Theresa May. Angela Merkel. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Hillary Clinton. Today, girls around the world have strong role models for political leadership. This is progress, and we should celebrate it. But while I’m pleased to see how far we’ve come, I am impatient too. In my twenties, I was confident gender would no longer be in an issue in politics by the time I was in my fifties. I expected men and women to have the same opportunities to lead.
Sadly, my youthful prediction was proven wrong. That dream is still elusive.
Last year, 11 women were serving as head of state and 10 were serving as head of government globally. Considering the world has some 195 countries, this is clearly nowhere near equal representation.
In parliamentary democracies, potential female leaders tend to be drawn from the broader pool of female parliamentarians. If women are to attain leadership positions and get a chance to affect profound change, we need a much higher percentage of women sitting in parliamentary chambers.
Today, only 22 percent of all national parliamentarians are female. In 37 nations, women hold less than 10 percent of all seats in single or lower houses. Six chambers have no women at all.
Former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard | David Moir/EPA
Becoming a political leader typically requires having served in executive government at a high level. Yet in January 2015, only 17 percent of government ministers globally were women.
As I see it, women are held back by three types of barriers: bias, both conscious and unconscious; structural impediments; and the way family life is treated in the public sphere. These factors not only thin the number of women who run for leadership positions, they also influence how we view and treat women who do make it to the top.
Take two women who, despite the clear statistical odds, have reached the highest political echelons: Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and British Prime Minister Theresa May, women from opposite sides of the pond and different walks of life. Interesting lessons emerge from the bias they face.
May, Britain’s second female Conservative prime minister, came to power in crisis circumstances. Clinton’s tilt at the presidency reaches back almost a decade. She is the first woman nominated for president from a major political party in the United States.
The Washington Post analyzed 100,000 tweets from the New Hampshire primary and found the most “gendered” language used in reference to Clinton included the word “bitch” and threats of rape.
Despite their differences, both are feminists who dedicated at least part of their political careers to the advancement of women’s rights. And both have coped with plenty of gender bias.
Journalist Laura Bates recorded some of the worst cases of gendered coverage of May in Britain, including a “Heel Boys” headline splashed across one newspaper’s front page, and “Here Come the Girls” across another. One cartoon depicted the contest between May and her then opponent, Andrea Leadsom, as an argument over a handbag. May’s marriage has frequently made headlines.
This is bad enough, of course. But it pales in comparison to the sheer volume and coarseness of the insults aimed at Clinton.
A harder, darker tone has emerged in this U.S. election campaign. The Washington Post analyzed 100,000 tweets from the New Hampshire primary and found the most “gendered” language used in reference to Clinton included the word “bitch” and threats of rape. For former Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders, “dad” and “basketball” were as bad as it got. The latest whispering campaign about Clinton’s health and stamina draws freely on stereotypes that women are weak, while men can take it.
Clinton faces a commonly-held perception that she is not likeable, despite the fact that those closest to her say she is kind, warm, funny and a great listener. This unfair perception illustrates what many academic studies also show: People tend to perceive women leaders as cold, hard and selfish.
To counter the image, Clinton went out on a no-fuss listening tour in the early days of her campaign, meeting small groups of voters and telling their stories to the public via social media.
Yet in confronting one stereotype — women leaders aren’t likeable — she played into another: men may dominate the conversation, but women are good listeners. Clinton visited communities to listen, while her opponent, Donald Trump, has never done anything but talk.
In the dance of political campaigning, oration tends to reign supreme and good “listeners” face an immediate disadvantage. Clinton could break this mold. If she prevails, it would be a victory not only for women, but for campaigns based on stereotypically “female” techniques and values.
To be sure, this would be a small first step in achieving equal treatment for male and female leaders. Vexed questions like the problem that men are more likely to be judged by their actions and women by their appearance still need to be resolved.
As prime minister, I experienced gendered treatment far too many times. When I spoke out against sexism and misogyny in parliament, the speech went viral. The overwhelming response to my comments was evidence that I had touched a nerve, and many women voiced their support.
Even as we celebrate new female leaders and the inspiration they bring to today’s women and girls, let’s remember that having a female leader does not automatically level the playing field for others.
Of course, anyone contending for high office must be scrutinized. But criticism of May and Clinton based on their gender is completely invalid. Everyone — men and women — share in the responsibility to make sure that, in any political campaign, a woman is not held back from leading simply because of her gender.
Looking at May and Clinton, and their journeys in leadership, I’m prepared to make a prediction. May will see more gender stereotyping. If Clinton is elected, the pitch of criticism will — after an initial ugly flurry — see a sharp decrease.
May’s experience is likely to mirror my own. What I experienced at the beginning of my premiership was close to benign, compared with much of what I faced later on. I have the uncomfortable feeling that this cycle will play out again. For May, the worst of gender stereotyping is yet to come.
For Clinton, the campaign has already been so long, so harsh and so uncivilized that, a few months after inauguration day, the worst will be behind her. The longer she governs, the more Trump-inspired ravings will seem absurd.
Even as we celebrate new female leaders and the inspiration they bring to today’s women and girls, let’s remember that having a female leader does not automatically level the playing field for others.
Until we collectively ensure that the pool from which we draw women leaders is more equal, female leadership at the national level will be the exception rather than the norm. We must tackle head on the barriers women face solely on the basis of their gender. Putting a stop to bias and gendered political attacks is the right place to start.
Julia Gillard served as prime minister of Australia from 2010 to 2013. She was the first and remains the only woman to serve in that role.