What are some common stereotypes?
For most people, the phrase “violence against women” or “gender-based violence” is associated with domestic violence and rape. By contrast, the words “political violence” or “election violence” are often associated with assassinations, bombs in markets and violent street demonstrations. In reality, these kinds of violence overlap; women around the world are attacked for being female and involved in politics as voters, candidates, elected officials, staffers, poll workers, civic leaders and in other roles of public leadership.
Although the term “violence” is commonly understood to mean physical harm, the United Nations defines violence against women to include both physical and sexual harm as well as mental harm and suffering. For this analysis, violence against women in politics includes both physical harm and sexual violence, as well as nonphysical harm, such as threats, intimidation, shaming, withholding a woman’s financial resources or food, harassing the victim or her family, or having children forcibly taken away or harmed.
Gender-based political violence doesn’t just affect women; it is an umbrella term for any harm that violates any individual or group’s political rights on the basis of their gender identity. However, here I focus on women, because they are the overwhelming majority of gender-based violence victims.
Here’s what I found in my research on these developing-world countries
Worldwide, scholars agree that violence against women is universally underreported. In my research in developing states, I examined more than 2,000 incidents of election violence in six countries — Bangladesh, Burundi, Guinea, Guyana, Nepal, Timor-Leste — between 2006 and 2010. I also drew on narratives of experiences related by women and men from 45 countries over the course of working on elections and political transitions internationally since 2005, and other qualitative sources.
In doing so, I’ve found that men and women have quite different experiences. Women reported being beaten, raped, burned and mutilated by men who wanted to punish or coerce their political choices or prevent them from participating in a political activity like voting or running for office, because they are female. When general political violence occurred against both men and women, women were much more likely to experience sexualized forms of violence, including rape, sexual assault and “virginity tests.” In some places this was extreme, such as the disputed 2007 Kenyan election when thousands of women were raped during post-election violence that swept the entire country.
The research revealed that women are as much as three times more likely to experience sexual and nonphysical attacks, while men are up to three times more likely to suffer the more public forms of violence such as political assassination and street violence. The quantitative data was collected by trained local monitors through the IFES Election Violence Education and Resolution (EVER) program. These community researchers were up to 10 times more likely to find information about acts of election violence affecting men by looking at public documents, such as police and hospital reports, and media coverage. In contrast, where election violence against women occurred, it was nearly three times more likely to be verbally reported by a member of the community.
Women were threatened, coerced, or deprived economically more often than men, enduring such experiences as being stoned and torn from their children, morally condemned by their church leaders, or even burned to death — simply because they tried to vote, work at a polling station or run for office. In the statistical data, both men and women were most likely to be targeted because they supported a particular party or candidate supporters (69 percent of male victims, and 48 percent of female victims were party/candidate supporters). However, the proportion of rural voters and journalist victims who were women was four times higher than among male victims.
These patterns are found in Western democracies as well
And just last week, during the #MeToo surge, over 140 women leaders in Californian politics — including nearly a quarter of all the women currently holding seats in Sacramento — reported that during their political careers they experienced, witnessed or worked with women who were groped, propositioned, or otherwise harassed.
Other studies are finding similar results. For instance, when the Inter-Parliamentary Union surveyed women parliamentarians in 39 countries across five regions, 82 percent reported that during their terms they endured gendered psychological attacks, such as sexist insults or social media threats of rape, death, or abductions of their children.
The letter from the Californian women in politics poignantly describes how such gendered and sexualized attacks cause fear, shame, and anxiety about losing one’s livelihood; fear of encountering more such attacks can crimp personal and professional growth. In countries where such attacks are more physically brutal, women reported that the effect is measured in lives lost, physical and emotional scars and shattered families. As documented in my research, they also reported fear of going to the polls, resulting in lower women’s turnout on Election Day, alienation from politics, and weakened democracies.
The nearly universal inequality in elected offices around the world may result in part from women being either turned off by or shut out of leadership roles because of the pervasive threat of gender-specific political violence.