The former First Lady, Michelle Obama, recently expressed her belief that America is not prepared to elect a female president. In a series of interviews promoting her new book, she cited the electoral defeats of Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton as indicators of persistent sexism in the political landscape. Obama’s comments highlight a continuing conversation about gender and leadership in the United States.
Historical Context of Gender and Politics
Obama’s remarks echo sentiments from previous decades when concerns were raised about the electability of a Catholic president, referencing John F. Kennedy, and more recently, the election of a Black president, which saw 43 percent of white voters supporting Barack Obama in 2008 and 39 percent in 2012. These historical precedents suggest that the electorate has been challenged on various identity fronts. Yet, the ongoing discourse surrounding women in leadership roles often shifts focus from the qualifications and policies of candidates to their gender.
The former First Lady, who has a background many would consider admirable, including a degree in sociology and African-American studies from Princeton University and a law degree from Harvard Law School, has often expressed her pride in her country. However, her previous comments, such as her reaction to her husband’s election, suggest a complicated relationship with American identity. “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country,” she stated, implying a sense of disappointment in the nation’s progress.
Identity Politics and Its Implications
The rise of women in political offices in the United States is significant, as women hold more positions than ever before. Some politicians have embraced identity politics to reflect the diversity of their constituents. For instance, Katie Wilson, the newly elected mayor of Seattle, has committed to appointing a cabinet that represents a wide array of identities, including Black, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Latinx/Hispanic, and other marginalized communities. However, critics argue that this focus on identity can detract from discussions on capability and policy.
“I will appoint a cabinet of exceptional leaders whose lived experiences reflect the diversity of Seattle’s communities,” Wilson stated.
Internationally, the election of female leaders presents a mixed picture. Japan recently elected its first female prime minister, while Bangladesh’s former prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, faces serious legal challenges. Such instances raise questions about whether gender alone determines effective leadership.
The recent gubernatorial election in Virginia illustrated how complex voting patterns can be. In races where a Black or female Republican competes against a white female Democrat, voting trends suggest that identity does not always govern voter preferences. A letter to the editor in the New York Post reflected this sentiment, noting skepticism towards candidates who may not have demonstrated significant electoral success or who appear to be selected based on identity rather than qualifications.
As the political landscape evolves, the conversation about the readiness of America—or any nation—for female leadership continues to be a contentious one. With increasing representation, the focus may shift back to the policies and capabilities of candidates, regardless of gender.
Readers can engage with Cal Thomas at [email protected]. Look for his latest book, “A Watchman in the Night: What I’ve Seen Over 50 Years Reporting on America” from HumanixBooks.
