I think our disagreement here may largely be semantics. To be clear, I'd never label myself a "servant leader". I agree I think it's ingenuous to do so. However

I think our disagreement here may largely be semantics. To be clear, I'd never label myself a "servant leader". I agree I think it's ingenuous to do so. However, if other people use that terminology to describe a type of leader—I get the picture they're trying to paint. So to be clear, I agree the label is weird and cheesy and maybe should only be used to describe a type of leader (which again, I'd argue is just a good leader). Leaders absolutely should hold themselves to a higher standard due to their responsibility for the good of the team and the fact that they DO have more power. I'm still not clear on what "pretending" to be a servant would look like. If I'm a shift manager and someone needs to sweep the floors before we leave and one of my team members is a teenager with an exam the next day—damn straight, I'm going go send them home early and sweep up myself. That's "serving" them—putting them before myself. But quite frankly it's also just the right thing to do. So in a sense, yeah I'm a servant in that I am serving my team members, but holy hell if you say, "Yeah, I'm a servant leader so why don't you go ahead and take off early." You're a cheesehead, a weirdo, and probably not actually a good leader. And in that case yeah I agree it's a weird play.