An important area to look at when deciding whether women need women representatives is the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation. Substantive representation looks at whether representatives ‘act for women’ in the policies that are articulated within political institutions. Descriptive representation occurs when representatives mirror the backgrounds of the represented. In some countries such as Sweden, Argentina, and Rwanda, women have made remarkable progress in participation and representation. However, in other countries, women either lack the right to vote as is the case in Saudi Arabia, or are entirely represented by male legislators in countries such as the United Arab Emirates. As of June 2006, women comprised just 17% of national parliaments around the world. The question I am going to address is whether women need women representatives. This essay will outline a number of reasons why I believe women do in fact need women representatives as well as looking at the opposing view that they can indeed just be represented by men. However, after researching this question in a large amount of detail, I feel strongly that women need women representatives to ensure their interests are aired and their position in society continues to grow.
Critical mass theory suggests that the substantive representation of women will come about as a result of there being a ‘critical mass’ of women in a legislature (Allen & Childs, 2018). Kanter is cited in (Paxton, et al., 2007) and talks about how the size of the minority group matters. Once a group reaches a certain size, between 15-40% of women, the minority starts to assert itself which results in a ‘tipping point’ whereby women can state their influence in politics (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). The most common assumption in the critical mass theory literature is that as women grow more numerous in legislative chambers, they will increasingly be able to form strategic coalitions with one another to promote legislation related to women’s issues (Childs & Krook, 2009). This view is further backed up by (Childs, et al., 2008); ‘Numbers matter: an increase in women's descriptive representation in parliaments will generally translate into an increase in substantive representation of women.’ An example of this can be seen when looking at women being elected to Congress which promoted women’s interests. House floor speeches were analyzed which were speeches in which congresswomen could voice the ‘uncrystallized interests’ of women’ (Pearson & Dancey, 2011) .30,000 one-minute speeches from 1993 to 2008 were analyzed and the results found that congresswomen in both the Democratic and Republic party were far more likely than men to discuss women in their speeches (ibid). The results show that congresswomen’s speeches enhanced women’s representation as they drew attention to women’s interests and so signifies the importance of women having female representatives.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
However, It has often proved difficult to demonstrate that the representation of women’s interests necessarily follows from the presence of women representatives. Research across a number of countries has found limited evidence that there is a relationship between the percentage of women present and women representatives acting for them. Childs and Webb cited in (Campbell, 2015), argued that substantive representation of women is more complex than primarily focusing on the number of women present. Irene Diamond, the first empirical political scientist to investigate in depth the actions of women legislators reported for example that in New Hampshire the state with the highest percentage of women legislators, most women legislators did not see themselves as ‘acting for women’ (Mansbridge, 1999). Further, the entry of more women politicians into the House of Commons in 1997 generated high expectations of what they could achieve by using their increased power to improve women’s interests (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). However, many appeared more quiescent towards the leadership, less willing to rebel than men, and therefore unlikely to make much of a contribution to the legislative agenda (ibid). Criticism became particularly strong when labor cuts for lone mothers were more likely to be supported by women than men MPs (ibid). The focus on female representatives ‘ignores important differences among women, at the same time that it overlooks men as potential actors on behalf of women as a group’ (Escobar-Lemmon & Taylor-Robinson, 2014). This view is further backed up by (Campbell, 2015) who claims that ‘impact depends not only on numbers but acts.’ These views suggest that having more women representatives alone is not sufficient to ensure women are represented but instead, women need representatives who want to improve the position of women.
Further O’Regan cited in (Paxton, et al., 2007) finds that the percentage of women in the legislature is related to policy relevant to women. For example, once female MPs moved from being a minority group in the New Zealand House of Representatives in 1984, there was an increase in the level of debate on issues such as parental leave and childcare, and female politicians claimed a greater stake in these debates (Grey, 2006). A rise in the number of women present may force male and female legislators to pay more attention to women’s issues (Childs & Krook, 2009). An example of this can be seen when analyzing MPs’ voting patterns on reproductive health and marriage equality in the House of Commons and the Australian House of Representatives (Plumb, 2017). This revealed that reforms were achieved sooner and conservative restrictions were opposed more effectively than would have been the case if fewer women were present (ibid). This further clarifies the significance of women representatives. As (Abzug & Edgar, 1972) summarised more women in positions of power will result in fewer women being discriminated against and more women represented.
Once again it should not be noted that having women representatives is not always beneficial for women. Many female candidates tend not to initiate discussion of women’s issues because they often believe ‘too much emphasis upon women's issues in a campaign might generate speculation that the candidate is too narrow in her concerns and will not adequately represent all the people' (Sapiro, 1981). As Drude Dahlerup records, ‘Women as politicians are caught between conflicting expectations. They have to prove they are just like male politicians and that they will make a difference when elected. There are also problems if women politicians are seen to represent only ‘women's interests’ (or perhaps ‘feminist interests’)’ (Grey, 2006). An example of this can be seen in Susan Carroll’s study of candidates for state legislative seats (Sapiro, 1981). She found that women who did not discuss women's issues at all during their campaigns fared somewhat better than those who discussed the issues (ibid). Due to this many women fear representing other women in politics as they feel it may hinder their political careers. Irwin Gertzdog reported that many ‘saw gender as a potential political liability, and they avoided identification with what were generally considered to be ‘women’s issues’ (Reingold, 2000) Additionally, some female politicians may be more interested in other aspects of politics rather than focusing on improving the position of women. For example, it has been stated that Margaret Thatcher, the first female politician in the United Kingdom, had little impact on improving women’s political opportunities and it was even stated by some that she had a negative impact (Campbell, 2015). This clarifies that having women representatives does not necessarily result in greater opportunities for women.
Nonetheless, researchers have argued that the growing number of women appointed to public office provides a great opportunity for further progress on women’s issues and women’s political representation (Reingold, 2000). In United States state legislatures, women have been more successful than men in getting bills passed that are directly related to women, children, and families (Paxton, et al., 2007). Wangnerud showed how women’s presence in the Riksdag led to women’s interests becoming more central in politics (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). She revealed how it was the articulation and mobilization of female politicians that resulted in women’s interests becoming more prominent (ibid). Women have also played a large role in Colombia, Argentina, and Costa Rica, with women initiating 11% more women’s issues bills than men (Paxton, et al., 2007). Female officeholders also are more concerned about issues involving women, children, and families, Compared to their male colleagues, women are more likely to initiate and propose policies and more likely to take active leadership roles in securing the passage and implementation of policies involving women, children and families (Sapiro, 1981). These examples above illustrate how in a number of different countries across the globe, having women representatives has resulted in greater substantive representation of women.
A number of authors have further believed that women do not need to be represented by other women. The primary function of representative democracy is to represent the substantive interests of the represented through both aggregation and deliberation (Mansbridge, 1999). Thus, descriptive representation should be judged primarily on this. When non-descriptive representatives have a greater ability to represent the substantive interests of their constituents, this is a major argument against descriptive representation (ibid). One of the main criticisms of descriptive representation emphasizes that descriptive representatives will be less able than others to perform the task of the substantive representation of interests: ‘No one would argue that morons should be represented by morons' (ibid).’ The representatives may and almost certainly will likely differ from those they act for, not only in their social and sexual characteristics but also in their understanding of where the ‘true’ interests of their constituents lie (Philipps, 1998). ‘What matters is whether my representative is 'acting in the interest of the represented, in a manner responsive' to me’ (Sapiro, 1981). In current electoral systems, many of those who run for election have chosen law-making as their vocation. They have spent a large amount of their lives acquiring the skills needed for the job (Mansbridge, 1999). The voters then select among these individuals those that they believe have the greatest ability to get their views across and improve their lives. This suggests that women can just choose the politician that they believe will represent them best irrespective of their gender.
However, although men have the potential to represent women and improve their position in society, women are best fit to represent other women because they know what it is like to be a woman, and often, ‘male representatives are not always aware of how public policies affect female citizens’ (Campbell, et al., 2009) Women politicians are seen to be not only ‘standing as’ women but also ‘acting for’ women as a group once elected (Grey, 2006). This is because it is assumed that due to their particular life experiences in the home, workplace, and public sphere, women politicians prioritize and express different types of attitudes, values, and policy priorities (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As Melissa Williams puts it: ‘The representative who is capable of acting as an advocate for women's interest must have some understanding of the ways in which the lives of her constituents are shaped by the privilege of men, and the most effective starting-point for that knowledge is the fact of her own experience of exclusion and subordination’ (Grey, 2006). Even when it appears that male and female officeholders share preferences on women's issues, it is often up to the women to do the real legislative work (Sapiro, 1981). Although sympathetic attitudes are useful, legislative work is essential highlighting the importance of women representatives. In Britain, reports suggested that women MPs work effectively on behalf of women behind the scenes, for example in influencing party policies or articulating women’s concerns in discussions with ministers (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As one scholar has surmised: ‘Research evidence over the last ten years supports the belief that many women politicians are different because they see things differently, because they understand the needs of women in society in a way that men cannot, and because many, if not most of them, will try to make the nation a better place for women and their families’ (Reingold, 2000).
The belief that women politicians will have a substantive effect on political decision-making is found within debates about the ‘politics of presence’ (Grey, 2006). When women are present in legislatures the nature of the issues discussed is more likely to include the concerns and perspectives of women (Allen & Childs, 2018). Philipps argues that women have a distinctive group identity based upon shared interests on issues such as childcare, abortion, or equal opportunities in education and the labor force (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). There are particular needs, interests, and concerns that arise from women’s experience, and these will be inadequately addressed in politics that is dominated by men (Philipps, 1998). Women have at least some interests distinct from or even in conflict with men (ibid). ‘The argument from interests does not depend on establishing a unified interest of all women: it depends, rather, on establishing a difference between the interest of women and men’ (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As a result, women need representatives who are the same gender as them as they may have conflicting aims with men. , ‘Regardless of whether the issue is foreign aid, the budget, or the environment, women are more likely than men to consider the possible impact of the policy on the lives of women and children’ (Poggione, 2004).
Nevertheless, there are further limitations that reduce women’s effectiveness at representing other women. Some studies have found that party affiliation is more important than gender (Reingold, 2000). It is very often women of parties on the left of the political spectrum rather than all women representatives who make the largest effort to raise women’s issues and concerns (Campbell, et al., 2009). ‘The likelihood of women representatives ‘acting for women’ and delivering women’s substantive representation is mediated by a myriad of factors, including their newness, party identity, and institutional marginalization’ (Allen & Childs, 2018). Lipset and Rokkan cited in (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003), argued that crosscutting cleavages such as those of social class, ethnicity, religion, and ideological divisions may override any interests associated with gender. It is very often women members of left-leaning parties rather than all women representatives who make the most effort to raise women’s issues and concerns (Campbell, et al., 2009). These examples demonstrate that although having women representatives may help to improve women’s interests, overall there are other factors that are more important in determining whether women as a whole have their views aired in politics.
Although there are times when women representatives struggle to help women’s interests, they help to overcome male domination and so are the best solution to improve women’s position in society. A repeated theme in the discussion of trade unions has been the neglect of women’s interests by the organizations of the labor movement. For example, according to Cockburn, ‘trade unions, which are male-dominated, have played an important part in maintaining segregation in the labor market and demarcation and segmentation at work’ (Heery & Kelly, 1988). Coote and Campbell cited in (Heery & Kelly, 1988) believed, ‘The most obvious case of the failure to improve the lot of women, is that women themselves still have no real power in their unions. They have little or no control over the making and implementation of policy.’ One crucial sphere of trade union activity where it is felt women’s interests have been subject to particular neglect is collective bargaining. According to Cockburn, cited in (Heery & Kelly, 1988), women’s issues such as equal pay, parental leave, sexual harassment, and women’s health have tended to be given low priority by trade union bargainers. Peter Allen and Sarah Childs look at how having women's organizations helped to ensure that women’s interests were heard (Allen & Childs, 2018). They focused on the Parliamentary Labour Party Women’s Committee. Its members wanted to ‘act for women’ by influencing the party and the government. Three of the four topics related to women’s substantive representation including issues of violence against women and women’s bodily integrity, care and caring, pensions, and the broader gendered nature of the economy (ibid). This suggests that by having more women representatives, women's views will not be pushed to the back of the agenda and instead women can improve their position in society.
Finally, the increased representation of people who ‘look like’ women will affect powerful symbolic changes in politics (Sapiro, 1981). Women and men continue to think of politics as a male domain (ibid). When more women candidates are elected, their example is said to raise women’s self-esteem, encourage others to follow in their footsteps, and dislodge deep-rooted assumptions about what is appropriate for women and men (Philipps, 1998). Can we consider a governing system to be representative of women if women are not considered 'representative' of governance (Sapiro, 1981)? More women in office will increase the acceptability of women in government (ibid). For example, New Zealand Member of Parliament, Christine Fletcher said, ‘There is a greater number of women in Parliament, and that allows us- as we approach the new millennium- to finally begin to debate some of the issues, which I see as the hard issues’ (Grey, 2006). This example illustrates how women need women representatives in Parliament as this means they can have their views aired.
Stuck on your essay?
