What makes a leader?

     Why am I so dizzy? The light bulb went off in my head. Must've time traveled somewhere else. But where? I look around. Hey! There's a skyscraper...Oh, and look! There's a poster of Abby Wambach and Hope Solo! Yes! I'm back in 2012! 
     It feels so great to be back in 2012. The Olympics are coming up in the summer, and I'm pumped to see the US Women's National Soccer Team fight for Gold again! That team is such a motivation and inspiration for all aspiring female soccer players across the WORLD. As a soccer player myself, I am pretty much obsessed with the National Team. I can name a random fact about every single player on the roster, and even some of the coaches.
     We, as soccer players, look up to these players - these women - as well as our own coaches. We watch, mimic, and learn from every single one of their actions on and off the field. As a goalkeeper, I like to watch Hope Solo/Jill Loyden/Nicole Barnhart/Ashlyn Harris play and see what/how she reacts to certain plays. Unfortunately though, I can't hear her. Why would I need to hear her? Because goalkeepers are supposed to be LOUD and very VERBAL. We have the best views of the whole field, and it is our job to direct our players, and LEAD them from the back. Goalkeepers are leaders on the field.
    But really, what is a leader? On the field, it's someone who guides the team, encourages the team, and helps the team. According to Dictionary.com, a leader is a person who rules, guides, or inspires others. Now, how many leaders do you know based off of this definition? Of those, how many of them are women? Are they all of political power? Or no? For me, when I think of a woman leader, I think of soccer players...and Queen Elizabeth. Each and every one of the soccer players that I think of as leaders are some of the most encouraging, inspiring, and funny people I know. My goalkeeper coach, for example, has been with us for three years. She has helped us develop not only as a goalkeeper, but as people too. She is someone for all of us goalkeepers to relate to (having played as a goalkeeper and playing in college), and she truly cares about every single one of us. My head coach is the same way. She has a way of making everything feel so easy-going, and I truly feel as if she's an older sister to me.
     Now, these leaders aren't powerful in any way. But they ARE leaders simply by being themselves. They are leaders by example and morale. Queen Elizabeth, on the other hand, had a lot of power. She ruled over a country, the army of the country, and the people in the country. In the movie Queen Elizabeth: The Golden Age, you can really get an idea of the power she had. However, she too, as a female leader, had a certain influence on those she ruled over. It was a positive influence on her country, and was a reason that she was so greatly loved.
     Many people think that men are better leaders than women. In a statistical sense, that's true. There have been far more male leaders in the world than have been women, and some people may use that as their reasoning behind why 'men are better leaders'. Men naturally seem more strict and almost (but not all) vicious when in power -- another possible reason behind the 'men are better leaders'.  However, which leaders in the world have had a more positive influence on their people and those that look up to them? In my mind, it's the women. Which soccer teams inspired tens-of-thousands of young soccer players to reach for the stars in 2011? The women's national teams.
     Now this is just my opinion. I may be biased due to my gender. But really, a leader shouldn't be described by their material items or the amount of land or people he/she ruled over. Instead, a good leader should be defined by their impact on those who are being led by them. Positive influence = Good leader. Simple as that.


This trailer is of Queen Elizabeth: The Golden Age. It is an excellent movie and shows the great influence the Queen Elizabeth had on her country.

These videos (one below and in link) show a little bit about the US Women's Soccer Team, and simply by listening to the comments and seeing the crowd show the influence and fans that they have.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8IBb0FW64s&feature=related

Do-or-Die Decision...What would you choose?

Oh geez... Where am I now?

I look around and...and it seems like I’m in a courtyard? Or maybe a square? There’s a large crowd of people ahead of me, so I walk up to them to figure out what’s going on. The stench is awful here, and it actually looks like there’s a castle up ahead too. I’m beginning to think that I’ve been transported to the middle-ages now. 

I force my way to the beginning of the crowd, just in time to see the ‘big event’. An execution.... “The following persons are being fully justified to the extent of their crimes!” said a man looking to be of great stature in this time period. “They are a reminder to all, that all we want here in Trantyn is peace!” 

The crowd erupts in “ooohh’s” and ‘“booo’s” showing their disagreement, but it’s mistaken by The Man (that’s what I’m calling the man informing the crowd of what’s going on) as applause. 

“Without further procrastination....The first trial!” The Man announces a name and what he is charged with. That person walks over to the guillotine, and almost habitually gets prepared. A woman is flooding in tears behind him - it must be his wife or something. “Three....two....one!” 

I turned my head. I can’t imagine watching someone’s life end. The people here, though, seem so calm about it. I mean, even The Man seemed like he had no shame or guilt for basically being the one ordering them to death. Granted, he wasn’t the one who actually ordered them to death, but he was the one who fulfilled the order. So really, shouldn’t he be guilty of murder?

It’s strange too, however, that not one person seemed to exclaim in objection toward what was going on. I guess if they had, they’d just be inviting themselves to a life-sentence as well... I guess that’s also why The Man did what he was told without question. If he hadn’t, he’d probably have to suffer punishment as well. Ultimately, it might as well be described as a fear of punishment to punish others...

Personally, I feel like people either way are guilty. Ending someone’s life - no matter what the reason, or how directly involved someone is - is a HUGE ‘no no’. It’s just wrong. I don’t even have to describe it. However, I understand that if one person doesn’t follow that order, another ultimately will. I also realize, that depending purely on the circumstances, it is almost inevitable for some people to say no. But really, if someone truly was against killing and murdering, they should just accept the fate, and object. That’s what I’d do... or hope I’d do.

For example, in the Holocaust, death was almost inescapable if one didn’t obey orders. It was still wrong to fulfill the orders, but the fear of the consequences are what fueled the motivation to complete the orders. Nazis even claimed that for this reason, they were helpless to their crimes. The article “Can You Learn Anything From a Void?” written by Adam Kirsch, describes the actions of some Nazis during the Holocaust. The article, though opposing what was done, did realize to an extent the consequences of that time period. “Such men did not make the decisions in the Nazi empire, they only carried them out; and if they had not obeyed their evil orders, someone else would have obeyed them.”

This same power abusive mentality can be seen in Macbeth through Macbeth’s executions of innocent people. It follows exactly with what I had witnessed at the square...or courtyard? I’m still not sure. 

I think ultimately the question comes down to this: Are you willing to end someone’s life to save yours? Or would you rather save your conscience by showing objection?

Most people would say that they’d choose the second, but if the circumstances were right, I wouldn’t be surprised if people folded on what they’d said... You would definitely find out who the courageous people are...