I wasn’t going to write this op-ed. I didn’t see what was controversial or even particularly exciting about Justin Trudeau appointing an even number of men and women to his cabinet. It’s 2015, am I right?
A discussion I had in my first-year political science tutorial this week changed that. My TA asked what the class thought of gender parity in the new cabinet and the conversation quickly devolved from “appointments should be based on merit only,” to “women just aren’t as interested in politics” (unsurprisingly not well received by a room half full of female political science students), to finally one person saying he feared being a white heterosexual man would prevent him from finding a job in 10 years.
Okay. Let’s first of all agree that cabinet appointments have never been made strictly on merit.
Cabinet has always consciously strove to be representative of the country regionally and linguistically, something Andrew Coyne acknowledges in his column “Trudeau cabinet should be based on merit not gender.” Coyne, however, sees the half-female cabinet as a convenient time to start striving for purely merit-based appointments. Coincidence?
Interestingly, no one championing the merit argument is questioning the credentials of any of the newly-appointed female cabinet ministers, probably because they’re all highly qualified bad-asses, but maybe that’s beside the point. To suggest that a gender-balanced cabinet automatically means a less meritorious one highlights a dangerous assumption: that men are more deserving of positions of power than women.
Canada has had universal suffrage for over 50 years, but the people who draft and pass our laws are still overwhelmingly white men. Oct. 19 saw a record number of female MPs elected, but representation still sits at only 26 per cent in the House of Commons. Barriers to women’s involvement in politics include harmful stereotypes about women’s roles and abilities, differential treatment of female politicians by the media, a masculine political environment, family commitments, and a lack of role models.
Women’s involvement in politics has been thoroughly studied. In Canada alone, we’ve had two Royal Commissions documenting the need for more women in politics and the challenges women in the field face.
Research shows that more women in political office leads to more consensus building, accountability, transparency, and more attention to issues that disproportionately affect women that are traditionally overlooked, such as childcare.
Getting more women involved in politics is as complex as dismantling sexism itself. But creating role models is part of it. As Marie Wilson, founder and president of The White House Project, said, “You can’t be what you can’t see.”
We’re so used to seeing men in positions of power that it seems natural. So ingrained is this idea that a cabinet of half men, half women makes headlines around the world and generates controversy.
The truth is that a democracy where half the population isn’t given an equal voice in Parliament isn’t really a democracy.
We need better representation of women and all demographics of Canadian society in politics not just because it’s fair, but also because it’s good for policy making. A group representing a diversity of perspectives stands the best chance of seeing the big picture and legislating effectively.
As for those who see affirmative action as taking jobs away from better-qualified white men—relax. The opposite of sexism isn’t matriarchy, it’s equality; equality, meaning men and women sharing power. A gender-balanced cabinet is the first step.
