It’s been a few weeks since Donald Trump was elected the 47th president of the United States, and the conversation is already turning to when Canadians will see a female candidate like Kamala Harris, with a real shot at the country’s highest office.
Canada’s only female prime minister, Kim Campbell, took office in 1993 after Brian Mulroney resigned amid declining popularity—a milestone that, three decades later, still hasn’t been repeated.
Since 1960, only 62 countries have seen a woman reach the highest office of executive power—though the United States has yet to join them.
Debate continues over whether the low number of women on North American ballots is due to societal or cultural barriers, a topic former NDP Member of Parliament Peggy Nash describes as all ‘too complicated.’
“I think politics is definitely gendered, I think leadership is gendered,“ she said in an interview with Yahoo News Canada.
“Women can win… we see women winning top offices around the world and I think what those women share is an ability to navigate those male leadership traits.”
But what does Kamala Harris’s loss mean for the future of women in politics? And are Canada and the U.S. ready to embrace female leaders at the highest level? Here’s what experts in Canada’s top universities have to say.
Despite progress in gender equality, the question of whether society is truly ready to see women in top political roles remains complex and divisive.
In the past three U.S. elections, women have appeared on the U.S. ballot twice—Hillary Clinton in 2016 and now Kamala Harris in 2024.
Both campaigns energized women voters, particularly women of colour. Harris, for instance, earned overwhelming support, with 92 per cent of black women voting for her.
“The fact that Hillary Clinton lost to Trump and now Kamala Harris lost to Trump… I think it’s pretty blatantly clear that society is not (ready),” said Megan Boler, a University of Toronto professor teaching Cultural Studies and Feminist Theory.
“I think it’s not only a lack of trust in women as leaders but also clearly in this case I think the fact that we had a female leader (like Kamala Harris) did not bode well.”
On the other hand, some argue Harris faced challenges unique to her campaign. Nash suggests Harris was disadvantaged from the outset, particularly due to the timing of Biden’s late decision to step down.
“I think she had the disadvantage of not going through a primary race,” she said. “Politics is about timing… a different time… maybe…. but she’s clearly a very talented leader.”
“This just wasn’t the time,” she concluded.
Traits often associated with leadership, like assertiveness and decisiveness, are still widely seen as male qualities, raising challenges for women in politics.
Last year, a business report from Fortune Global 500 found that less than six per cent of the world’s largest companies by revenue are led by women.
While there is no research to support the idea that men factually outperform women, there is evidence that shows perception of society still favours men.
For example, research from the University at Buffalo reviewed decades of data and found that men tend to demonstrate higher levels of assertiveness and dominance, which are often valued in leadership roles.
Nash says, “I think that there is a perception that a strong leader has a deep voice is more confrontational… they are male traits.”
Despite the perception of those traits, it’s still possible for women to navigate and succeed equally, she adds.
On the flip-side, women tend to be more communal, cooperative and nurturing. As a result, men are more likely to participate and voice their opinions during group discussions, and be perceived by others as leader-like.
Boler supports this idea of society’s perception, saying that “we see men as authority figures… and women as people who serve men.”
“Women are expected to be the primary caretakers of children and when women do have careers, they are expected to perform both of those careers at 100 per cent,” she said.
Canadians often believe that they have a more “gender egalitarian society” says Nash. But when it comes to the representation of women “we do not do as well as many other countries,” she added.
One significant barrier, according to Nash, is Canada’s “first-past-the-post” system, a winner-take-all voting method used for federal and provincial elections.
In countries with proportional representation systems, Nash says, political parties are able to recruit more female candidates, often achieving a 50/50 split between women and men.
“That can lead to greater gender diversity in governments,” she said. “There are a number of women in European parliaments. I think the first-past-the-post system is an issue.”
Nash also pointed to the process of candidate nominations in Canada as another hurdle. She argued that party leaders often hold too much power in deciding who gets to run.
“Sometimes they just appoint a candidate and there is no nomination,” she said. “I think parties have a tremendous amount of control.”
While women have made strides in politics, progress often feels like a push-and-pull battle, where every step forward is met with lingering setbacks.
“I think history shows us we may progress and then we have setbacks, and then we make progress and then we have (even more) setbacks,” Nash said. “I don’t believe that history is a straight line of progress.”
She believes the Kamala Harris loss, coupled with the return of a second Trump administration, represents a significant setback for women in leadership.
“I think this is and will be a setback for women,” she said.
President Biden himself also weighed in on the results, confirming Harris’ loss is indeed a setback.
“Setbacks are unavoidable, but giving up is unforgivable. We all get knocked down, but the measure of our character, as my dad would say, is how quickly we get back up,” he said in a seven-minute speech at Rose Garden.
Despite the president’s comments, Harris’ campaign was described by Hillary and Bill Clinton as “forward-looking.”
In a statement on Instagram, they wrote, “What we as citizens do now will make the difference between a nation that moves forward or one that falls back.”
