Gender, oh Gender

I'm always excited to see women running in elections. Not just the big positions, but also the smaller, lesser-known positions. I am a glass half-full kind of person when it comes to this. After all, not too long ago, the idea of suffrage was laughable and we've progressed [very rapidly] to the point that women everywhere, from all walks of life have the courage and the confidence to propel themselves to positions of power, positions of change. To me the change that is most striking is at the grassroots level--your local governance. Pakistan's provinces are divided into districts, into towns and into union councils. Each council has representation through a local. In the case of one of these, a colleague of my is the councillor for her neighbourhood. You may think that since this is a sort of side-job and not full time, it doesn't count for much but its there and she has the oppportunity to create change in her own home and among her peers in ways that women have been prevented from doing.

But its true that having women in greater positions of power, such as heads of state or presidents of large multinationals or even heads of universities is a big deal. Its the combination of both that will eventually grant women the sort of equality status [in terms of being recognised for having equal intellect and capability as men] that they seek. And we're not there yet, not even close.

I recently read an article from The Guardian by Madeline Bunting which had several key points which I think highlight particularly well how much further we have to go:

"...would President Ségolène Royal have got beyond being routinely referred to as a "glamorous mother of four"? Would President Hillary Clinton still be described as cold and calculating? Would Chancellor Merkel's leadership style still be characterised as one of "female modesty"? And would reporters be able to resist frequent comment on the clothing and hairstyles of these political leaders? Depressingly, the conventions that dominate political reporting seem to cling even more stubbornly to gender stereotypes than the political institutions themselves."

It is interesting, whats even more pointed here is the fact that the reasons why such issues still matter is because we let them matter. However, its not always true, there are pockets where leaders are simply leaders, not men not women, not black nor white, just someone who gets the job done. I think the president of Ireland, Mary McAleese is one such example or Helen Clark of New Zealand. Perhaps because they're not the leader of an all-powerful nation (e.g. America or even Germany) or of a Third World country (e.g. Liberia). And there's a long list of them, just check out Wikipedia under the headings of female heads of state or female heads of government--there's a long list.

I liked what Madeline Bunting went on to say, because it shows you how amazing women are and how savvy they are:

"But what makes the campaigns of both Royal, the socialist presidential candidate in France, and Clinton, bidding for the Democratic nomination in the US, so novel is how both these daughters of the feminist movement are deliberately using these stereotypes, pioneering a new way of women doing politics. Breaking away from a Thatcher model (adopted by Angela Merkel) of never explicitly drawing attention to the fact of one's sex, Royal and Clinton have put the fact that they are women and mothers at the centre of their campaigns. It is a fascinating experiment."

I like that rather than trying to completely ignore or, worse, trying to act in exactly an opposite manner, they have embraced the comments and taken ownership of them. Its a sign of maturity to accept what one is and work forwards from there.

At the end of the day, Bunting's summing up says it all:

"Being the first women to run for president offers a dramatic opportunity for a country to make a fresh start, a sharp break with the past. That is what thrust Michelle Bachelet into power as Chilean president a year ago. She was an icon of a new future for Chile, reconciled after its violent past and emerging from its entrenched social conservatism. Mary Robinson played something of a similar role when she became president of Ireland. Their elections transformed the image of their countries overnight. This is the big pitch of both Clinton and Royal, but there has to be a real hunger for that change - and in neither the US or France is that self-evident."

Now its just a time to wait and watch.