women in power are less corrupt than men

Some say women in power are much less inclined to corruption than their male counterparts. • To what extent do you support this view? There is a popular saying that, ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’. But this is not always true when the reins of power are held by women. In my point of view, it is right to say that most women, though not all, are not so prone to corruption. 45 words The only and only argument to support my view is based on the fact that corruption as such is a heinous social evil. Let it be in any form, corruption is a cancer, and it can eat away any society. And in any society, it is women who happen to suffer more from the ill effects of corruption than men. For example, graft is a form of corruption, and if graft happens to take over a given society, men in that society will rule supreme by way of money power, and women will have to suffer from the effects of the same. Obviously, women themselves may not get corrupt. Men on the other hand are prone to corruption. This is due to their being in positions of power, and their needs and ambitions are much more than that of women. Naturally, they happen to get their hands greased in one form or the other say, favours, cash or kinds. However, it is very hard to have generalization that all men are likely to be corrupt and all women are free from corruption. History has several evidences to prove that both men and women, when in power, have got themselves corrupt. Ms. Emilia Marcos of Philippines was corrupt to her core. Dr. Radhakrishnan of India was the cleanest of statesmen the world has ever seen. So it sounds right to conclude that the number of men in power who are corrupt is much bigger, unlike the number of women in power who are corruption prone. Power corrupts, but it is more male centric than female. 260 words. Ajaypeesdoc. 21.4.012