The Audacity of Political Women: Why Is Ambition a Bad Thing?
The "ambitious" woman in politics is a contrived caricature. Forget the cold, calculating lady stepping on those in her way (in high heels, of course!) as she marches to the top, with identifiers like "bossy" "aggressive" and "shrill" in cartoonish word bubbles around her.
This is an unfair, broad-brush categorization of women. It is bad for women's progress. More importantly, it is bad for everyone.
What does it mean for gender parity in politics when we pull the ladder out from under women who have worked so hard to get to the upper rungs? What does it signal to society when a person as accomplished as a former secretary of state, U.S. senator, and first lady is described as having "extraordinary, irrational, overwhelming ambition"? What is the message to a young woman who gets stellar results but is labeled "too assertive" or "abrasive"? Nothing good.
The message to women who want to take their place as leaders has been: You can sit here, but don't expect to be at the head of the table. Even for women who have approached the peak, there has been a pit. If you were a woman who did exactly the same things a man in your position would do, you were unfairly seen as overly ambitious, self-serving, a liability to your party.
Effectiveness paired with ambition translates to a healthy determination and drive for men. It translates to over-the-top audacity for women.
There is a distinctly sexistdifference between the way we talk about women with lofty professional goals (and who meet them) and men who do exactly the same thing. We need to call out that perceptible shift and flip the script.
Let's allow -- even better, let's embrace -- women being honest about their ambition. We're always pushing our politicians to be authentic, to reveal their whole selves to us. Ambition is part of that. And really, we want to see ourselves in those we elect. We want to believe we are resilient, brave people with the fortitude to push forward and reach for our goals.
We reward that kind of behavior in men. It's about time we do the same for women.
Source: Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-lee/the-audacity-of-political_b_6056974.htm)l
Image: http://herhatpoliticalcartoons.weebly.com/uploads/1/5/9/8/15985276/2570220_orig.jpg
VOCABULARY WORDS:
1. Contrived (adj.) ~ obviously planned or forced
2. Categorize (verb) ~ to arrange in categories or classes; classify
3. Stellar (adj.) ~ like a star, as in brilliance, shape, etc.
4. Assertive (adj.) ~ confidently aggressive or self-assured
5. Abrasive (adj.) ~ overly aggressive
6. Liability (noun) ~ something disadvantageous
7. Audacity (noun) ~ boldness or daring, especially with confident or arrogant disregard for personal safety, conventional thought, or other restrictions.
8. Sexist (adj.) ~ pertaining to, involving, or fostering sexism
9. Lofty (adv.) ~ arrogantly or condescendingly superior in manner
10. Perceptible (adj.) ~ recognizable; appreciable
11. Authentic (adj.) ~ having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified
12. Resilient (adj.) ~ recovering readily from illness, depression, adversity, or the like
COMPREHENSION QUESTIONS:
1. According to the article, what are the common misconceptions about ambitious women?
2. What kind of message does the misconception conveys to the younger generation?
3. What kind of behavior should we embrace from women politician? Why?
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1. What is your opinion on women with political ambition or women who want to conquer the “male-dominated careers”?
2. Do you think that your country is now more accepting of career women and ambitious women? Discuss.
3. Do you think that gender can affect the quality of leadership of a person? If so, in what way?
4. Is it true that women have to work harder and exert more effort in order for them to become successful?
5. How do you feel about having a woman boss?
