response-Pol-06

Response one pol-06

While there are no official rules that are different between male and female political candidates, they are viewed differently and females have more barriers to face. There is still strong evidence of sexism in American culture especially when it comes to females in leadership positions. Because there are fewer females in this arena, the stakes are higher and they are scrutinized in a different way than males are. A 2008 Pew study reported that a vast majority, 69%, say that men and women make equally good leaders. (Pew, 2008) However, there is a paradox in the study and respondents also said that women’s family responsibilities and lack of experience holds them back from upper ranks of politics and business. To me, this sounds like if a woman is already in a leadership role, people think they do a good job, it’s the getting to that level that is the challenge. One of the biggest barriers to women is often themselves. A Politico article pointed out that women do tend to win elections at the same rate as men, but they are far less likely to even run at all.  (Ripley, 2017) The political ambition of women is far lower than men creating a gender gap in female representation in politics. However, this article was written just eight months after the 2016 elections and there has been a surge in female consideration of running for office and this might be the catalyst that shrinks this gap. Hopefully the under representation of women in the government will take a change for the better and the gender gap will close.

Because there are fewer female candidates, they stand out more and sexist thoughts are present, even if they are subconscious and unintentional. Using the example of the 2016 presidential campaign, we can find many instances where female candidates, Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina, were held to different social standards than their male opponents. A Washington Post article analyzed specifically the presidential debate, even details such as the podium height, leans against women. They are usually build for six foot and taller people which can make women look smaller and insignificant. Also, if a man becomes emotional on a heavy topic it can be seen as compassion but when a woman does, they can be seen as overly emotional and unable to deal with the issue objectively. Women also have to find a balance between being firm but not too firm. Being too firm comes off as combative and too masculine, a turn off for voters. Even their tone of voice is scrutinized, both Hillary and Carly have lowered their voices over the years in speeches to not sound too high and “shrill”. Voters also tend to see female candidates as experts on social programs and male candidates as experts on national security and defense which could be a problem with what the hot topics are for the country at the moment.

 

"Men or Women: Who's the Better Leader?" Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project. August 25, 2008. Accessed April 11, 2018. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2008/08/25/men-or-women-whos-the-better-leader/.

Ripley, Amanda, Reena Flores, and Ellen Weinstein. "What It Will Take for Women to Win." POLITICO. 2017. Accessed April 11, 2018. https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/women-rule-politics/.

Ross, Janell. "Hillary Clinton, and the Very Different Rules for Women in Debates." The Washington Post. March 07, 2016. Accessed April 11, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/18/how-to-debate-like-a-woman/?utm_term=.464f943780a

Response Two –pol-06

Although women political candidates are still underrepresented, continues to fight for equal pay, right, etc., men and women political candidate have to comply with the same statutes (FEC, 2018). Furthermore, and according to the FEC (2018), to run for a "seat in the House and Senate Candidate, all men and women candidates must raise or spends more than $5,000 in contribution or expenditures before he or she may registers".  In addition, and according to the FEC (2018), all “House and Senate Candidate must submit a Statement of Candidacy form within 15-days of becoming a candidate”.  The only difference is – the Senate candidates must submit his or her paper registration to the Secretary of the Senate, whereas the House candidates must present his or her electronically or paper registrations (Form-2) to the FEC because the Statement of Candidacy must obtain the Candidate original signature (FEC, 2018).  Notwithstanding, women political candidates have to work even harder, and they have to be as stern as their male counterpart to be perceived as leaders (FEC, 2018). 

Furthermore, women, political candidates have to maintain a stern professional status while running to serve as political candidates’ position. Besides, being underrepresented continues to hinder women “directly and indirectly” (Bauer, 2018). Moreover, and according to Bauer (2018), “gender stereotype is a potential source of biases that voters have against women candidate.  Female political candidates encounter obstacles from voters, their counterparts, and they do not obtain as much support from the party gatekeepers as most men receive.[1]Although women and men political candidates must maintain a professional status throughout their candidacy, men are more likely not to be discriminated for their unethical conduct.[2]  Hence, political candidates, supporters would rather have a stern, assertive or decisive as well as something politically unethical male candidate advocating for them.[3]  Moreover, a masculine stereotype perceived as an advantage in politics.[4]Hence, and to be quite candid, a women political candidate who partakes a masculine stereotype would most likely exceed a women candidate who appears to be demoralized.[5]  The masculine "stereotypes are equivalent to longstanding popular expectations for political leaders."[6]  Nonetheless, the feminine stereotypes (passive, demoralize, etc.,) contradict those expectations which imply why women political candidates have to be more assertive than their male counterparts. Furthermore, women continue to be rejected and viewed as being more emotional, caring, and compassionate than men political candidates. Women political candidate cannot follow men political candidates “unethical” leads when running for a political candidate because the women who do will be stereotyped as "vulgar."[7]  Women political candidate will have to address those obstacles as well as fighting for equality. (Bauer & political party, 2018). 

Overall, and considering U.S. Senate Pelosi is the only women in Congress to lead a party, women are making progress in politics.[8]Moreover, and as Bauer (2018), has stated, women political candidates has and continues to overcome some of the obstacles that had hindered them from running for political candidate positions. Studies have indicated that women political candidates’ contribute as much (often equal) as men political candidate contribute to their campaigns.[9]Furthermore, and compared to the 1990s, women are “becoming more mainstreamed in the parties" due to their competitiveness and leadership ability.[10]Nonetheless, women are still encountering barrier (i.e., equality) with pay and leadership roles.[11]Bauer (2018) stated, women have rarely served a chair, and it is still unusual to see a women chair “either national party”(journalist’s Resource, 2018). There are also many barriers (the “lack of crucial masculine qualities,” too passive, caring, etc.,) that hinder women from being viewed as adequate political candidate - by their counterparts, leader, and voters.[12]  Nonetheless, there are many gender stereotypes (i.e., honesty, empathy, etc.,) that helps women political candidate achieve their goals. Nevertheless, women political candidate will have to continue addressing obstacles as well as fighting for equality (political party, 2018).

[1]23456Bauer, Nichole. “Gender Stereotypes and Female Political Candidates” Journalist’s Resource, Research on Today’s News Topic, Scholars Strategy Network: university of Alabama for Journalist Resource  October 1, 2015  https://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/elections/gender-stereotypes-female-political-candidates (accessed April 10, 2018).

Federal Election Commission. United States -of- America. “House and Senate Candidate Registration  https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/registering-candidate/house-and-senate-candidate-registration/ (accessed April 10, 2018).

[8]9101112Political Party. “Women Candidates and Political Parties”Party Leaders and Women.  https://www.politicalparity.org/research-inventory/women-candidates-and-political-parties/ (accessed April 10, 2018).

Response Three_06

 One possible factor in understanding a woman’s enduring disengagement from the political world compared to men is the low visibility of women political leaders of past and present (Atkeson, L.R., 2003).  Although that is slowly changing!  Another prominent theory that could explain some of the differences associated with gender in politics is our visual engagement that focuses on mental and physical characteristics of the individual.  Atkeson, argues that differences in political capital, such as education, income, property ownership, experience, class status, and self-confidence are all traits that could define different political rules for female political candidates.  Political activity has a personal side as well as a political side says Atkeson.  For centuries, world societies have condition men to believe that women have or had the sole responsibility of home care, and when society views a woman for political office we judge them on their personal family life harsher than men.  A sort of balancing act like the scales of justice.  For example, former Secretary of State Hillary Clintons recent campaign bid for the presidency; she never appeared in public with her grandchild, (at least to my knowledge) which would have showed a conditioned paternal softer side that society has prescribed on women. Maybe there is bias on my part when viewing women politicians, but to me, emulating the tough male political figure, was a bit off balance. Take Ambassador Nicky Haley, and how she balances her prescription.  I see no extremes which could cause me to view her balancing act as unequal (personal/private), and she exerts strong leadership when discussing foreign affairs as a political leader.

            The Equal Rights Amendment was the paramount feminist issue first proposed by Alice Paul in 1921 (Freeman, J., 1995).  Paul was a British suffrage apprentice whom returned to the United States in 1913 with a wealth of political lessons in civil rights movements.  Paul had learned to hold the party in power responsible for injustices by organizing women to vote against specific members in 1914.  The main purpose of the Equal Rights Amendment was to dismantle state and common laws that placed restrictions on women against public political participation.  Labor laws denied women economic independence and subordinated them like helpless children in need of protection and care. Local laws would limit the number of hours a woman could work, prohibit night time employment, and paid only minimum wage only until a Supreme Court decision in 1923, that ruled those local laws unconstitutional (Freeman, J., 1995).  Paul had concluded that protective labor laws hurt women more than it helped because it encouraged the employment of men.  Yes, there are different rules for women in politics, but they can be overcome.  Rewind back to 2008, when former Secretary of State Clinton lost the democratic primaries to former POTUS Obama in the Iowa primaries.  After that initial shock, Clinton went on to the New Hampshire primaries and showed her disappointment with a tear, which elicited support from me about gender inequality in politics, back then.  For decades women have aligned themselves more closely with the Democratic Party and men more inclined to identify as republicans. A long history of economic struggles.  The suffrage movement for women has not been a united movement over the years.  Things like property ownership, citizenship status, and class status, all imply an economical theme that fostered the need for women to liberate themselves from the chains of injustices just like other minority groups in American history. Between 1940 and 1945, the percentage of women in the U.S. workforce increased from 27 percent to nearly 37 percent, and by 1945 only because of the United States participation in WW II.  One in every four women worked outside of the home, and at least over 350,000 women served both domestically and on foreign soil during the war.  This was an opportunity for women to realize, society too, that women were more than just homemakers.    

            Labor laws of the past, once denied the goals of economic inclusiveness for women and has continued to be formed with sort of a double-edged sword when it comes to women balancing a (personal and private) political life.  Over the course of history, women have had fewer economic resources than men, and women were mostly homemakers which required them to participate less frequently in politics.  Women participate in politics because of the political choices and incentives they are offered that could help to improve their lives.  When women become visible players in the political system they empower other women citizens to be bold.  Viable women candidates encourage more women to feel more connected and to become part of the political processes (Atkeson, L.R., 2003).  In modern times, women working outside of their homes are more likely to develop policy interests that are distinctly different from their husband’s as they face new challenges of balancing family life and a career choice.  Women must balance home life, and public life, like the scales of justice.  Men need only perform a public balancing act, which tips the scale in their favor in politics, but women have always been involved in politics.  They have suffered the injustices of personal biases, and public laws that supported the injustices of gender differences for many years just like other minority groups.  America has a long history of such events against women, but with continued participation, increased capital, and equality, women will only increase in numbers in politics, but, just be authentic, be who you ARE.

References:

Atkeson, Lonna R., 2003, Not all Cues Are Created Equal: The Conditional Impact of Female Candidates on Political Engagement, The Jo0urnal of Politics

Freeman, Jo, 1995, From suffrage to Women’s Liberation:  Feminism in Twentieth Century America, A Feminist Perspective ed, 5th edition, pp. 509-28

Response Four—pol-06

The rules for female political candidates are different than those for male candidates. This should not come as a surprise because women are still grossly under represented in the American political sphere. Women have not seen fair, equitable, or equal representation in the political world at any level of government. This lack of exposure not only leads to women not feeling welcome to participate as candidates, it leads to an environment where even voting seems futile because there are likely no candidates who represent the policy ideals important to women. There has been progress made in advancing female political participation, especially in the last fifteen to twenty years, but American politics are far from equitable representation.

Male candidates are not only expected to be aggressive, it is seen as a step to success in American politics. However, negative campaigns go against the expectations society has of women which hinders female candidates from campaigning against male counterpoints on a level playing field. Expected female behavior includes sensitivity, familial concern, compassion, emotional expression, affection, and using nurturing language even in their campaigns (Craig and Rippere, 2016).  Women are not expected to use harsh language or be assertive verbally or physically whereas men are encouraged to behave aggressively, especially while engaging in a political campaign.

The position of female candidates becomes even more precarious when behavioral expectations are coupled with the expectation that all candidates are expected to live up to the masculine norms of the presidency regardless of gender (Dittmar, 2016). This double standard of expectations can be a deterrent to female candidates as they are going to be judged negatively regardless of how they behave as political candidates. Women who do enter the political field are either termed too manly and too aggressive or they are criticized for being too soft and emotional to handle the difficult decisions required of political figures.

As society progresses more towards having a greater number of female candidates at all levels of politics, there remains one question, will voters actually vote for female candidates? Survey respondents have been found to overstate their willingness to vote for female candidates because they want to make a positive impression (Krupnikov, et al, 2016). The pressure to be judged as having the socially correct answer on a survey skews the likelihood female candidates will be elected. However, Krupnikov et al (2016) found that respondents who were given the opportunity to explain their behavior and save face with the explanation were more likely to answer that they are not as likely to vote for female candidates. This goes some way toward explaining why surveys and polls have not consistently held true at the polls.

Dittmar (2016) found the most consistent predictor of who a person would vote for is party affiliation. As an indicator, gender is not the primary decision point for many voters. Golder (2017) expands on this with the finding that voters at the extremes of any party are less likely to vote for female candidates. This means even party affiliation with the liberal left is not a consistent indicator of likelihood of voting for female candidates. Female candidates have numerous walls to knock down or climb over to prove they are capable of performing a masculine role while maintaining their femininity, the double standard is glaring and obvious in female participation in political candidacy.

References

Craig, Stephen C. and Paulina S. Rippere. 2016. "He Said, She Said: The Impact of Candidate Gender in Negative Campaigns." Politics & Gender 12, no. 2: 391-414, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1791580014?accountid=8289.

Dittmar, Kelly. 2016. "Watching Election 2016 with a Gender Lens." PS, Political Science & Politics 49, no. 4: 807-812, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1828008587?accountid=8289.

Golder, Sona N., et al. 2017. "Votes for Women: Electoral Systems and Support for Female Candidates." Politics & Gender 13, no. 1: 107-131, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1876039877?accountid=8289

Krupnikov, Yanna, Spencer Piston, and Nichole M. Bauer. 2016. "Saving Face: Identifying Voter Responses to Black Candidates and Female Candidates." Political Psychology37, no. 2: 253-273. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed April 13, 2018).