Why ambitious women are disliked and shamed for being so.
Ambition is like a cuss word for a woman. When a man is ambitious, he is called driven. When a woman is ambitious, it’s a bad thing. It is the irony of our world.” — Priyanka Chopra
In today’s progressive society, the idea of a ‘powerful’ woman is applauded and sought after, not only idolized by our younger female generation, but also by men. Often, this ‘ideal’ of a woman- I call this an ideal as it has become a conceptual expectation: is desired in thought, not reality. It seems the characteristics of a determined, forceful, ambition conflicts with the pre-supposed gender stereotype in our society of women being warm, accommodating and apologetic at all times. It goes back to pre-liberal gender stereotypes, roles and expectations that dominated the gendered division of society, and a desire for subordinate women.
Many recent studies have found that among the web of gender bias, there is further emphasis placed on ambitious or ‘forceful’ women. The Washington Post headlines: “Why ambitious men are celebrated and ambitious women are criticized.” The irony here is, as this determined attitude is pre-accustomed to men, it is deemed acceptable and a trait of males, whereas a woman is misjudged in her attempt to compete with the top dogs. In a headline for the Forbes, an article ‘Women’s Perceived Competency Drops Significantly When Judged As Being Forceful’ caught my eye. Surely, someone is more competent if they recognize the need to present a ‘forceful’ side to get their voice heard rather than suppress their belief, yet no study of males would ever correlate ‘competence’ and ‘force’ together.
“A women’s perceived competency drops by 35% and their perceived worth falls by $15,088 when they are judged as being “forceful”
The study shows that although the female boss may be better at her job, if she decides to take a cold, dominating stance like many businessmen, she risks losing the respect of her colleagues. . The key finding in Caprino’s article is as follows: “The observers loved the female actor as long as she was neutral and agreeable. But, as soon as she disagreed and defended her point of view in a forceful way, she was cast off her pedestal and punished far more than the male actor.” It is why we we’re overly polite even if we are just having a mood swing, why we use the word ‘just’ to under-emphasize our feelings, why we bite our tongue. As women, we know that signs that we aren’t accommodating or warm will be used against us.
Displaying the gender bias evidently as for men, an ‘***hole boss’ is just that, but for a woman, it taints her entire image as an individual, pushed back down to the role of subordination men expect from their wives, but protest for their daughters. The expectation of a subordinate female is one which will haunt our progress for generations. As an ethnic woman, I have learnt so far being unapologetic gets you nowhere, if not in more despair and the same is shown for powerful women within UK politics. Along with the gender bias, the ethnic bias is prevalent, hindering the success of powerful women. In a simple Google search, 5 out of 8 articles included the words ‘female, MP, apologizes’, whilst the other 3 articles illustrate the gender bias outlining Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s refusal to apologize for his racist remarks toward the south Asian diaspora, and the battle to get an apology out of a man in power.
Unfortunately then, in order to maintain a successful position in our patriarchy, women are still subordinate to some pre-accustomed roles and expectations as a female, and that is part of our struggle, despite the highest level of education, or the healthiest bank account. Forceful, determined or just a bitch to some, but perhaps the only way to keep thick skin in a world designed to belittle women.
How much longer will women succumb to these expectations and can we ever fully be free from them if we want to compete and survive in today’s age of patriarchy?
