As we get closer and closer to electing the first female president, there has been a lot of speculation as to who the "ideal" person would be. After all, with something this significant in history, the person who assumes the title is going to have a significant impact on America's future. More than just America's future, the first female president will hold a major spot as a feminist icon and role model for women around the world. So how do we measure who would be best to take on such a responsibility? Even of more concern, how do we pick someone who won't make mistakes big enough to cause the country to stop putting women in office?
I think a larger part of these questions is why are we allowing one woman to have such lasting impact? One man would never have this much power over his entire gender. Yet because of how bad women's situation has been for so long we put the weight of women's success on whichever woman can break the highest glass ceiling. With the lack of women in politics, it is up to just a few to fight for the interest of women, which dangerously leads to the assumption that women all have the same interests. Women are an interest group, yet they all come from different backgrounds, different career paths and ambitions, and have different political opinions.
Because of women's disadvantages, we claim the title of a "minority" group. However, this notion is so deceiving because women are by no means a minority. We make up more than half of the world's population. I think we forget the diversity of the female gender, putting all women into a box who all have the same wants and needs. After all, there are very few women in public service tasked with representing the interests of their massive gender.
We have to stop asking women running for president to represent the interests of all American women, because it's physically impossible. Culturally, we also need to stop using the quality of one woman's skills in politics to represent the capability of any woman in politics. It's assumed that if one woman can't handle a job, no woman can handle the job, which simply isn't true. It's entirely unrealistic to generalize women and their value to the political world in this way, because it ignores the fact that there are all different kinds of ways to be a woman.
What this teaches young girls is that all women grow up to be a certain way, which couldn't be further from the truth. In 2019 women are holding all different kinds of jobs and leading all different kinds of lifestyles. Women can dress any way they want, wear their hair any way they want, act any way they want, and, most importantly, be absolutely anything that they want. How we treat women in politics mirrors how we treat women in American society, and it brings out the worst of misogyny. Let's remember just how unique all women are, and how each one deserves to be recognized for what sets them apart.
