What role does gender play in the expected success of elected leaders? When citizens vote, do they consider the gender of the individual leader when casting their ballot? An argument can be made that countries with histories of electing non-cis males into office perceive gender as not having a significant role in potential leader success. Conversely, on the national level, it could be argued that Canada and the United States consider gender as having a significant role, seeing as both countries have never formally elected someone with a non-male identity into the highest office. While nations like Canada and the United States might work to promote the facade of gender equality, the results display that we just aren’t there yet.
The history of male domination in the western world begs the question of what living in a hegemonically male-structured society entails. Looking at pandemic responses provides a strong metric for the advocacy of female leadership. Studies found that during the pandemic, the number of cases and deaths were systematically better in countries that were led by women. Similarly, states led by female Governors had a lower fatality rate. This idea isn’t breaking news: in late 2020, headlines relayed messages of female-led success, attributing female leadership as a risk-limiting factor during the crisis.
Of course, we should resist drawing conclusions about women leaders from the success of a few exceptional individuals operating in unusual circumstances. When highlighting women as being inherently more capable of dealing with disaster because of perceived attitudes, we risk furthering gender stereotypes. Characterizing gender as the determinant of success negates the accomplishments of leaders who worked tirelessly to decrease the vulnerability of their citizens. Instead, when congratulating women’s success, we should commend the ideas, methods, and judgements that brought them that success. In this way, we can turn their accomplishments into lessons that can educate others, regardless of gender.
Through analysis of female leaders’ success during COVID-19, we can do just that. The New York Times argues that during COVID-19, varied information sources and leaders with the humility to listen to external audiences were crucial for success. Female leadership signals that people of diverse backgrounds and perspectives are valued and listened to regarding how to combat crises. This was largely the case for the former German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who during COVID-19, had a government that considered various information sources, data from medical providers, and evidence from successful testing and isolation programs in South Korea to form pandemic protocol. The results yielded a lower coronavirus death rate than other Western European countries.
The characteristics of listening, consideration, and risk aversion are not commonly commended in state-level leadership. The prevailing idea that strong American leaders are powerful, aggressive, and fearless thus limits the potential for male leaders to display perceptively feminine traits without losing the respect of their constituents. The correlation between female leadership and crisis success does not stem from biologically gendered aspects of behaviour, but rather from socially produced constructions of gender that influence behavioural norms.
Given this knowledge, how do we approach future disaster response? Is the answer as simple as a diverse table of leaders? In the case of the inflation crisis, that is a prevailing idea. After the 2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC), it became abundantly clear that few women were in the driver’s seat of the global economy — lending institutions that contributed to the crisis were dominated by white, well-educated, elite men. Analysis of those in leadership positions at private banks and financial institutions, the central banks and national regulatory, global governance organizations, and financial journalists found that males dominated in both the United States and the United Kingdom. In an attempt to learn from previous mistakes, changes have been made. The Fed’s boardroom currently has a more diverse leadership than ever, comprised of more female, Black, and openly gay officials than ever before. Moreover, many are far less wealthy than the officials they have replaced. The hope is that through a diverse board, the Fed’s perspectives will broaden as it weighs the consequences of raising or lowering rates to combat inflation.
While the diverse board works to broaden perspectives, arguably one of its strongest assets is removing the burden of identity from a uniform group. Men no longer face the social pressures of being powerful, aggressive, and fearless to the same degree. The same argument could be made for diversity in political and civil structures. Diversity plays the hidden role of breaking down social constructions of gender both internally and externally. Therefore, it is paramount to promote diversity in elected and appointed leadership positions, especially ones that convene on the crisis – a feat that is largely easier said than done.
Edited by Ruqayya Farrah
Claudia Velimirovic is in her fourth and final year at McGill University pursuing a major in honours International Development and a minor in Social Entrepreneurship. This is her third year writing for Catalyst and she is particularly interested in politics, gender inequality, and women’s health.