The American political system has long been dominated by men, with deep-rooted cultural norms favouring male leadership. This historical precedent has created an environment where female candidates must navigate additional hurdles to be seen as viable contenders. As of 2024, women make up 28% of the U.S. Congress, with 150 women serving in total. This includes 25 women in the Senate, making up 25% of the 100 seats, and 125 women in the House of Representatives, which accounts for 28.7% of the 435 seats.

The presence of women in Congress has increased significantly since the early 20th century, with notable milestones such as Jeannette Rankin’s election to the House in 1916 and the significant increase in female representatives during the 1992 “Year of the Woman”. However, women still face substantial barriers in achieving equal representation.

GENDER STEREOTYPES

Women in politics often contend with pervasive gender stereotypes. Traits associated with strong leadership—such as decisiveness and assertiveness—are frequently perceived negatively in women. This double standard can undermine female candidates’ campaigns, making it difficult for them to garner the same level of support as their male counterparts. Kamala Harris’s 2024 presidential campaign could suffer due to this persistent gender bias. Historical examples, such as Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, highlight the challenges female candidates face. Clinton’s campaign was marred by gender-based scrutiny, double standards, and societal stereotypes that questioned her likability and emotional stability. These biases are not unique to Clinton and reflect broader societal attitudes that often undermine women’s political ambitions.

MEDIA REPRESENTATION

The media’s portrayal of female candidates has traditionally differed from that of male candidates, often emphasising their appearance, tone of voice, and likability over their policies and qualifications. This disparity can skew public perception and hinder female candidates’ ability to convey their political agendas effectively. According to Pew research, female candidates frequently receive disproportionate attention on their appearance, wardrobe, and personal lives. This can detract from their policy positions and qualifications​. Then there is often a lack of diversity within media organisations themselves, leading to coverage that may not fully understand or fairly represent female candidates’ perspectives and challenges​

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE

No women have ever held the office of the President of the United States. Historically, fewer women have held high-ranking political offices, resulting in a smaller pool of experienced female candidates. When women are underrepresented in political offices, it reinforces traditional stereotypes that leadership and decision-making roles are primarily suited for men. This perpetuation of gender roles can discourage women from pursuing political careers and can influence public perception that women are less qualified for the presidency, further disadvantaging female contenders.

VOTER BIAS

Implicit biases among voters also play a significant role. Some voters may unconsciously prefer male candidates or harbour doubts about the effectiveness of female leaders, impacting their voting decisions. Many voters harbour unconscious biases that favour male candidates. These biases can stem from deeply ingrained societal norms and stereotypes about gender roles and leadership qualities​. Voters may expect female candidates to conform to traditional gender roles, such as being nurturing and empathetic, while simultaneously criticising them for not displaying stereotypical masculine traits like assertiveness and toughness​.

KAMALA HARRIS’S 2024 CAMPAIGN: FACING GENDER BIAS HEAD-ON

Kamala Harris’s 2024 campaign is expected to encounter several of these gender-based obstacles. Drawing on the example of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 campaign, Harris must navigate concerns about electability, double standards, and media scrutiny. For Harris, these biases could manifest in similar ways, potentially affecting voter perceptions and media coverage. Despite her qualifications and experience, overcoming deeply ingrained gender biases remains a significant challenge in her quest for the presidency.

PERCEPTIONS OF ELECTABILITY

Despite her extensive qualifications, Harris will face questions about her electability based on gender. This issue was a significant factor in Clinton’s 2016 campaign, where many voters harboured doubts about a woman’s ability to win the presidency. Donald Trump has repeatedly questioned Kamala Harris’s electability, often suggesting that she lacks the broad support necessary to win a presidential election. He has framed her as a candidate who is too radical for mainstream America, which he argues makes her unelectable. Additionally, Trump has capitalised on her previous low polling numbers during the Democratic primaries to cast doubt on her ability to garner widespread voter support​.

RACIST ATTACKS AND DOUBLE STANDARDS

Trump has also targeted Harris on racial grounds, questioning her identity and background. He has insinuated doubts about her racial heritage and used dog-whistle politics to appeal to his base, which includes segments of the electorate that harbour racial prejudices. These attacks are designed to alienate Harris from potential voters who might otherwise support a candidate of diverse background and progressive values​ Harris is likely to encounter double standards similar to those faced by Clinton, where her actions and behaviours are judged more harshly than those of her male counterparts. These biases can skew public perception and create additional hurdles for her campaign. His comments often emphasise stereotypes about women being overly emotional or unlikable, undermining her professional qualifications and leadership abilities​

MEDIA SCRUTINY

The media will focus more intensely on Harris’s personality, appearance, and public speaking style than on those of her male competitors. Harris has faced biassed media coverage, with a focus on her prosecutorial record and personal background. Her actions and statements are often analysed through a lens that may not apply to male candidates​. Hilary Clinton faced similar scrutiny, which often overshadowed her policy proposals and qualifications.

SEXIST ATTACKS

Harris will have to contend with sexist attacks and rhetoric from opponents and certain segments of the electorate. Trump has resorted to sexist rhetoric when attacking Kamala Harris, frequently referring to her as “nasty” and questioning her demeanour and temperament. This language mirrors the double standards often faced by women in politics, where assertiveness and strength are negatively portrayed. These attacks can undermine her campaign’s message and appeal, making it more challenging to build a broad coalition of supporters.

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT

The failure of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, despite her high qualifications and experience, might reinforce the belief amongst some voters that a female candidate cannot win the presidency. This historical precedent poses an additional challenge for Harris as she seeks to break the glass ceiling in American politics.

Harris in her 2024 campaign must confront and overcome the entrenched gender biases that have long shaped American politics. Leveraging strategies to counteract these stereotypes and emphasising her qualifications and vision will be crucial in appealing to a broad spectrum of voters. The journey ahead is fraught with challenges, but Harris’s campaign represents a critical step toward greater gender equality in U.S. political leadership.

Tune In