BlogHer - gender - Comments

Other reasons

Jill Miller Zimon — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:55:16 -0600

1. Why Women Still Are Not Running for Office

A study from the Brookings Institute that works with data from a larger study about gender, ambition and race:

Women are less likely than men to be willing to endure the rigors of a political campaign. They are less likely than men to be recruited to run for office. They are less likely than men to have the freedom to reconcile work and family obligations with a political career. They are less likely than men to think they are “qualified” to run for office. And they are less likely than men to perceive a fair political environment.

2. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office

This is the book that came out of the same research - circa 2005.

3. Here are the numbers I first remember seeing some time in 2006, from an article called, Why Don't Women Run for Office:

The impact of self-perceived qualifications on a woman’s decision to run was nearly double that of men. Surprisingly, although many of those surveyed had attained success in male-dominated professions, women were twice as likely as men to rate themselves “not at all qualified” to run for office. Men were about two-thirds more likely than women to consider themselves “qualified” or “very qualified” to run for office.

Women were also significantly less likely than men to think they would win their first race. Only 25 percent of female potential candidates, compared to 37 percent of males, thought that an electoral victory would be “likely” or “very likely.”

Not only did they not think themselves qualified, women received less encouragement to run than men. Thirty-two percent of women, compared to 43 percent of men, received the suggestion to run for office from either someone involved in the political arena or within their personal life. Such encouragement often more than doubled the likelihood of considering a candidacy.

Across all factors – age, party affiliation, income and profession – women were significantly less likely than men to express interest in seeking public office. Among women, there were some interesting differences:

Women with higher incomes were more likely to consider a candidacy than women with lower incomes. Men were as likely to consider running for office across all income levels.

Women with more responsibilities for household tasks were less interested in holding office. Forty-eight percent of the women whose partner was responsible for the majority of the household labor had considered running for office, compared to 33 percent of women who were responsible for the majority of tasks. There was no difference for men.

When women did think of running, they were more likely to be interested in local-level politics. Just one office attracted substantially more interest from women than men: the local school board.

“These results suggest that we are a long way from a political reality in which women and men are equally likely to aspire to attain high-level elective office,” said the researchers.

Yet the findings offer some direction. The number of women who said they would definitely be interested in running for office “someday” was equal to that of men. Women also viewed the activities associated with campaigning as positively as men. Those included such things as attending fundraisers, dealing with party officials, going door-to-door to meet constituents, dealing with the press, and devoting time to running for office.

So - these reasons are not so different from reasons related to why women might opt-out of other careers - its often very related to having a supportive partner. But again, the demands are high and the expectations of society, as have been set up historically, unless we work to alter them or simply just buck them, aren't going to shift enough to impact the representation.

We have a lot of work to do. :)

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Yeah, why is that?

9to5to9 — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 02:33:25 -0600

Jill wrote:

This stat has been published many many times, but women need to be asked to run for office, men usually just do it. The average age at which men start to run for political office is somewhere in the late 20s - for women, it's far older - I can't find the stat at the moment but its at least well into the 30s.

I don't understand this at all, yet I accept it as true because I've caught myself doing this in my own life. I'll sit back like a teen-ager hoping the cute guy asks me to the prom instead of stepping up and asking him myself. Or even going it alone. Maybe it's a vestige from growing up in a time and place where it is was unladylike -- or even worse (gasp!) aggressive -- to go for what you wanted.

I think in some quarters, the message is getting out that in politics we can and we're needed. But you're right: The spotlight needs to remain bright.

Debra Legg
9to5to9

Women Candidates are Second Class in Virginia

minnie bee — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:52:22 -0600

So we added ten women to Congress, and some of these women replaced other women. . . . well, thank goodness for small blessings, I guess. Unfortunately, the United States still runs far behind even smaller, less developed countries in terms of female leadership. As usual, this time around, many awesome women candidates did not win their races, and I suspect, at least some would have won if they had been men. Case in point: Democrat Dr. Judy Feder, who ran in the 10th Congressional District in Northern Virginia against 28-year incumbent, Frank Wolf. Wolf is a do-little Congressman who takes credit for a lot more than he actually does. He has shored up popular support over the years by playing the Godfather, doling out personal favors and fixing personal problems for his constituents, while abdicating his real job as a federal Congressional representative. In the meantime, Wolf's district faces the same problems it faced ten years ago - congested roads, struggling schools, gang activity, and rising taxes, along with new issues affecting the country - a weakening economy, increasing unemployment, foreclosed homes, health care, the war in Iraq, and the energy crisis. On these issues, Wolf has taken the path of least resistance, and voted with Bush 92% of the time.

On the other hand, Dr. Judy Feder, a former Dean of Georgetown University's Public Policy Institute is capable, intelligent, knowledgable, articulate, energetic, and feisty. She is a health care expert who worked with Hillary Clinton on Clinton's health care initiative. She also raised nearly 2 million dollars. Feder's platform was essentially the same as President-elect Obama's platform, and she would have been a strong ally of President Obama's in Congress.

This was Dr. Feder's second try against Wolf. Her fellow running mates on the ballot - Barack Obama and Mark Warner - were both elected. In my opinion, Feder was not elected primarily because she is a woman, and women candidates don't do well in Virginia, particularly in statewide and federal races. Virginia has elected only two congresswomen in it's 230-year history. There have been no women Senators, no women Lt. Governors, and no women Governors. Women candidates are second class in Virginia. Too bad. Dr. Feder would have been a first-class Congresswoman.

All good points

Jill Miller Zimon — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:17:01 -0600

Hi Debra -

Thanks for reading and commenting - you mention a number of other really good and true points about the topic of women and running for political office.

A few additional comments about what I've learned too - from talking to women who research this stuff and observation:

I'm in total agreement with you about how we don't run and if you don't run you can't win. What We Know About Why Women Don't Run is a great document to start with.

This stat has been published many many times, but women need to be asked to run for office, men usually just do it. The average age at which men start to run for political office is somewhere in the late 20s - for women, it's far older - I can't find the stat at the moment but its at least well into the 30s.

Now, also, like you say - when women do run, they do well. In part, it's that sense that I'm not going to do this unless I think I can win or unless I totally commit. And the issue is about becoming an incumbent.

But we also need to select other women to run to fill women's spaces, and fill other seats. There are a lot of books and studies out there about the need for mentoring.

I did come across this article which includes some good information broken down by other demographics such as race and ethnic background. The good news is, we women are taking the initiative and putting a spotlight on how we can do better. We just can't let up or let anyone convince us that it doesn't matter. It does.

JillWrites Like She Talks

It's like the lottery

9to5to9 — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:31:40 -0600

You can't win if you don't play.

Where I live, at least, it seems the lack of women in office is due largely to a lack of women running. Where they did run locally, they did really well this time. One led the ticket for a city council seat (blasting past an incumbent) and another woman might have also beaten the incumbent for the second seat. Who knows when they'll finish counting the votes on that one.

Another woman easily won re-election to state Senate. And ...

Oh. That's the problem. There wasn't any "and" Those three women, plus Cynthia McKinney were the only female names on my ballot.

I agree with Ziegler on term limits. In California, they haven't appeared to help anyone other than staffers, who wind up holding way more sway than they should because they're more experienced than most, of not all, of the lawmakers. Ironically, the woman state Senator was a former staffer.

I think you're spot-on in suggesting training and mentoring programs to help candidates. And to encourage them to keep trying.

What the two City Council women had in common is that both had run before. They knew the system, they knew how to campaign. They had name recognition in reserve from previous unsuccessful efforts.

I hope these two take it upon themselves to ask questions when people are appointed to city commissions during their terms, particularly to panels such as planning and zoning, which often serve as City Council trainers. Is this the best applicant pool we have? Are there no qualified women or members of one of the many ethnic groups in this city? They're terribly unrepresented, too, though the mayor is ethnic so I suppose that counts for more than one slot!

Debra Legg
9to5to9

friends without benefits

rsg2003 — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:12:05 -0500

Some people can have the platonic, opposite-sex friend and NOT have romantic feelings toward them (even if they're hot). SOME PEOPLE... not ALL. Even when there aren't romantic feelings, we are all human and prone to the side effects of physical attraction. We need to clearly define our own boundaries with opposite-sex friends and be honest with ourselves about the way we feel for someone. There is no point in "friending" someone if you're holding out a flame for them that they have no intention of firing up for you... you're just torturing yourself if you do.

Roger S. Gil, M.A.
www.rogergil.com/blog

Hear! Hear!

Suzanne Reisman — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:18:25 -0500

So long ago that I'm not even going to try and find the link, I wrote a piece about whether one can be a feminist if one is against legal abortion. I concluded, that while person autonomy is what I consider the most important aspect of feminism, I can see how others would see it differently and still work towards women's equality in society. So while I also disagree with you about the equal pay for equal work (my definition of equal pay for equal work is that if two people are performing the same job and both doing it well, one should not be paid less because she is a woman), I am always glad to work with people on common causes. Also, your last paragraph is hilarious. I also love working with funny writers.

I hope other people will chime in here with their thoughts.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants

NO happily Ever After

SpecialK — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:33:10 -0500

Great points! We've bought into the notion that being single is a TEMPORARY place of UNCOMPLETENESS on our way to the BIG PRIZE: couplehood/familyhood. Even when movies are breaking molds about fitting in, FIONA still marries Shrek and has babies, SJP gets the guy at the end of the movie. I write about this all the time at http://specialktreatment.blogspot.com/... The ideal is marriage...That's why we don't see spinsters in stories...

Thank you!

alvenable — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:45:29 -0500

Gena, I'll definitely have to pose those questions to the group. So far, of the folks who have RSVP'd, it's predominantly female, which isn't much of a surprise to me. That said, I'm looking forward to hearing the male perspective on these issues. There definitely doesn't seem to be as much of a stigma attached if a male is a "permanent bachelor." Hmm, I'll have to ask about that perception, too. All good stuff.

A. L. Venable is a Random Citizen. She primarily writes at Dimple and a Smirk (dot) com and Our PDX Network.

Excellent - I Have Your A Question or Two

Gena Haskett — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 06:51:34 -0500

Being single does not negate the need for community or friends that can back you. So outside of the marriage and family structures how will single folks re-define friends, good friends and those that support you through difficult times.

There is also a question about new kinds of living arraignments. Some live single, other by financial necessity might be looking at co-housing or communal living.

I have a feeling there will be so many others questions that leap ahead of these to the point where you are gonna have to kick folks out the door as the discussion continues.

Good luck and keep us posted.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

Hosting a discussion on "Single"

alvenable — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:06:16 -0500

Gena, because of this entry, I'm hosting a viewing and discussion on the "Single" documentary you mentioned. It's not for a few weeks, but I'm looking forward to hearing the guests' thoughts.

A. L. Venable is a Random Citizen. She primarily writes at Dimple and a Smirk (dot) com and Our PDX Network.

I have a new favorite

SuetheGreat — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:16:17 -0500

Written by a totally naive 24 year old girl - all about her crush on her best friend:

http://mysuperhopelessromance.blogspot.com

It KILLS ME. I think we've all been there at one time or another, haven't we? I'm hooked.

Single a documentary film

JOSH — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:16:21 -0500

Gena,

Thank you for such a full and detailed answer. Let's hope personal income and the economy improve and inflation abates. I appreciate your implied point that if we use less energy (electric or plastic disposable)we will reduce our own personal carbon foot print. Your out of the box thinking should be put forward as legislation in this highly charged election year.

Best

Josh

I Cannot Speak for CUSS

Gena Haskett — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:52:58 -0500

I am gonna have to pony up cash to purchase that DVD. It will be an issue with the Boomers coming over the horizon.

The way I see it as the price of personal care services and items rises in conjunction with the loss of discretionary spending, I'm sure we will see the decline of bare labia both majora and minora.

I say let it grow, let it flow.

Gena - Out On The Stoop

Single a documentary film

JOSH — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 19:25:21 -0500

Wow....this is a very profound article Gina.

The trailer is available on you tube and everyone I know who's seen the film tells me it leads to hours of passionate conversation among married and unmarried.

I liked Susan Reisman's "on the mark comments" but I'm still pondering over "the campaign for unshaved snatch"........has this group gained momentum under the Bush administration?