory and our feminine is our ability to listen, nurture, and adjust to the needs of others, we could grow in our capacity for both.  Perhaps if we expanded on that with the wisdom of when to deploy each of these we could expand our capacity for success as human beings living in a world of other human beings.

As a dancer through life, I prefer dancing with partners who know how to lead, let me learn the same, and create a beautiful waltz through the world that has the audience impressed at the effortless grace of an empress with perfect style and her or his follower who have practiced the art of communication so intuitively.

That, folks, will win my vote for champion in the dance of champions in world leadership.  Because leadership should not be defined exclusively by gender.  Leadership isn't about gender dominance – it's about neural optimization.

Leadership is learned and learning should not be limited.

Fun fact:

Here's what's fascinating: New research from Harvard Business School reveals that organizations with balanced leadership approaches show up to 35% better decision-making outcomes. But here's the game-changing insight: it's not just about who's in the room – it's about how different neural patterns complement each other to create extraordinary results.