On May 1, 2025, in what has been described as a “groundbreaking” moment in Caribbean frontline politics, Kamla Persad-Bissessar of the United National Congress (UNC) became the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago. Perhaps even more interesting than this is the fact that this is the second time she has been elected to this position.

What makes this groundbreaking, then, is not that a woman now has the position of Prime Minister, but that woman hold the top three constitutional offices in Trinidad and Tobago. Pennelope Beckles-Robinson is the leader of the opposition, the People’s National Movement (PNM). Christine Kangaloo, who has been president since 2023, was responsible for swearing them in.

Last week, social media was full of posts by Caribbean people celebrating the moment, highlighting these three women in these three positions, asserting that it is not only progress, but an uncomplicated achievement. It is not unusual for social media posts to lack gender analysis, and it is not unusual for people to see numerical and proportional increases as synonymous with the true advancement of women. Quantity, as we all should know, is not quality, so there is more to consider.

Following the US presidential election, Persad-Bissessar, as the (then) Opposition Leader, made clear her position on the Biden administration. She said, “They focused on pushing a woke, extreme left-wing agenda that offended basic common sense and morality, overturned the norms of civilised public life, disoriented and mutilated children, censored and cancelled dissenting views, disparaged religious and conservative values, fuelled wars around the world, weaponised the judicial system against political opponents and increased nepotism, corruption, crime, poverty, homelessness, and wealth inequality.”

Persad-Bissessar went on to congratulate and celebrate the current US president. She said: “He has survived assassination attempts, political persecution, and years of personal attacks, but he triumphed in the end.” She added: “I look forward to the return of meritocracy, excellence, and intelligence as a standard criterion for accessing equal opportunities.”

This position is cause for concern for anyone who cares about and is committed to the achievement of gender equality and full access to human rights, especially for those in situations of vulnerability including women, children, LGBTQI+ people, people with disabilities, and people experiencing poverty, all of whom are disproportionately affected and deliberately targeted by the dangerous actions taking by the current US administration.

We do need more women in positions of leadership. We do need to reach gender parity in all levels of governments. We do need women to have decision-making power. We do need women to design and implement policies that move us toward gender equality. Women, however, are not all the same. We are not a homogenous group. There are women who benefit from existing systems of oppression and who are committed to maintaining their positions, even at significant cost to other women. There are women who do not want to be the woman to make the statement or take the action that demonstrates commitment to gender equality and the advancement of all women, often because it is more comfortable to come close to fitting in (with other leaders and decision-makers, the majority of whom are men).

Feminist advocates know this. This awareness is the source of the clear distinction between “women’s groups” and women who are political aspirants who call for more women in parliament and the feminist advocates who acknowledge the nuances and call for more feminist women and women who support women’s rights in positions of leadership at all levels.

Ahead of the 65th United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) in 2021, stakeholders from across the Caribbean worked together to develop a regional position on the theme, “Women’s full and effective participation and decision-making in public life, as well as the elimination of violence, for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls.” The conversations had significant focus on women’s political leadership, ways to reach gender parity in frontline politics, and the markers of gender equality in leadership that extend beyond numbers and into outcomes, both for women and girls and for entire countries.

When gender equality and women’s leadership—particularly in the areas of political life and public life—is discussed, people focus almost exclusively on numbers. Just as there are difference among men in positions of leadership, there are differences among women in positions of leadership.

There are differences in beliefs and values, in skills, in leadership practices, in personal and professional interests, and in ideas and vision of success. It is easy for people to make assumptions about women in positions of leadership based on what they think they know. There are many gender stereotypes that are taken to be true, often entirely due to the frequency with which they are stated as though they are facts and the infrequency of them being refuted. Women do not all lead in the same way. Men do not all lead in the same way either. These facts do not necessarily change the longstanding ideas people have about the differences between women and men and what they mean for abilities and outcomes. This is a primary reason for the focus on gender, what it means, what it does not mean, and how it is used to limit opportunities.

Feminist advocates for women’s political leadership know that numbers are important. The call for women’s leadership in public and political life extends beyond women receiving nominations, getting votes, and being elected into office. It is for harmful gender ideology to be eradicated and social norms to change. It is for the creation of an enabling environment for women’s participation and leadership in public and political life. It is for increased positive representation of women in leadership in media. It is for early exposure to policymaking and spaces and processes. It is for the development of opportunities for women and girls to lead and conditions under which leadership by women and girls is supported, celebrated, and normalised.

Regarding the political moment in Trinidad and Tobago, Dr Gabrielle Hosein, lecturer at the Institute for Gender and Development Studies at the University of the West Indies St Augustine’s campus said, “In Trinidad and Tobago’s political history, having three different kinds of women leaders right now is unprecedented and historic.” Importantly, she noted that these wins are symbolic. “We have to see if they lead to ‘substantive’ wins, meaning approaches to governance that are less domineering and antagonistic and more inclusive and transformative, and create greater social, economic and gender justice,” she said.

Feminist advocates hold multiple truths. One is that women have the right to hold positions of leadership and decision-making power, and this is not contingent on any trainings or alignment on sociopolitical issues any more than is the case for men. Another is that the progress we need, particularly on women’s rights, gender equality, and social development, requires the participation and leadership of feminist women and women who are committed to working on achieving these goals, even in the face of great opposition, (from) wherever it rears its head.

This means that, just as many men in leadership are mediocre, women have the right to be mediocre in leadership. Just as men enter frontline politics without training, women can enter frontline politics without training. This, however, is not where the bar must be set. It is discriminatory to hold women to a different (and higher) standard than that to which we hold men, so must set higher expectations for all leaders while acknowledging the importance of increasing women’s representation to reach gender parity. This increases the visibility of women as leaders, demonstrates possibilities to young women and girls, normalises women’s leadership, and makes it possible for more women to take feminist positions not only at the personal level, but professionally, within the walls of parliament, cabinet, and the senate.

 

Published in The Tribune on May 7, 2025.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply