Women Leading On Their Own Terms: No More Apologies, No More Limits

In a striking scene from the Netflix mini-series Adolescence, 13-year-old Jamie is mocked and pressured by peers online into proving his masculinity through aggression, reinforcing the idea that legitimate leadership is about dominance and control. This damaging lesson isn’t limited to teenage boys; women also internalise the message that true authority must align with traditionally masculine standards.

Over the past decade, across classrooms, conference rooms, and casual conversations, I’ve often heard women ask, “How can we make our language more inclusive so that men don’t feel excluded?” This question comes from a genuine place. It’s often rooted in the desire to build bridges and keep conversations open. But beneath that intent lies something more troubling: the assumption that leadership spaces only gain legitimacy when men are (also) present. My contention is that the reverse is rarely ever true. Never have I heard a group of men sitting in the top positions in their companies reflect the lack of gender representation amongst them. Is this by accident or design?

Early in my journey as a gender activist, learning the ropes, I found this frustrating. Later, studying gender theory, I understood it as a symptom of a broader system that conditions women to seek validation. Today, working in gender policy, I see it clearly: this concern isn’t just about words—it reflects how leadership has been defined in a male-dominated world.

When Men Are Missing, Guilt Fills the Room

Women continue to find themselves vastly outnumbered in decision-making spaces. In India, women hold just 14.4% of seats in Parliament. In rooms where key policies on healthcare, education, or employment are debated, women are often missing. Even in these moments, the focus isn’t on why women are excluded, but on whether men are being left out of conversations about change.

In many spaces, when only women are present, there’s a strange sense of unease, like something is missing. That “something” is often male participation. Without it, the discussion feels at risk of being dismissed as “just about gender.” This is the emotional labour women are constantly asked to do: to carry the conversation while also ensuring it sounds neutral enough to be heard.

Even in the nonprofit and social impact space, often viewed as more gender-inclusive, power still skews male. Data from studies by Dasra Foundation (2015) and EquiLead (2024) clearly show that while women make up a majority of the workforce in this sector, leadership remains heavily male-dominated. Organisations speak of inclusivity, yet few have achieved gender balance at the top.

What’s more telling is how women in leadership are expected to lead: with caution, with compromise, and with constant awareness of how their words might be received. There’s a pressure to soften hard truths, to avoid being “too focused” on gender equity, to ensure men aren’t alienated—even when women are still underrepresented.

Redefining Leadership on Our Own Terms

We need to reimagine what leadership looks like, without the burden of male approval. Women’s perspectives, insights, and lived experiences are not add-ons to the conversation; they are essential to it. And yet, many women still feel they must justify their presence in leadership by ensuring their male colleagues are comfortable. The absence of men shouldn’t delegitimise a discussion. All-women spaces are not inherently exclusionary. They are powerful spaces for strategy, solidarity, and truth-telling—spaces that shouldn’t have to prove their worth.

This is about more than gender. When we define leadership only through binary, male-centred lenses, we ignore how caste, class, religion, sexuality, and other identities intersect to shape access and influence. A truly inclusive approach must embrace this complexity.
Diversity statements and hiring pledges aren’t enough. What we need is real, structural change. That means creating mentorship pipelines that actively support women’s advancement, implementing gender quotas in leadership roles to shift power dynamics, and redesigning evaluation systems to value collaboration, empathy, and lived experience, not just outdated notions of “merit.” It also means training leaders to recognise and challenge internalised biases and to build workplaces that are genuinely safe and equitable. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re long overdue.

This Isn’t About Exclusion. It’s About Centring Women.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about pushing men out. It’s about refusing to let conversations about leadership and equity be dependent on their presence. It’s about recognising that women—especially those from marginalised communities—have been leading, organising, and transforming systems all along, often without recognition or resources.

When women gather to lead, strategise, or demand change, it shouldn’t be viewed as a side conversation. It shouldn’t be dismissed as lacking authority. These conversations are the heart of real progress. Gradual change is no longer good enough. We can’t afford to keep tiptoeing around people’s comfort levels while inequality remains embedded in our institutions. The next phase of leadership must be unapologetically inclusive, intersectional, and woman-led.

We must stop asking if men will approve, support, or join us before we act. The legitimacy of our leadership doesn’t come from who’s watching—it comes from the truth we speak, the impact we create, and the futures we’re building. Women are not asking for power. We are already holding it. And now, we’re leading—on our terms.

Authored by Devleena Chatterji, Research and MEL Lead at Climate Asia, and principal researcher of the recently released study Unpacking Gender- Equitable Leadership in Organisations: Insights and Strategies.