I think that it is no coincidence that the new head of the IMF just happens to be a woman. I am sure that her selection had a lot to do with a conscious or unconscious gesture of atonement and restitution to all women for the fact that their previous director has been accused of rape. And, in the world of political correctness, being accused of rape is basically the same as being a rapist, because the feminist mentality is, a man is guilty until he’s proven innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt. So, the IMF chose a woman to overcome the guilt by association related to their previous director Dominique Strauss Kahn being a “rapist”. Tthe fact is that if gender had been a deciding factor in choosing a man over woman to lead such an institution, it would immediately be branded sexism and discrimination. But, double standards and hypocrisy are as natural as breathing in our society. One standard for men and another for women. One standard for whites and another for blacks. I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea.
So Leguard was chosen, not because she was most qualified for the job, but because she was presumably the most qualified woman for the job. Aside from not being the most qualified, there are also serious problems of her being a French woman and a European, at exactly the time when the IMF is involved in that region. I see this as an innate conflict of interest. She may have worked in an American firm and speaks fluent English, but like all French she is fundamentally a French nationalists, and will look apologetically to further the interests of her own country above all else. In France, being biased and prejudicial in favor of France is not something to be ashamed of, but something to be absolutely proud of. Why should the world not bow down in favor of France, considering that it is by far the most glorious nation in the world? In truth, Leguard may end up actually being reasonably impartial (or she may very well not). But, of all the Western nations, I trust French politicians the least to be impartial. They have a long tradition of being brazenly and on apologetically a pro-French. Sarkozy even crowed about how Leguard´s appointment was a victory for France. One would think of that with all the questions raised by her appointment, that he would’ve been a little bit more diplomatic, but Sarkozy sees no problem in being openly biased in favor of France, even when the person in question is supposed to be heading up an international organization, and thus is presumed to be impartial.
The fact that Leguard was chosen in large part because she was a woman, echoes a similar happening at Harvard University. Summers, while he was president there, dared to engage in intellectual inquiry with other academics in a closed-door meeting. He basically presented the idea that possibly — just possibly — differences between males and females might have something to do — at least in part — with innate differences. In other words, he was throwing out the possibility — and speculation — that men and women have observable differences, and that these differences are not to 100% due to environmental factors. Well, in our greatest institution of higher learning and intellect, apparently saying something with common sense, and more importantly, that disagrees with the fundamentalist religion of political correctness, is more than the academics at Harvard could allow. Feminists and politically correct academics protested, and Summers was soon kicked out of his position, the sending a clear warning to any others who in the future might dare to express opinions that do not conform 100% to the brittle fundamentalist religion and political correctness. Not surprisingly, the president who succeeded Summers was a woman. Clearly her choice was based highly on the fact that — like the IMF — Harvard felt that it had to atone for its “sins” by choosing a woman. Of course the real scandal is not what Summers said (which is perfectly reasonable and normal), but the fact that there was a collective witchhunt to expel him. And then, they engage in sexism by choosing a woman, because it would be more politically correct to do so.