Explore the Global Political Scene: Women and Politics (Case Study Sample)

Women and Politics
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Women and Politics
The fact that there is a rising number of women with relevant positions in the global political scene has drew scholars’ attention during the last decades. In the 1980s, fewer women held significant titles in contemporary politics compared to the modern times. During this period, there was an invisible glass ceiling that deterred women from pursuing not only politics, but also leading a life of independence and authority in a male-dominated society. Regardless, there is still a difference in the way men and women are viewed in politics, both by the media and by the general public. This paper will tell a story and analyze the evolution and the role of women in politics.
This story emerged because more and more women were seen taking center stage in world politics, yet it was not the case in the 20th century. Thirty decades ago, women were considered as lacking strong will, ambition, courage, ability, and reason to engage in politics. During this time, was very rare to find a female being advanced in political positions (Zamfirache, 2010). This saw the arenas of power being dominated by men. The barriers that caused this, apart from the glass ceiling, were stereotypes, informal boundaries, and media related issues. The media was responsible for raising standards for female candidates and perpetuating stereotypes.
The reason for telling this story is so that the reader can understand why most females have to try harder than their male counterparts to achieve political success and the factors that influence this achievement. The speech that was supposed to make women achieve the same type of political recognition as men made them seem untrustworthy and weak. During the 19th century, most women were associated with the personal-private sphere of life. Culture and tradition confined women to their ‘places’ since it was believed that men could do a better job in almost every aspect of life. There also existed a stereotype that drew people to think there was no way of joining the political-business sphere of life with the one related to family and household chores.
Economic growth influenced the evolution of women in politics. Markets were growing, and they needed more work power. Soon, more and more jobs were available, and women left the domestic environment to do paid work. Expectedly, the increase of supply and demand in the markets required tighter regulation and scrutiny since more transactions were taking place. However, the trade unions present at that time were not enough to represent women’s rights (Zamfirache, 2010). There was a need for substantive and direct representation. Soon, cultural and traditional values that prevented women from achieving representation grew weak. In turn, women’s roles in public and private domains grew strong.
Apparently, even with all the changes that have occurred in the late 20th century and early 21st century, there still exists a glass ceiling that prevents political equality from taking place (Zamfirache, 2010). This glass ceiling is not institutions-related, but women-related. Some women have been seen to exhibit male tendencies on the political stage, which makes them appear not worthy of trust. Pertinently, most women do not relate to their new found positions, and this leads to limited power. Therefore, the struggle for women, in as much as it may seem relevant, lacks efficiency.
I came across this story as I was reading the journal Anthropology and Sociology. I found it fascinating since I had never known exactly what led to a gradual rise of female politicians in both the regional and international scene. My readers need to know that there is still a glass ceiling present in the political aspect of modern society. This analysis will base its argument from that glass ceiling.
Analysis
The story is trying to show that although there is an increase in female political participation, equal female political representation is still far from being achieved. This is shown through how the media and the public portray women. The media, for example, plays one of the most significant parts in representing female candidates. Zamfirache (2010) states that female candidates have themselves been disappointed by how the media views and describes them. It emphasizes on appearance and neglects the most significant aspects, like political agenda. In contrast, male candidates are portrayed in a normal-like manner. The result is that women are perceived as sexual objects. Furthermore, they are characterized as belonging to a more material, less intellectual world.
In effect, they try to appear more masculine in public appearances, in speech, and in image. The consequence is that there is an emergence of “gendered mediation.” The latter phrase is mostly portrayed by the media in that the male is the norm in news frames. Thus, politics is portrayed by media houses in stereotypically masculine terms. This is why the glass ceiling that women face in politics is women-related. The evaluation and tight scrutiny that women face in politics seem to be as a result of gender mediation. In fact, governments might remain male-dominated because the media keeps reminding the public of the image of “talking tough,” which is less feminine.
Women also have a long way to go in politics since they constantly have to find a balance between being too aggressive and combative and being feminine. If one is too feminine, they are considered weak and untrusting. If they are aggressive, they are considered violent and this stirs up negative reactions (Zamfirache, 2010). Either is considered “not enough” by both the public and the media. This explains why female politicians and potential politicians find it difficult to send a message to the electorate.
The author of the story, Irana Zamfirache, clearly indicates some form of power negotiation. Although difficult, Zamfirache suggests that women need to play their political role in a more natural manner, like their male counterparts (Zamfirache, 2010). He states that by women trying to portray masculinity so that they appear more qualified or equal to the men, they deny themselves the chance to progress in politics since the media will portray them in a masculine rather than a feminine manner (Hall, 1997).
Another form of power negotiation is seen where the author states that women are more likely to vote for women representatives than their male counterparts. In this case, women are holding a more dominant stand in the form of power negotiation as men may not vote for a male leader merely because they are of the same gender. Similar experiences make it possible for women to do so. Power negotiation is present in the article because the piece in itself is about how men are more favored than females by both media and society. Therefore, there is a power struggle, and males and females are dominant in different aspects.
In another point, there exists power negotiation in how the public views female political leaders as well as aspiring ones. In this case, power negotiation tends to weigh more on the side of the males. Both male and female citizens tend to exhibit more trust in male candidates than in women candidates. Thus, leaving women on the edge. Starting from the dress code, who pays for the campaign, who they have lunch with and many other aspects. Women always have to try harder than men regarding how the public views them (Galligan, 2007). Male politicians can get away with many scandals and mistakes, but not women leaders. Therefore, there is a need for power negotiation in this terms of public view.
The story tries to re-negotiate the idea that females are no longer facing a glass ceiling in politics. Most readers are familiar with the fact that the number of women in politics has increased. This makes them think that the glass ceiling is no longer in existence, but this is not the case. Women still face challenges and barriers to politics. In fact, the role of women in politics is not of the same political legitimacy as the one of the men. Galligan (2007), states that the role of women in politics can be seen as a formal one, with no real consequences for the public. Women are still being perceived as second-rate politicians and society is still debating upon the question “Is a female politician as credible as a male one?”
Also, women seem to require a lot of support in politics compared to men. This arouses the notion that they are not as stable as their male colleagues at work. As long as this inequality is present, the glass barrier that women face will still be present since there is little evidence to support the fact that women are progressing in the political scene. The author tries to re-negotiate the fact that women need more attention on the political scale than is given to them. A majority of the public confuses women empowerment with politics. While it is true that women are doing better in their businesses, at their workplaces, and in their financial status,’ the political scene still has a long way to go for a change to be effective. Most women are given power because of gender rules, not because they are thought of as competent.
Interpretation and counsel are available in the story, but not indicated in a direct manner. Zamfirache points out the weaknesses of women in politics hoping that the readers will see these weaknesses and how they can be improved. For example, when he talks about women being masculine in speeches, he urges politicians to be natural when addressing p...