presidential women
Chile shocked the world this week by electing their first woman president. Michelle Bachelet is a pediatrician and single mother of three, and with 53% of the votes in her favor she became only the second woman elected to head a South American nation (Janet Jagan was chosen to succeed her husband as president of Guyana in 1997 after his death). Ms Bachelet has already made some strong pledges to her country, including helping women have a stronger voice, and promising to bridge the gap between the rich and poor. This was Chile’s fourth election after their return to democracy in 1990, ending 17 grueling years of military rule.
Liberia also swore in a female leader this week! Ellen Johnson Sirleaf became Africa’s first elected female president. The world is changing, according to the female author of this article, and women leaders are bringing new skills to the table: “The modern world, if it is to be sane, is going to have to be much more of a woman’s world than a man’s. The operative words today are not kill, but negotiate; not hate, but understand; not riot, but institutionalize.”
Where does the United States stand amidst this swirling tide of growth and change in the world’s elected leaders? Some speculate that as one of the world’s longest-running democracies, perhaps the answer lies in “social constructs that have been embedded in the nation’s very fabric.” Whatever the reason, I think that America is past due for a change in the way we think about our elected leaders. Our country could only benefit from breaking away from the traditional white Christian male authority. Several countries have not only broken ground by electing their first female leader in the past fifteen years, but they have continued the trend; New Zealand, Bangledesh, Ireland, The Phillipines, Lithuania, São Tomé and Príncipe, and Finland have all elected two women as president so far, and Sri Lanka has had three women leaders, two of them serving as Prime Minister, and one as President.
Laura A. Liswood, the co-founder and secretary-general of the Council of Women World Leaders, has made it a personal mission to get a woman in the oval office. She believes that there are several main problems preventing America from electing a woman as president. According to her, the two-party, “winner-take-all” system does not work for out-of-power groups, which includes women. The United States is also the only country that requires an enormous amount of cash to finance an election, which is another obstacle to those outside of the power structure.
Ms Liswood believes that “women must play an integral role in all the world’s issues or else humanity’s challenges will never be solved.” I agree wholeheartedly. Not only are women as fully capable of taking a leadership role as their male counterparts, but I think that our gender can add a much needed dimension of caring and softness to the role of president. A woman thinks differently, approaches problems differently, and applies solutions differently. Gerald Ford is rumored to have said that America will only have a woman president after a woman becomes vice president, and then succeeds a male president who dies in office. Ford said that once that happens, we’ll never have another male president again. Imagine that!
Great post, and I agree completely!
Comment by Theresa — January 20, 2006 @ January 20, 2006 at 7:14 am
It’s nice to get a glimmer of hope sometimes, isn’t it?
Comment by V — January 20, 2006 @ January 20, 2006 at 8:00 am
Thank you! That was simultaneously sobering and inspiring. My only fear is that a woman will “sell-out” and disregard her feminine instincts in order to be one of the boys during an election. I want to see a woman win on the merits of her own gender-related characteristics, you know?
Comment by Mignon — January 20, 2006 @ January 20, 2006 at 10:29 am
I think it would be fascinating experiment for a woman to be president of our country. I happen to be a big supporter of women’s issues in society and I would love to see what would happen. I think tho, that I would really have to hear her side of things before I voted for her. I won’t vote for someone just because of their gender. I want to hear what they stand for. So I hope it’s in the near future for us.
Comment by Queen Beth — January 20, 2006 @ January 20, 2006 at 3:21 pm
How fitting to read this. My son and I are just doing a country unit study on Chile. So thanks!
Comment by krista — January 22, 2006 @ January 22, 2006 at 7:16 pm
You know, even if a woman sold out and disregarded some of those feminine instincts I would still be happier than if she wasn’t there in office to sell out to begin with. Ultimately woman have to work so much harder to be respected in politics, and it kills me when people deny that. I am amazed that in politics (Canadian ones anyway) women (Like Sheila Copps for example) still get called bitches when they have something to say.
Comment by Krista- The Silent K — January 23, 2006 @ January 23, 2006 at 6:25 am
I would assert that the real difficulty in American culture right now is that we’re actually moving BACKWARDS in terms of gender roles–that women are being urged to return to the barefoot-and-pregnant model, rather than being encouraged to put on a nice black pantsuit and step up to the podium. I see it in places like Samuel Alito’s assertion that marriage is a central tenent of the law, around which all other issues–school choice, access to birth control, health care–revolve. I think Krista is on to something when she points to the way Western culture derides women with a voice.
And it makes me sad.
Comment by Susan — January 23, 2006 @ January 23, 2006 at 9:05 am
We in Canada had a female prime minister for a very short stint. She wasn’t very liked & didn’t last very long. But I’m sure Canadians aren’t against having another one in the future. (THat’s my opinion though!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kim_Campbell&oldid=37094843
Comment by MommyMaki — January 28, 2006 @ January 28, 2006 at 4:07 pm