Women as Presidents (Part 2)

There is a lot of research showing how women live in a world created by men and for men. A few years ago, Caroline Criado Perez wrote a famous book, Invisible women: Data bias in a male-dominated worldprovides us with multiple examples: from bulletproof vests designed to protect the male body, which is not fully comparable to the female anatomy, to drugs designed and tested on the male body, which do not work the same way or react adversely in women, and even in the architectural design of our buildings and cities.

The same thing happens in politics: women who gain office enter institutions designed by and for men. Political institutions are gendered: neutral on the surface, but they are built on hidden values ​​and biases that prioritize men’s interests and actions over women’s.

In this area, gender institutional norms are particularly evident in top management positions. Women who successfully break the glass ceiling and become president or prime minister face a unique set of challenges posed by the institutional structure of government. They often face implicit resistance from others. Establish Mainly male politics and bureaucracy. His directives are questioned, his priorities are downgraded. They have to work harder to maintain their authority.

Dilma Rousseff in Brazil is an example. As president, she had to deal with a highly masculine political environment, especially in interactions with Congress or cabinet meetings. According to people close to her, male ministers often interrupted her and talked over each other, leaving Rousseff little room to lead the discussion. When she stepped in to maintain order, she was seen as “bossy” or “hysterical.” Informal power networks and key negotiations often took place in typically male spaces and social settings (dinner parties or informal evening meetings), which was an additional obstacle for Rousseff, who was often excluded from these circles.

In Chile, Michelle Bachelet faced resistance from the traditional party structure during both her first and second terms, even within her own coalition.

Parties with historically male-dominated leadership and decision-making styles often struggled to advance gender equality reforms that Bachelet pushed for. When he wanted to introduce mandatory gender quotas for parliamentary candidates, for example, he faced strong opposition from more traditional sectors of the party, who saw such measures as a violation of “meritocracy.” This forced Bachelet to expend precious political capital negotiating with these factions and watering down some aspects of her initial proposals.

Germany’s Angela Merkel also had to navigate the complexities of leading a coalition government in a parliamentary system designed with male assumptions. As chancellor, Merkel often had to give up key leadership positions (e.g., finance or foreign affairs) and make significant concessions to her male partners in the Bavarian CSU or FDP, which limited her ability to directly influence these areas and led to the subordination of their own political priorities. The debate culture of the Bundestag, with its formal protocols and emphasis on confident speeches, posed a challenge to Merkel’s more pragmatic and consensual style.

These examples illustrate how institutional norms, practices, and cultures rooted in a long history of male leadership create significant barriers for women to reach top management positions. From cabinet dynamics to parliamentary agreements to informal power networks, these women leaders must invest considerable energy in navigating and challenging these gender structures to advance their agendas and maintain their authority.

Mexico has elected its first president. Claudia Sheinbaum will take office on October 1, 2024 and, in addition to the challenges posed by the problems facing the country, the need to build her own leadership and move towards the control and institutionalization of the party, she will also face her gender.

Despite recent gains in female representation at other levels of government, the presidency has been a male bastion for more than two centuries. This masculinity manifests itself in many ways, from the rituals and etiquette of the office to the power dynamics within the cabinet, as well as relations with state governments and key legislative actors or the functioning of the bureaucracy.

Sheinbaum, for example, could face subtle or overt resistance from governors or legislative leaders accustomed to dealing with a male president.

In negotiations over budget or political reform, these actors may question her authority or try to exclude her from discussions, as has happened with the secretary of state or lawmakers. In her own cabinet, Sheinbaum may have to work harder to assert her leadership and prevent male aides from condescending or undermining her, a challenge her male counterparts rarely face. She will also have to deal with a federal bureaucracy whose organizational culture is gendered and puts women at a disadvantage.

It is a complex balancing act for presidents to have to define their own leadership style and to be expected to demonstrate “strength” and leadership skills, as well as “feminine” qualities, such as empathy and approachability. Managing these conflicting expectations will be a major challenge. Trying to change them, to “de-gender” institutions, will be an even greater challenge.

________________________________________

Text published in magazine 0013 processcorresponding to July 2024, a digital copy of which is available at This link.