Read on Twitter
Chrystia Freeland is the first woman to serve as Canada's Minister of Finance -- the second most power position in the federal cabinet after the Prime Minister.
Many are suggesting that she's on a "glass cliff." Here's why I think that's incorrect THREAD
Many are suggesting that she's on a "glass cliff." Here's why I think that's incorrect THREAD
My issue is with the glass cliff metaphor itself.
It's based on the glass ceiling. Glass ceilings exist where women can see where they want to go, the powerful positions they want to achieve, but there's an invisible barrier that's keeping them from rising.
It's based on the glass ceiling. Glass ceilings exist where women can see where they want to go, the powerful positions they want to achieve, but there's an invisible barrier that's keeping them from rising.
But the glass cliff? It suggests that women are placed in precarious positions of power during a crisis to do the hard work of managing the mess, only to be pushed off when things get better.
This is unsatisfying for a few reasons. First, it assumes women aren't strategic actors but things to be "placed" by other actors without my agency.
Second, if you can see through the glass ceiling, why can't you see through the glass cliff, too?
Second, if you can see through the glass ceiling, why can't you see through the glass cliff, too?
Here's a better way to think about it: the political opportunity structure is gendered. It only opens for women when something takes the men most likely to hold these positions out of consideration.
This can be crisis, but it can also be a protracted decline
This can be crisis, but it can also be a protracted decline
Karen Beckwith outlines this argument well in this article, using Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel as examples.
Merkel's opportunity comes on the heels of a scandal that knocks out several men from consideration for party leadership. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-gender/article/before-prime-minister-margaret-thatcher-angela-merkel-and-gendered-party-leadership-contests/D9466903E0113B68F30CBFD430CE65BD
Merkel's opportunity comes on the heels of a scandal that knocks out several men from consideration for party leadership. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-gender/article/before-prime-minister-margaret-thatcher-angela-merkel-and-gendered-party-leadership-contests/D9466903E0113B68F30CBFD430CE65BD
Thatcher's case is more interesting for me. Her party lost two elections within a year, under a leader who (unless I'm mistaken) was the PM before that. Some think things aren't bad, but they're also not great.
Thatcher strategically organizes a challenge and wins it
Thatcher strategically organizes a challenge and wins it
Once the party leader/ex-PM is out of the way, ALL THE MEN come out of the woodwork to try to become party leader, even though Thatcher did the work to make the opportunity.
Thatcher still wins. But the point is that she had to take additional risks to get to power. Risks that men didn't, wouldn't take.
I apply this to Canada to try to get concrete evidence of when women become provincial premiers when their parties are in crisis or decline. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/in-crisis-or-decline-selecting-women-to-lead-provincial-parties-in-government/52F4696D5EE8688133923838030D8284
I was struck that most women become premiers through a party leadership selection process -- all but Pauline Marois and Rachel Notley. For men, it's about 50-50. This suggests that the crisis-decline narrative might make sense
I argue at two women were selected to lead parties in crisis:
Rita Johnston, the first woman premier, selected after Bill VanderZalm's resignation in a cloud of scandal and criminal charges, and
Rita Johnston, the first woman premier, selected after Bill VanderZalm's resignation in a cloud of scandal and criminal charges, and
Pauline Marois -- runs three times for leader, but never selected until her party finishes third for the first time since the late 1970s. Then, she's acclaimed.
A third, Rachel Notley, fits the comparative literature to a T: selected leader of a small, left-leaning, then electorally uncompetitive party (see https://www.jstor.org/stable/24582963?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents).
What about the others? For the decline argument to be supported by evidence, clear evidence of decline would have to be present BEFORE those women were selected leader/premier. Time order is key.
I looked at several things to try to find evidence of decline, all before their selection:
-changes in vote and seat share the election prior
-stability of party support (could only do in AB and ON)
-by-election results
-donations before selection
-public opinion polls
-changes in vote and seat share the election prior
-stability of party support (could only do in AB and ON)
-by-election results
-donations before selection
-public opinion polls
The result? Finding clear evidence of decline prior to women's selection as party leader/premier? It's hard to find. It was only really clear for Wynne in Ontario.
But for Clark, Redford, Dunderdale? The evidence on these indciators doesn't support this decline narrative.
But for Clark, Redford, Dunderdale? The evidence on these indciators doesn't support this decline narrative.
I'll be the first to acknowledge that a concept like a party in decline is intangible and hard to measure. But, if we want to argue this is THE pattern that brings women into powerful political offices, we need to be able to find SOME evidence of it before their selection
That we don't suggests that the logic behind the glass cliff isn't the best to use to explain what's going on here. The logic of a gendered (sexist) political opportunity structure that only opens when things are a bit of a shitshow is better.
And, some women are just really good political operators who rise to the top on their own merit, despite that structure. Or, perhaps more accurately, because they know what they're dealing with and they work it accordingly.
Anyone who wants to access those articles above but can't b/c of subscriptions should DM me with an email address. I'll send the PDFs to you.
