User:Egw777/Violence against women

Article Draft

Violence Against Women in Politics (VAWP)

Slut shaming is a common form of semiotic violence against women in politics.

Violence Against Women in Politics (VAWP) is the act or threat of physical, emotional or psychological violence against female politicians on the basis of their gender, most often with the intent of discouraging the victims and other female politicians from participating in the political process. VAWP has been growing in significance among the fields of gendered political science and feminist political theory studies. The main intent behind creating a separate category that is distinct from Violence Against Women, is to highlight the barriers faced by women who work in politics, or wish to pursue a career in the political realm. VAWP is unique from Violence Against Women in three important ways: victims are targeted because of their gender; the violence itself can be gendered (i.e., sexism, sexual violence); the primary goal is to deter women from participating in politics (including but not limited to voting, running for office, campaigning, etc.) It is also important to distinguish VAWP from political violence, which is defined by the use or threats of force to reach political ends, and can be experienced by all politicians. While women's participation in national parliaments has been increasing, rising from 11% in 1995 to 25% in 2021, there is still a large disparity between male and female representation in governmental politics. Expanding women's participation in government is a crucial goal for many countries, as female politicians have proven invaluable with respect to bringing certain issues to the forefront, such as elimination of gender-based violence, parental leave and childcare, pensions, gender-equality laws, electoral reform, and providing fresh perspectives on numerous policy areas that have typically remained a male-dominated realm. In order to increase women's participation in an effective manner, the importance of recognizing the issues related to VAWP and making every effort to provide the necessary resources to victims and condemn any and all hostile behaviour in political institutions cannot be understated. Experiencing VAWP can dissuade women from remaining in politics (and lead to an early exit from their career or from aspiring higher political office. Witnessing women in politics experience VAWP can serve as one of many deterrents for aspirants to run for office and for candidates to continue campaigning. Acts of violence or harassment are often not deemed to be gendered when they are reported, if they are reported at all. VAWP is often dismissed as the "the cost of doing politics" and reporting can be seen as "political suicide," which contributes to the normalization of VAWP. This ambiguity results in a lack of information regarding attacks and makes the issue appear to be relatively commonplace. While it is reported that women in politics are more often targeted by violence than their male counterparts, the specific cause is often not reported as a gendered crime. This makes it more difficult to pinpoint where the links between gender-specific violence and political violence really are. In many countries, the practice of electoral politics is traditionally considered to be a masculine domain. The history of male dominated politics has allowed some male politicians to believe they have a right to participate in politics while women should not, since women's participation is seen as a challenge to the social order. Male politicians sometimes feel threatened by the prospect of a female politician occupying their position, which can cause them to lash out, and weak men do not want to feel as though women could be above them causing them to harass and threaten women in power. 48% of electoral violence against women is against supporters, this is most likely the largest percentage as it has the largest amount of the public participating. 9% of electoral violence against women is targeting candidates, while 22% targets female voters. This means that women who are directly acting in politics are likely to face some form of violence, whether physical or emotional. Regarding violence against female politicians, younger women and those with intersecting identities, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are more likely to be targets. Female politicians who outwardly express and act from feminist perspectives are also more likely to be victimized.

Sub-Types of VAWP

Gabrielle Bardall's 2011 report: "Breaking the mold: Understanding Gender and Electoral Violence" was one of the first documents published that showed examples and figures for how women are intimidated and attacked in politics. Since Bardall's report, other scholars have conducted further research on the topic. Notably, Mona Lena Krook’s work on VAWP introduced 5 forms of violence and harassment: physical, sexual, psychological, economic, and semiotic/symbolic. Physical violence encompasses inflicting, or attempting to inflict, bodily harm and injury. While physical violence is the most easily identified form, it is actually the least common type. Sexual violence involves sexual acts (or attempts at sexual acts) through coercion, including unwanted sexual comments, advances, and harassment. Psychological violence includes causing emotional and mental damage through means of death/rape threats, stalking, etc.. Economic violence involves denying, withholding, and controlling female politicians’ access to financial resources, particularly regarding campaigns. Semiotic or symbolic violence, the most abstract subtype of VAWP, refers to the erasure of female politicians through degrading images and sexist language. Krook theorizes that semiotic violence against women in politics works in two related ways: rendering women invisible and rendering women incompetent. By symbolically removing women from the public political sphere, semiotic violence renders women invisible. Examples include using masculine grammar when speaking about and to political women, interrupting female politicians, and not portraying political women in the media. By highlighting the role incongruity between stereotypically feminine attributes (e.g., warm, polite, submissive), and traits typically ascribed to good leaders (e.g., strong, powerful, assertive), semiotic violence emphasizes that women are incompetent to be political actors. This form of semiotic violence can manifest through denying and minimizing women’s political qualifications, sexual objectification, and labeling political women as emotional, among other actions.

---