“For me, a better democracy is a democracy where women do not only have the right to vote and elect but to be elected.”
- Michelle Bachelet
Head of UN Women
Only recently have women become frequenters of politics, and even now, collectively, they do not hold nearly as many governmental positions as men. Based on data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2016, less than 25% of governmental positions are held by women (Bureau of Labor Statistics). Therefore, with over 75% of governmental positions held by men, the political world is overwhelmingly dominated by males and it has existed in this manner since the times of ancient Greek politics in which women were forbidden to even utter their political views. With male dominance in the political world dating back to the very birth of modern politics, it is quite arguable that many political concepts and ideals are formed in a manner that is more relative to male thought. Thus, excluding influential female perspectives from much of politics and leaving many women feeling as though they do not or cannot belong in the political world. This concept of feminism in politics is discussed in J. Ann Tickner’s article, A Critique of Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism, in which she argues this very notion that politics is mainly viewed as “masculine” because it is mainly men who have shaped political theories. Therefore, if more women were to take on political roles, the world of politics would be more “neutral” rather than strictly “masculine” or “feminine.”
Women tend to have a strong sense of ‘other’, in which they seek to empower each other and other people in general. Whereas, males are often very competitive in terms of power and they are frequently associated with dominance. Within the seventh century feudal system of the Germanic Kingdoms, women were forbidden to exercise politico-military power and were confined to the roles of nurturers and caregivers for their men and their children. According to “The Nation-State and Global Order” by Opello and Rosow, these were known as “feminine and domestic occupations” (Otello, Rosow). Furthermore, so-called ‘masculine occupations’ tend to carry characteristics of force and dominance (usually in physical terms). Though power and dominance are important aspects of politics, they should not necessarily mean harsh force, but rather “empowerment.” As Tickner puts it, “Power as collective domination and control privileges masculinity and ignores the possibility of collective empowerment, another aspect of power often associated with femininity” (Tickner). Many masculine political views believe that national interest has to do with power alone, while feminists believe in multiple national interests. With a feminine perspective like this, national and international conflict might be decreased while bringing about a stronger sense of commonality. In other words, if all national interests are communicated and understood (rather than solely the interest of power), the world might be a more peaceful place to live.
Overall, it is quite evident that both the past and current political world has been strongly influenced by men with not nearly as much feminine impact. The reason for this might very well be a result of sustained masculine political thought throughout the history of politics, making women feel as though they do not belong in the political field. However, feminine thought is very much needed in the political world in order for political ideals to represent a balance of perspectives.
This is really well written. Do you think that Feminine idea of Empowerment is a compliment to the Masculine idea of Power, or is it something that should take Power's place entirely? You mention briefly the history of political academia, would you agree that along with an uptick in the political sphere, should there be a related uptick in Feminist political scholars, or is that not as important? Also It would be awesome if you could somehow incorporate the stereotypes of culture vs. nurture we talked about in class
ReplyDeleteThank you! I definitely believe that the feminine idea of empowerment should compliment the masculine idea of power, rather than completely take the place of power. I think that a balance between the two is more efficient than solely having a political ideals based on power or solely on empowerment. Additionally, I do think feminist political scholars are just as important as feminist politicians themselves. The political scholars are generally the ones creating the theories used in the political world and they are the ones who relay important information that allows things like the Feminist Movement to be so far-reaching, in terms of involvement.
DeleteWho is this? Sorry to be annoying but blogger isn't saying who posted...
ReplyDeleteI think Zach has a good question and I might add, how do you think they can/should compliment each other (assuming you think they do of course)
I would also caution you on your use of 'male' and 'female' ideas as, according the feminist theory, it isn't male and female that is important but instead the social roles they are expected to fulfill, masculine and feminine.
This is Victoria!
DeleteThank you for your feedback! In relation to Zach’s comment about feminine empowerment complimenting masculine power, I believe that it would almost be a mix of soft power and hard power. Furthermore, the persuasive and empowering characteristics of soft power do not always produce the best results in certain situations. Just as the coercive and dominant characteristics of hard power are not always effective either. Therefore, feminine empowerment can be used in politics during times when soft power/persuasion is needed and the masculine idea of power can be used when hard power/dominance is needed.
I think the information you cited from different sources to build your argument makes your point better and clearer. I like the fact you mentioned that “women have a strong sense of “others” where they tend to empower each other, while males are more competitive about power” (Feminist and Realist theory). Do you think you can bring US political system (gender roles) as part of your discussion? I think for two pages paper you have done a good job to explain your points. If you have ever thought to do your analytic paper on this topic, it would be great if you could compare and contrast the political principles of other countries, like UK, Myanmar, etc. to find out if these countries headed by women have a different political point of view.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much! Yes, it would definitely be a good idea to expand my argument to include the way gender roles are presented within the U.S. political system itself. With this, I could go into more depth on how women in politics are viewed in the U.S. in particular, and then go even further to compare this to how gender roles in politics are perceived in different countries. I’m not yet well educated on the political system or the way in which gender roles are perceived in the country of Myanmar. However, I could certainly do more research to incorporate this into my discussion.
DeleteI really enjoyed reading your post, Victoria. I especially liked how you were able to back your argument with clear and relevant evidence effectively. Your post did leave me wondering how exactly we can incorporate more of these feminine ideas Tickner develops without disrupting the delicate balance between masculine and feminine. You raise the point that neutrality is needed between these ways of thinking; what are your thoughts on how we can achieve this, especially in the United States today?
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your feedback! In response to your question on how we can balance masculine and feminine thought in politics, I think that if more women were involved in the political sphere, naturally their voices would be heard more clearly than if the political sphere were dominated by men (as it is now). In other words, more women in politics does not necessarily mean less men in politics. Rather, it would most likely even the playing field if more women felt compelled to join the political world. Thus, balancing the scale of masculine and feminine political thought.
DeleteVictoria, this post was very well written. Your use of evidence from sources aided in making the argument stronger. I agree with your argument made regarding masculine and feminine power in politics- I believe women could bring balance to politic power with their collectivist "other" attitude. I know creating equality between women and men in the world of politics is no easy feat, but do you believe it is possible with certain tactics? If so, what would they be? Lastly, have you ever seen this inequality in a personal situation?
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment! I’m not sure of any specific tactics that could be used to create equality between men and women in politics. However, I believe that if more people were accepting of feminist ideals and if women felt more welcome in the political world, then gender equality in politics could likely be achieved. As for personal situation regarding gender inequality, I cannot say that I have experienced this in regards to politics but I have certainly experienced gender inequality in general terms. I remember when I was younger, gym class always seemed to be a place where gender inequality was very common. Much like in politics, the girls would almost always be chosen last to play on a team due the common (and false) ideal that girls were weaker and less capable than boys. In relation to politics, some people do not believe that women are capable of working in the political sphere, though this notion is certainly inaccurate.
Delete