Dirty Politics: Yes Ma'am!
Posted by Matthew D.S. on 01.17.2006
Condi, Hillary, and women in politics
A woman's place is in the home, so went the old saying back in the day when Ward Cleaver would work hard at his place of business, and then come home to his loving wife June, clad in pearls and all.
Fast forward nearly half a century: a woman's place is in parliament, or in a presidential mansion.
Over the past few weeks and months, the world has seen a great upsurge in the number of women who can claim the right to call themselves a head of state, or head of government.
In doing so, there have been a number of nations that have seen many firsts pertaining to the gains of power by these women. Liberia - and Africa - will witness the first female president in their histories when Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf takes the oath of office, an event that American First Lady Laura Bush will be in attendance.
Chile just only elected Michelle Bachelet as their president, again a first for that nation. In Canada, Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, accepted the recommendation of Prime Minister (or perhaps soon to be former Prime Minister?) Paul Martin and appointed Haitian immigrant Michaëlle Jean to the Vice-Regal position of Governor General. Canada, on a side note, should also be recognized as the first North American nation to have a female head of government, Kim Campbell.
Even more significantly, Germany, one of the world's great economic and political powers, placed Angela Merkel in the Chancellery as head of Germany's government, albeit through a somewhat precarious process of dealing and negotiating with her electoral foes.
What would Hitler think? It would likely outrage him, so all the more congratulations to you, Madam Merkel.
Currently the world boasts nine heads of government who are female; this number is extremely low, even when taking into consideration the different social or religious situations in the various parts of the world which would discount women from taking power of any shape or form (e.g. Saudi Arabia). Women comprise about half of the world's population but so few are at the head of government or state, and even fewer sit in the world's various parliaments or assemblies, comprising just over 16% of elected members. Statistically speaking (as of 2004), Rwanda's parliament had more females sitting as members than the United States Congress.
People from all across the political spectrum, but more pronounced from the left, complain and protest this lack of female participation in the world's power and decision making bodies. Many believe that an increased number of women would improve the political process and would make politics more democratic and representative, and perhaps even a bit more, how shall one say, tame?
On the first two points I have no qualms with. The world as a whole should have more female politicians, purely on the basis of population demographics. Would females make politics more tame however, or just, or open and honest? One can only speculate.
The image of the female gender as being the fairer sex has long been shattered, and rightfully so. In politics women certainly do not take a back seat to any man in terms of aggressiveness, or the potential for aggressive political behaviour. Margaret Thatcher became renowned in the United Kingdom for her no-nonsense approach to politics, and garnered the nickname of the "Iron Lady" in the process. Argentina learned that she would not be pushed around when she successfully utilized the armed forces to keep the Falkland Islands firmly in British hands during the 1982 Falklands War.
Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Rodham Clinton also are renowned examples of political women who, pardon the expression, do not take shit.
One must look forward to 2008 now when discussing both these women, for in their hands may rest the future of what female politics may hold. Both women have been rampantly discussed as heirs apparent to the White House that will be left vacant by George W. Bush. Of course, one must assume that they will win each of their respective party's nominations for the presidency (Rice for the Republicans and Clinton for the Democrats), and should both decide to stand for the post, it has been speculated that both would win support and the nomination.
The most powerful nation on Earth would then be subjected to the whims of a woman and whatever that brings with it to the table. Doubtlessly feminists and other female politicos would rejoice in witnessing that the United States had finally entered into the modern age by possessing the ability to see a woman fit to run the state.
The reaction of the phallic-central political world would also be fascinating to gage. Would male chauvinist leaders scoff at the United States and see it weak? Fragile? Should anybody dare think such ignorant things, they should not only remember that not only would Ms. Rice or Mrs. Clinton be Commander-in-Chief of the world's most dynamic military, but would also hold the access to its nuclear weapons.
Unfortunately, some female politicians in the past have seen their gender as a weakness. Former Ontario Liberal leader Lyn McLeod for example attributed her gender as a debatable reason for her defeat in the 1995 Ontario provincial election.
Doubtlessly though, and contrarily, Ms. Rice and Mrs. Clinton do not believe their gender is a weakness whatsoever. And it isn't. Both would likely serve as excellent presidents, and should they both face-off in 2008, it may arguable make for the most intensely followed presidential election in US history.
Until then, Ms. Rice and Mrs. Clinton serve as laudable role models for women across the world, both having reached near the pinnacle of power in any case, with Ms. Rice as Secretary of State, and Mrs. Clinton as a duly elected United States Senator.
I myself though am still unsure whether females would make politics less dirty as it is now with us men in charge. Judging by the behaviour of some female Members of Parliament here in Canada, the answer is definitively no. And whether Ms. Rice or Mrs. Clinton becomes the 44th President of the United States, dirty politics is likely here to stay.
STAY CURRENT