ANTHONY BUTLER | Patriarchy can create unexpected paths to power for women leaders

Female politicians may exploit sexist assumptions to emerge as consensus candidates in divided systems

First published in Business Day

May 29, 2026

Women around the world sometimes observe that there are potential costs toalways having a man as national leader. Bias has historically filtered out capable women, while the best candidate is surely more likely to emerge when the full population is genuinely in contention.

A democracy better reflects its people when leadership is no longer drawnfrom only one half of the population, and this strengthens citizens’ sense ofinclusion and trust in institutions.

Women bring different life experiences to the policy process, especially when it comes to healthcare, workplace discrimination and reproductive rights.

Some political science research controversially suggests women lawmakers tend to be more collaborative. Gender-diverse leadership teams in both politics and business arguably produce better decision-making outcomes.

If the path to power is harder for women, those who tread it may become more formidable than their male counterparts. British prime ministerMargaret Thatcher cultivated an iron lady persona deliberately, with voice coaching and a confrontational style, to neutralise prejudice about “female weakness”.

Germany’s Angela Merkel, quiet and methodical, outlasted rivals throughpatience and steely resolve. Merkel also benefited from an “underestimationadvantage” that gave her an informational edge: male politicians assumed shewas not a threat right up to the moment they were outmanoeuvred by her.

Sceptics claim it can’t happen here. South Africa’s constitution may be gender-progressive, but the country remains deeply patriarchal. Customary law, traditional leadership structures and social norms across all racial groups subordinate women. Gender-based violence rates are among the world’s highest, and women remain underrepresented in economic roles.

While these observations may be accurate, sexist assumptions about women’sweakness can in some circumstances create political opportunities. When twopowerful male-led factions are deadlocked, a woman can emerge preciselybecause she’s perceived as non-threatening.

The men involved may each prefer her to their rival, calculating that she will be malleable or easily removed. This patronising assumption is often what gets a woman leader through the door, after which she may prove anything but feeble. 

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in Liberia emerged partly because she was seen as less threatening to various factional interests after years of warlord-driven civil war. 

Cristina Kirchner in Argentina and Sirimavo Bandaranaike in Sri Lanka initially benefited from being seen as extensions of their husbands’ legacies, a form of reflected legitimacy that depended on patriarchal assumptions about women’s derivative power. 

Even Theresa May’s ascent to the British premiership in 2016 owed something to the way male Brexiteers attacked each other until she was the only one left standing. 

Women’s potential advantage can be redoubled when power is shared. National Assembly speaker Thoko Didiza’s name keeps appearing in ANC succession discussions because she is experienced and capable but also because she is perceived as less factionally divisive than Paul Mashatile or Fikile Mbalula — and also better suited to coalition dealmaking with other political parties. 

Women can exploit a “mother of the nation” framing in patriarchal societies, accessing a form of moral authority denied to men. They are perceived as above the dirty business of factional politics, as nurturers rather than competitors. This set of deeply patronising assumptions can be strategically useful for an ambitious politician. 

There is no risk-free way to the top, of course. Women still confront the “glass cliff” phenomenon, in which they are disproportionately chosen to lead organisations or countries during crises when men have declined the poisoned chalice or dodged the bullet. 

Nonetheless, the uncomfortable implication of this argument is that some women’s political advancement may depend not on overcoming patriarchy, but on exploiting it. 

Like any system of systematic misjudgement, patriarchy creates exploitable inefficiencies, and politically astute women can use these to get elected — and then, hopefully, to govern brilliantly. 

• Butler teaches public policy at the University of Cape Town.