Linda Robinson
Seventy-six countries have had at least one woman president or prime minister, and 118 have not. The United States is among the latter group, but that may finally change with the presumptive nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party’s candidate. The historic nature of this event cannot be overstated, due to the many barriers that women in politics must surmount. Should Harris win, her success will be based on her performance as a candidate and her merits for the office, which is as it should be—not because of her gender but despite her gender.
Many features of the U.S. presidential system, its electoral college, and its winner-take-all electoral rules, have made it difficult for a woman to reach the top office, despite women’s economic, professional, and educational accomplishments. The lack of national childcare and family leave and male-dominated political parties and fundraising networks count among the many structural impediments that prevent women from competing on a level playing field. But one of the most significant impediments to women winning the presidency is a persistent belief by almost half (49 percent) that men are better equipped to lead countries, simply because they are men. Digging deeper, a central component of this prejudice is skepticism that women can handle the existential life-and-death decisions posed by foreign policy crises—arguably the most critical single role of the chief executive and commander in chief. According to the Pew Research Center, 37 percent of those surveyed say men are better at national security and defense versus five percent who say women do better.
No comments:
Post a Comment