Breathe
By Adina Chelminsky
In the eighties, my grandparents used to receive Time magazine from the United States by mail (just to give you an idea of how old it was). I devoured it page by page every week.
On June 4, 1984, when I was 10 years old, one of the covers changed my life. Literally.
That November was to be the U.S. election; Ronald Reagan was seeking re-election running against Walter Mondale who was in search of a vice presidential running mate.
And there, in front of me, the cover of Time proclaimed in huge letters:
And for vicepresident, WHY NOT A WOMAN... And for vicepresident, WHY NOT A WOMAN?
I have engraved the exact place where I saw that cover and what I felt. It took my breath away.
It was the first time I realized that a woman could be anything she wanted in life.
And yes, I was raised at home in accordance with this phrase, but seeing it in large print, published and proclaimed by the most important magazine in the world, changed my life.
That's the day my feminism was born.
That phrase has accompanied me for almost 40 years throughout all my challenges where being a woman plays to my disadvantage. I repeat it as a mantra, I just change the noun.
And for economist, why not a woman?
And for a master's degree, why not a woman?
And for entrepreneur, why not a woman?
Today, at the dawn of perhaps having a woman president in Mexico, this phrase and what it has meant in my life, echoes in my head.
And for president , why not a woman?
Being a feminist, it should be a resounding and unquestionable Yes but the answer is not so simple. It has taken me 40 years to understand that feminism is much more complicated and that, undoubtedly, so is politics.
Many times supporting a woman to obtain a position, privileging her characteristics as a woman as a value to the curriculum of the position she aspires to, is the worst thing we can do to advance the cause of women; because it emphasizes the wrong thing (gender versus capacity) and because it minimizes what we should demand from men.
They say: Is a woman president going to be more sympathetic to women's causes and situations?
Not necessarily, as we have seen time and again this six-year term in Congress. Shouldn't we, rather, demand that all candidates, regardless of their gender, put women's agenda as a priority not because they identify "guild-wise" with it but because it is the right thing to do for women citizens and for the country as a whole?
They also say: Having a woman president will break a glass ceiling and serve as an example to thousands of girls.
The representation of women in positions of power, without a doubt, is an example for young women but the real example, what we really have to teach, is that a woman can aspire to a position of power not because she is a woman but because she is the best prepared and suitable for it.
The glass ceiling is not broken with the magic banner of "I am a woman", it is broken with the real sword of "I am the best prepared, trained and suitable for the job... and, coincidentally, I am a woman".
The gendered emphasis on ability can even work against the feminist cause. Martha Lamas callsthis The Dilemma of Difference: "Ignoring the difference (between men and women) leaves in place a flawed neutrality but focusing on difference can accentuate stigma".
Let us not look for spaces because we are women, let us look for spaces because as women we are the best option. Our gender cannot be a hindrance, but neither can it be a false step.
Electing a woman to any position because she is a woman is as detrimental to the feminist cause as not electing a woman to a position because she is a woman.
(read that several times).
Today in Mexico 2023, here and now, where so much is at stake for the country and for the real situation of women, we must be very careful with banal and simplistic arguments.
Political parties must understand that using the gender of a candidate as an advertising and electoral advantage is an absolute irresponsibility.
Potential female candidates should emphasize their ability over their gender and be very, very, very careful in minimizing the criticisms they face and disqualify them all with "they attack me for x, y or z because I am a woman" because, even though it is a fact that women are judged more severely, going off on a tangent, infantilizes and detracts from the level of political and feminist debate. Respond directly with reasons, facts and proposals.
And as citizens: for president, why not a woman?
If and only if and only if and only if and only if and only if she is the best candidate for what this country needs.
For the good of Mexico.
For the sake of feminism.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of Opinion 51.
More than 150 opinions from 100 columnists await you for less than one book per month.
Comments ()