WHY HAVE THERE BEEN SO FEW WOMEN RULERS?

The answer to this question is complex. Primarily, take into account deep seated attitudes about women which have limited their access to political power. Patriarchy being the norm in the vast majorities of cultures throughout time, a woman's position within her family, as well as within the state hierachy, has been as a dependent, not leader, of men. The tendency was to assign women and men different roles; women's special reproductive functions, of course, encouraging this division. Often the sharply restricted participation of women as combatants in war raised questions about a female's ability to command. (Example: Some believe that Margaret Thatcher had to show herself to be a forceful military commander in asserting England's right to the Falkland Islands).

Most simply believed that men are better suited to rule; female rule was seen as something unnatural - improper. Regardless of their individual personalities and skills, women have been perceived women as too weak, kindhearted, irrational, and emotional to rule. (Examples: the view of Orthodox Muslim believers that women should be prevented from ruling because such rule would be disruptive - fitna. Or, Chinese saying which states: " A woman ruler is like a hen crowing." A similar sentiment from a European medieval proverb is similar: "Let not the hen crow before the rooster."Aristotle, who explained that women's powers of reasoning were defective, "without authority," and that their political influence was always fatal: "What does it matter if women rule or are ruled? The result is always the same." Or John Knox, who in 1558 wrote: "To promote a woman to beare rule, superiorities, dominion or empire above any realme, nation, or cities, is repugnant to nature...it is the subversion of good order, of all equitie and justice."

Beliefs such as these were supported by customs, practices, religious doctrine, and laws disdaining or outright forbidding the right of women to rule. (Example: In 14th century France, the old Salic law of inheritance was invoked for the first time to justify excluding women from succession to the throne.) These traditional restrictions have been burdens women rulers had to face. Both their subjects, and perhaps themselves, held negative expectations which had to be overcome. Women rulers often had to justify their position. Their strategies for keeping power in a world of men varied. They might become "honorary men", that is like men in their behavior, deeds, and perhaps appearance. They might assume the male title. (Examples: Hatshepsut who had to be called "pharaoh,' in order to rule, or Queen Elizabeth I who in a speech to her troops at Tilbury exclaimed: "I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and a king of England too...") Rulers also have presented themselves as heirs of strong female goddesses or of legendary heroines. Female regents for their sons, queens who ruled for debilitated husbands, or grieving widows of ex-rulers, almost always made the point that they ruled as stand-ins for the male. Another road to acceptance might be to be seen as a "mother" figure - a mantle given to Golda Meir and Queen Victoria, for example.

Attitudes from the past are reflected today. There is not a single country where women enjoy the same political status, access, or influence as men do. Despite the fact that women make up half or sometimes more than half of the electorates in most countries, there are only a handful of women who serve as heads of states throughout the world. There is no obvious solution to overcoming the limited access and encouragement of women to rule. Recently, in some countries affirmative action type programs helped break this barrier. Gro Brundtland has said that she would never have been able to become Prime Minister of Norway without required female representation within her political party. Quotas promoting women's representation in national legislatures exist as well in countries such as Tanzania, France, Greece, Bangladesh, and Venezuela.

This is not to say that women have not been political! In spite of limits on their access to public political power, throughout time women have been active political agents. How is another essay!

Originally published in http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/current.html#Anchor-Why-47857- Adapted and edited to be posted by LC.