SAMENVATTING GENDER,
DIVERSITY & POLITICS
,INTRODUCTION
1. THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE: EQUALITY AND FREEDOM
The democratic promise: “Everyone is equal and free ... to become a politician.”
• We’re all equal and free to participate in politics, that’s part of the democratic ideology
• The numbers on world & regional averages of women in parliaments strongly contradict this
democratic promise.
1.1 THE PROMISE: EQUALITY AND FREEDOM
• If women and men are equal and free:
o why, then, are women underrepresented?
o why, then, are women now better represented?
• The ‘democratic’ answer: ‘Inequality is okay when the reason for that is a lack of ambition or
lower (or higher) levels of merit (verdiensten).’
• What the research on women in politics teaches us:
o It is not (only) about personal ambition; structural factors matter greatly – the
inequality is structural and is generated by structures in society, by how politics are
organized. If there is less inequality, than that’s not because of individuals but
because of structural changes.
o Ambition and merit are gendered, and mediated by networks
1.2 WHEN DO WOMEN RUN FOR OFFICE?
STRUCTURAL FACTORS
Political parties are key gatekeepers in democratic systems. As such, the conditions under which
women run for office depend heavily on party competition, party ideology and party
organisation.
1. Party competition – when do political parties put women on their list?
• When there are scandals or when there’s electoral failure. The reason for this is that they
protect their best people on the background (behind the scenes) and put new people in front
to take the accusations.
• When there are weak competition and low chances of assuming government: when they
are entering selections and they’re pretty sure what the outcome will be (they will not win).
• Contagion: when one party starts with e.g. putting women at top of the list, other parties will
follow this example. Even when a party is not women-minded, they will still follow the
example to not lose their female voters.
1
,2. Party ideology
Historically, left-wing parties have nominated and elected more women and have included more
women in party elites. This is linked to the historical alliance between leftist parties and women’s
movements. However, right-wing parties are catching up.
3. Party organization
• Centralisation: we see that IF the top of the party is convinced that the party should be
gender-equal, they are more powerful to make that work. So only when the party leaders
believe in women’s qualities and the principle of gender equality.
• Women party leaders & selectors: when there are women in the team of selectors, we see
that women are more on the list. The reason for this is networks: women do have more
women in their work circle and circle of friends.
• Women sections within parties:
o Functions:
§ In the past: serve coffee
§ Mobilize female electorate
§ Intra party decision-making
o Effects:
§ Effective in promoting women for office and quota
§ Channel for voicing women’s demands
§ Group consciousness as resource for campaigns addressing party leaders
RULES
• The more formal rules the better for newcomers (women, ethnic minorities, ...): formal rules
are good for inclusion and equality.
• Quota & reserved seats: positive impact on the number of women in politcal parties
o Genderquota do not limit equality in an important way. If there is a limitation of
freedom, then it’s just the selectors choosing if women can be on the list or not.
1.3 IS THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE FULFILLED?
Research on political recruitment highlights three interrelated concepts: ambition, merit, and
networks. These factors do not operate in isolation but are shaped by institutional and party-related
contexts.
NETWORKS
Homosocial capital
• Networks of individuals who share norms, values and perceptions, and therefore are
perceived as trustworthy and predictable.
o People tend to bound with people that look like them, that are familiar. That’s how
you build networks.
2
, • Instrumental side: access to resources = capital that is mobilized in politics, information
about & support for political mandates amongst others
• White privileged men historically dominate these networks. They benefit more strongly
from these networks (but also the underrepresented groups do)
o Networks have always been around in politics and traditionally/historically political
power was with men, highly educated white wealthy men.
• These networks do not intend to exclude (no conspiracy) but do generate and maintain
exclusion. In these networks, these highly educated white men have political power and it’s
there for historical reasons. These networks are an extremely important explanation for why
inequality persists and it’s so hard to change.
o In the networks of women, there is less political capital
o Generally speaking, it’s difficult to build these networks full of political capital
AMBITION
What motivates women (more than man) to run for office?
• Direct recruitment: research shows that women are ambitious, want to go in politics, but they
need to be approached in another way then men. Women are differently socialized. Women
think less of themselves as a politician than men.
• Encouragement
• Exposure to women officeholders
• Organisations and programmes committed to women’s recruitment and training
• Sense of ‘usefulness of politics to solve problems’: for men the bar is lower. Women need to
see the prove that they can achieve something. The reason for this is that women do have
less time for politics, e.g. because of all the caring work they have (generally speaking). They
ask themselves: ‘Can I actually change something?’
• Capacity to make substantive policy change
MERIT (VERDIENSTEN)
Rainbow Murray (2014):
• Quality criteria based on previous (male) examples
o The criteria we use for women’s underrepresentation are re-installing the inequality;
they’re based on male examples.
• Men greater opportunity to demonstrate their worth
o The easiest way to show you’re competent is simply by doing the job, but not
everyone has the chance to prove their competence.
• Men’s competence is rarely called into question - they benefit from the presumption of
competence
• Meritocratic argument assumes men’s overrepresentation as a correct & fair outcome. But if
we shift the focus from the underrepresentation of women to the overrepresentation of men,
you have a much more relevant discussion. By focussing on women’s underrepresentation,
we’re not questioning the ones who already are in power.
3
DIVERSITY & POLITICS
,INTRODUCTION
1. THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE: EQUALITY AND FREEDOM
The democratic promise: “Everyone is equal and free ... to become a politician.”
• We’re all equal and free to participate in politics, that’s part of the democratic ideology
• The numbers on world & regional averages of women in parliaments strongly contradict this
democratic promise.
1.1 THE PROMISE: EQUALITY AND FREEDOM
• If women and men are equal and free:
o why, then, are women underrepresented?
o why, then, are women now better represented?
• The ‘democratic’ answer: ‘Inequality is okay when the reason for that is a lack of ambition or
lower (or higher) levels of merit (verdiensten).’
• What the research on women in politics teaches us:
o It is not (only) about personal ambition; structural factors matter greatly – the
inequality is structural and is generated by structures in society, by how politics are
organized. If there is less inequality, than that’s not because of individuals but
because of structural changes.
o Ambition and merit are gendered, and mediated by networks
1.2 WHEN DO WOMEN RUN FOR OFFICE?
STRUCTURAL FACTORS
Political parties are key gatekeepers in democratic systems. As such, the conditions under which
women run for office depend heavily on party competition, party ideology and party
organisation.
1. Party competition – when do political parties put women on their list?
• When there are scandals or when there’s electoral failure. The reason for this is that they
protect their best people on the background (behind the scenes) and put new people in front
to take the accusations.
• When there are weak competition and low chances of assuming government: when they
are entering selections and they’re pretty sure what the outcome will be (they will not win).
• Contagion: when one party starts with e.g. putting women at top of the list, other parties will
follow this example. Even when a party is not women-minded, they will still follow the
example to not lose their female voters.
1
,2. Party ideology
Historically, left-wing parties have nominated and elected more women and have included more
women in party elites. This is linked to the historical alliance between leftist parties and women’s
movements. However, right-wing parties are catching up.
3. Party organization
• Centralisation: we see that IF the top of the party is convinced that the party should be
gender-equal, they are more powerful to make that work. So only when the party leaders
believe in women’s qualities and the principle of gender equality.
• Women party leaders & selectors: when there are women in the team of selectors, we see
that women are more on the list. The reason for this is networks: women do have more
women in their work circle and circle of friends.
• Women sections within parties:
o Functions:
§ In the past: serve coffee
§ Mobilize female electorate
§ Intra party decision-making
o Effects:
§ Effective in promoting women for office and quota
§ Channel for voicing women’s demands
§ Group consciousness as resource for campaigns addressing party leaders
RULES
• The more formal rules the better for newcomers (women, ethnic minorities, ...): formal rules
are good for inclusion and equality.
• Quota & reserved seats: positive impact on the number of women in politcal parties
o Genderquota do not limit equality in an important way. If there is a limitation of
freedom, then it’s just the selectors choosing if women can be on the list or not.
1.3 IS THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE FULFILLED?
Research on political recruitment highlights three interrelated concepts: ambition, merit, and
networks. These factors do not operate in isolation but are shaped by institutional and party-related
contexts.
NETWORKS
Homosocial capital
• Networks of individuals who share norms, values and perceptions, and therefore are
perceived as trustworthy and predictable.
o People tend to bound with people that look like them, that are familiar. That’s how
you build networks.
2
, • Instrumental side: access to resources = capital that is mobilized in politics, information
about & support for political mandates amongst others
• White privileged men historically dominate these networks. They benefit more strongly
from these networks (but also the underrepresented groups do)
o Networks have always been around in politics and traditionally/historically political
power was with men, highly educated white wealthy men.
• These networks do not intend to exclude (no conspiracy) but do generate and maintain
exclusion. In these networks, these highly educated white men have political power and it’s
there for historical reasons. These networks are an extremely important explanation for why
inequality persists and it’s so hard to change.
o In the networks of women, there is less political capital
o Generally speaking, it’s difficult to build these networks full of political capital
AMBITION
What motivates women (more than man) to run for office?
• Direct recruitment: research shows that women are ambitious, want to go in politics, but they
need to be approached in another way then men. Women are differently socialized. Women
think less of themselves as a politician than men.
• Encouragement
• Exposure to women officeholders
• Organisations and programmes committed to women’s recruitment and training
• Sense of ‘usefulness of politics to solve problems’: for men the bar is lower. Women need to
see the prove that they can achieve something. The reason for this is that women do have
less time for politics, e.g. because of all the caring work they have (generally speaking). They
ask themselves: ‘Can I actually change something?’
• Capacity to make substantive policy change
MERIT (VERDIENSTEN)
Rainbow Murray (2014):
• Quality criteria based on previous (male) examples
o The criteria we use for women’s underrepresentation are re-installing the inequality;
they’re based on male examples.
• Men greater opportunity to demonstrate their worth
o The easiest way to show you’re competent is simply by doing the job, but not
everyone has the chance to prove their competence.
• Men’s competence is rarely called into question - they benefit from the presumption of
competence
• Meritocratic argument assumes men’s overrepresentation as a correct & fair outcome. But if
we shift the focus from the underrepresentation of women to the overrepresentation of men,
you have a much more relevant discussion. By focussing on women’s underrepresentation,
we’re not questioning the ones who already are in power.
3
