Hi Shieiuan and thanks for this essay
Personally, I disagree with this suggestion would rewrite the situation will bring a positive effect as we expected.
It’s always better to specify exactly which side you agree with, and it’s always better to make every sentence relevant to the topic. Your sentence doesn’t mention any of the keywords from the question. Here are some possible rewrites:
- I don’t believe that more women in leadership would mean a more peaceful world. OR
- I disagree with the statement that having more women leaders would mean more peace. OR
- In my opinion, having more women in power would not necessarily mean a safer or more peaceful world.
The first part of the very long first sentence (30 words) is a little obvious. Could we leave it out? Don’t use commas or ‘thus’ to join what should be separate sentences into one sentence.
Here’s one possible rewrite of the intro:
The seemingly endless wars in our world prompt some people to ask if more women leaders would mean less conflict. However, I don’t believe that more women in leadership would necessarily mean a more peaceful world.
(36 words, 2 sentences, 18 words per sentence: that’s still high, but I would balance it with some very short sentences later in the essay.)
Word Choice/Word Form/Usage
- female have to be tougher and aggressive as their counterpart does. → females have to be as tough and aggressive as their counterparts.
- However, people often have negative impression on these outstanding female, iron ladies or isolated, for instance which is not fair for them. → However, people often have a negative impression of women with these characteristics.
- Some say there should have more women with various backgrounds to be in charge of the administration. → Some say there should be more women from various backgrounds in politics. OR Some say more women from different backgrounds should run the country.
Not just... But Also
It is not just for female leader who needs to be responsible for, but also the male one should put more efforts on the issue as well.
Try to avoid using "not just…but also" or "not only /but also." It’s hard to get right. Use a simpler structure. Here are some possible rewrites:
- It’s not just women who need to be responsible leaders. Men have to make more effort too. OR
- Both male and female leaders have to be more responsible.
They have to present the capabilities such as viewing issues in a whole picture, willing to take advices from people with various backgrounds, and then making decisions correctly. (28 words)
Here’s one possible rewrite:
They must be able to see the big picture, listen to conflicting advice, and make correct decisions. (17 words)
The chaos and violence may already exist which government should take actions to tackle it no matter of the gender differences of its leader.
This is really two sentences, or else the subject of the sentence is unclear:
Governments should act to tackle violence, no matter what the gender of the leader is. OR
Governments should deal with violence regardless of the gender of their leaders. (12 words)
Male and female rulers could both control the conflicts well if they introduce more effective policies and strategies and work cooperatively with relevant departments. (24 words)
This sentence is crying out for specific examples and for vague or empty words (‘relevant departments’) to be removed.
Male and female rulers can be equally effective. (8 words)
Don’t use commas to join what should be separate sentences into one sentence. You wrote:
Take Burma’s newly elected female president as an example, she introduces democracy to the nation and fights for human rights.
This should be two sentences, or rewritten as a shorter single sentence:
Take Burma’s newly elected female president as an example. She introduces democracy to the nation and fights for human rights. OR
Burma’s newly-elected Aung San Suu Kyi, for example, is fighting for democracy and human rights
Generalizations and Unsupported Ideas
- Burmese’s history rewrite completed due to her efforts.
- If there were more female leaders, people would suffer less in some regions- Middle East and Southeast Asia, for instance.
These two ideas are not really supported. Both need sentences explaining why, and the second particularly needs explanation: why the Middle East? Why Southeast Asia? Make sure you support all ideas. To avoid generalizations, you can use modals like ‘may,’ ‘might,’ ‘could’ or qualifiers like ‘possibly’ or ‘perhaps, ’ or you can just be less definite. Here’s one possible rewrite of the first sentence:
Burma’s history is changing due to her efforts. OR
Burmese history is being rewritten due to her efforts.
I don't think it's your best essay here in the forum. Looking forward to some better ones soon!