Female Success in Politics in Response to Tickner's Principles

            Recently actress Emma Watson gave a speech to the United Nations addressing Woman’s Rights. A part of Watson’s speech that I find particularly interesting is when she points out that “women are choosing not to identify themselves as feminists,” simply because their “expressions are seen as too strong, too aggressive.” This passion and strength commonly found amongst feminists, such as Watson, are qualities that many powerful female political leaders exhibit as well. Political theorist, J. Ann Tickner refers to international politics as a “man’s world.” Thus, female leaders who overcompensate and act masculine usually achieve the most respect and power in the political world. In this blog post, I will prove my argument by giving a few examples of female leaders, who have assumed power and critique alike, based on their masculine character, and later analyze the affect of one of Tickner’s six feminist principles in the political realm.

            More woman are beginning to enter the political field, however, their male counterparts still vastly outnumber them. Why is that? According to Judi McLean Parks, Ph.D., professor of organizational behavior at Washington University in St. Louis, when people are asked to describe a political figure, “the character traits [they] associate with leadership positions are stereotypically masculine, such as being assertive or competitive.” Thus, the public generally dislikes when women violate stereotypical gender expectations because it clashes with their pre-established archetypes, such as ‘leader.’ These stereotypes and norms have kept women out of the political sphere for centuries. So when female political leaders, such as Hillary Clinton and Margaret Thatcher acclaim power, it is clear why they receive scrutiny as well.

Thatcher and Clinton are considered successful because of the way they conduct their policies— in an assertive and masculine manner. Their character is what helps them strive in the patriarchal political arena. Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Nicknamed the Iron Lady, by a Soviet journalist as a critique, Thatcher nonetheless embodied strength, courage, and determination both domestically and internationally. The Falklands War is an excellent example of “her resolve to stand against any threat to British interest.”  When Argentine military forces invaded and occupied British territory, Thatcher perilously ordered the British military to take back the islands. Seventy-four days later, Argentina surrendered, and the islands returned to British control.  Hillary Clinton was the 67^th U.S. Secretary of State and has been a heavy hitter in politics for decades. During her tenure, Clinton advocated for military intervention in Libya in response to the Arab Spring. She was also known for her use of smart power, a combination of hard power and soft power, in efforts to assert U.S. leadership around the world. Her tough and ambitious approach to politics is what makes her stand out in the field.

J. Ann Tickner released a reformulation of Morgenthau’s six principles of political realism in her article “A Critique of Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism.” The principles are suggestions to help us think multi-dimensionally about international relations. For instance, she stresses the idea of dynamic objectivity. This means taking different viewpoints into account, not solely the masculine view that has always ruled politics. However, as great and inclusive as these principles sound, they can’t be implemented. Politics and leadership have always been linked to masculinity. Changing archetypes, as I’ve previously mentioned, is not an easy task and is mostly always rejected by the majority. Women who have succeeded in the political field have always been attributed to having masculine traits. Margaret Thatcher, known as the Iron Lady, for her strict conservatism and Hillary Clinton known for her ambitious goals.

I’d love to see more women thrive in politics, however based on previous examples; it’s dubious that Tickner’s optimistic principles will prove successful.

Sources: http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/11287.aspx

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/08/opinion/rogan-thatcher/