Graphic by Raj Brodie
Cate Mahoney
Opinions Reporter
There is an alarming lack of female representatives in the US government and beyond. Despite what one might argue about record numbers of women serving in Congress or being recognized for political strides, it is undeniable that women are still underrepresented in government. The few who are included are constantly disrespected, so often made fun of for being too serious or otherwise too shrill or emotional. The double standard is insanely apparent when it comes to politics. Women are held to extreme standards of intelligence, eloquence, and appearance. They are not allowed to age, show any sign of weakness, or exhibit femininity but must also act “enough” like a lady. Public image is essential for politicians, but even more so for female ones.
Women in the workplace have been ridiculed and tokenized since the very foundation of modern work. Politics bring a unique and unjust light to the issue, revealing the stark truth behind how people in power and even average Americans truly view women. A simple yet powerful example of this is the contrast between how people address male versus female political figures.
Names hold power; they grant people social capital, recognition, and infamy. While male politicians are known by their last names (e.g., Biden, Trump, Obama), female politicians are often addressed by their first names (e.g., Hillary and Kamala). At the very least, first names are needed to clarify who a female politician is since their gender automatically gives them less relevance. Think about Stacey Abrams and Elizabeth Warren. You wouldn’t know who it was if she didn’t have a first name attached – a symbol of her projected inferiority and subordination.
Furthermore, a toxic culture of male gratification vs. female subjugation surrounds politics. A recent New York Times article compared Michelle Wu, mayor of Boston, and Eric Adams, mayor of New York City, who were both elected in 2021. It pointed out the tendency toward self-assurance and egotism of male politicians vs. the often overlooked humility and industriousness of female ones.
A legacy of our misogynistic culture is that women are more accustomed to doing unrecognized and unglamorous work. A common theme in politics and takeaway for many citizens is that leaders often spend more time on self-reverence and branding than actual achievement and societal progress. While Adams is cutting ribbons and spending nights charming taxpayers, Wu is quietly establishing initiatives for more efficient transit systems and early education. This is not to say who is a more effective leader, as Boston and New York are vastly different cities, merely an observation of their different styles and how their gender affects that, as well as their public perception.
Having female leaders in positions of influence is critical to a successful and equal society. It can help increase pay equity, change workplace policies, and establish societal norms. It’s about equaling the scale and balancing perspectives to truly represent the people.
This isn’t just a US problem. Data from the UN shows that women are underrepresented at all levels of decision-making worldwide. The idea that only men deserve to hold positions of power and make important decisions perpetuated throughout history and is fallacious and inherently flawed. Unfortunately, it has created the underrepresentation we see today. For governments to be truly effective and representative of the people, there must be more women in central roles.
