Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
EVERY WEEKDAY EVENING, TheJournal.ie brings you the five biggest stories of the day.
1. #DONEGAL: A man is set to be charged over the 2006 murder of former Sinn Féin official and IRA double agent Denis Donaldson.
2. #THE ORPHANAGE: The decision to rename a former children’s institution in Dublin that’s been turned into a co-living space as ‘The Orphanage’ has prompted outrage.
3. #SWORDS ROAD: Gardaí in Dublin are appealing for witnesses following a hit-and-run incident in Malahide in which a teenager was injured.
4. #PONGY: The EPA is warning that plumes will continue to appear in Dublin Bay until an upgrade to the Ringsend wastewater treatment plant is complete.
5. #LONDON: A baby that was delivered prematurely at eight months after his pregnant mother was stabbed to death in London has died.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
As these are elected officials all the positions can be female – we have laws for the workplace on gender equality for pay and gender specific on maternity but elected officials are just that – elected – by all the people – not just one gender. Why is there a constant need to look at politics for gender issues when every elected person can be either gender. Why not a survey on why most bricklayers are make or any other outdoor laborious job. In politics there is the same barriers for both genders to be elected and women can and should be there but please stop using politics to make up issues that aren’t there.
@lorcmulv: I think the issue is that women find it difficult to get the the time to actually get involved with politics because of other commitment traditionally assigned to women (E.g. childcare). If they do get the time to be involved, then they need to get nominated by the party and ensure they get the support from their party to run an effective election campaign. At the same time, the party might want to throw their limited resources behind the traditionally more “electable” male candidate instead of this “riskier” female candidate. At election time, the female candidate is already starting at a disadvantage even though both women and men are voting.
@Karl Knapman: then it is the attitude of “commitment traditionally assigned to women” that needs to change rather than a quota to force it and like in all elections it should be the best candidate for the role rather than gender. In all careers those at the top have forgone personal commitments to reach the top and as for elected officials I want the best minister for justice, finance etc that are committed to the role they were put themselves forward for and were elected to.
@lorcmulv: And the “best person for the job” is a very valid point. However, the idea of the “best person” is very subjective and can be open to bias due to the value systems of people making appointments or traditional viewpoints that are hard to change.
For example, if I am in charge of making an appointment, I will subconsciously pick someone who doesn’t challenge my value system, even if my value system is outdated or inherently flawed.
Obviously, in an election, we have men and women making the decision whom to appoint. However, we, the electorate, are still fighting our subconscious biases that men are the decision makers and are in charge, while women are more a support role in the background. When it comes to voting, we are probably more likely to vote for men, reinforcing the continuation of this bias.
How we fix this system is hard without resorting to tokenism or outright sexism against men. Maybe giving extra funding grants to female candidates to run election campaigns would help but there is no easy solution.
@Karl Knapman: again you are essentially saying that attitudes need to change – I personally believe we have some very good female politicians and I teach my family equality in all matters – but why is it always about elected officials that there is a cry for gender balance when all the positions can be female – why not start with gender balance in nurses, teachers or even traditional gender unequal roles such as childcare or carpentry?
Why should someone get a job just because of their gender? They should have to be qualified for the job but then we’re talking about politicians.
@Chris Mackey: neck is the only qualification
@Chris Mackey: You can’t have centuries of inequality and then suddenly expect a level playing field while old perceptions and biases remain. Quotas are a temporary measure to normalise women in politics and to help us reach that place of equal opportunity.
There should also be quotas for those of an immigrant background as well so we don’t continue to have a large portion of our society completely unrepresented in politics but I feel a certain eternally cranky section of society aren’t ready for that conversation.
@Rochelle: Then why dont they have quotas for other professions. Why is only positions of power that women want them. Men have over 90% of work place injuries because we are the majority when it comes to working in dangerous jobs, why not have some quotas there so women face the same dangers? Why not have quotas in Teaching where the majority are women?
@Rochelle: dead right, I fully support quotas as a way of destroying democracy and enforcing gender equality. Let’s see more women lose the house and kids in a divorce, let’s see more women in prison, let’s see more women drop out of education. That would lead to equality of outcome.
Until academics in this field look for gender quotas in jobs at sewerage treatment plants and bin collections this type article is meaningless. And by the way we don’t ‘send’ women to the European Parliament, they have a mind of their own and put themselves up for election in exactly the same way as men do. If more women still choose to raise children full-time then that needs to be respected for the crucial and valuable thing it is. You can’t have it both ways
Women go because it’s handy work with major benefits and nobody on your back If you don’t get things done
@Fiona O’ Dwyer: according to the article it’s hours, travel and family commitments are the reasons more women don’t engage in politics – men don’t have these issues apparently
It’s only Wednesday and so far this week the journal has published an article on the mythical gender pay gap, one on the the alleged discrimination against women in academia and now this. Is the journal trying to replace the Irish Times as the country’s leading mouthpiece for feminist propaganda.
@frank mcglynn: I was thinking the exact same thing – waiting on tomorrows hyperbole – but saying that I agree with with more women in politics but from these articles it seems they want what every worker wants – the same pay with more time off – and the non sexist reason they want is because of their gender
I will never vote for anybody because of the gender. I vote for the person with the best policy and who works for the people and with the people.
I may not vote for people, if they are pushed at me, for the sake of equality, if they do not come up to the standard I insist upon. Especially if they are always screaming about equality and don’t back it up in real life, outside their bubble. I have seen it happen only recently.
I judge politicians on the work not their gender and we have some fantastic female politicians. We also have some terrible ones as well just like the men.
Being female does not make you a good politician.
Same with any vote, the best person in my belief gets my vote.
I want the best elected officials nothing else.
have your say