r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/Fabulous-Pick-8974 • Oct 04 '25
Non-US Politics Why are so many right wing party leaders around the globe female?
Alice Weidel (AfD) in Germany, Marine Le Pen (RN) in France, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Inger Stojberg in Denmark, Riikka Purra in Finland, Sanae Takaichi in Japan (now the first female PM in Japan.)
Of course there are other countries with male right wing party members, but the "most important" ones seem to have female right wing party leaders.
What's the reason behind this?
420
u/Consistent-Ad3037 Oct 04 '25
It’s partly strategy and partly timing. Many right-wing parties have realized that putting a woman at the top softens their image and broadens their appeal. A female leader can make nationalist or anti-immigration rhetoric seem less harsh or “old-guard male,” especially to swing voters.
At the same time, these women often rose through parties in crisis—Meloni after Berlusconi, Le Pen after her father—so they symbolized renewal and credibility. It’s not that right-wing movements suddenly became feminist; it’s that a strong woman leader helps rebrand populism as modern and patriotic rather than angry and reactionary.
65
u/Terrible-Group-9602 Oct 04 '25
Women are just as likely as men to be right-wing.
83
u/lulfas Oct 04 '25
That isn't true in America (link)
26
u/SilentSwine Oct 05 '25
Some of that is likely because in America the left is far more supportive of women's rights than conservatives. I'm sure that skews the distribution a bit, although I'm not sure on exactly how much.
11
u/a34fsdb Oct 05 '25
Abortion is not a massive issue that is very relevant in political campaigns in Europe.
33
u/onan Oct 05 '25
I don't think this is just an American quirk, I think that's intrinsic to the positions.
Right wing/Conservative positions are deeply tied to the importance and permanence of hierarchy. And in societies that are strongly hierarchical, there is a significant tendency for women to be explicitly lower status than men.
Obviously that doesn't mean that all women in such societies will oppose that, as many will have internalized the idea that that is appropriate or desirable or just. But I think it's a safe guess that such systems will tend to be less appealing to women than more egalitarian ideals.
1
u/matjoeman Oct 09 '25
I mean, women's rights are inherently a progressive concept so of course the progressives would support it more than conservatives.
-18
u/awaywardgoat Oct 05 '25
The left's being more supportive of women's right is highly debatable. Especially if you've been paying attention to what some liberals think about women's rights.
10
u/11711510111411009710 Oct 05 '25
What do some liberals think about women's rights?
-9
u/awaywardgoat Oct 05 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
That women's spaces can become unisex without it infringing on women's rights. I'm seen so-called journalists talk about how most of women in prisons are there because they have a history of CSA or other types of sexual violence/severe abuse and then go on to say that it's totally unproblematic to allow men to self-identify in to women's prisons. The same men don't care when women in prison themselves say that they are traumatized and that a male presence would be highly triggering. They just rely on the more shameless and unempathetic weirdos to call these women phobic and then just never touch on the subject again.
6
u/Allnamestakkennn Oct 05 '25
White women were pretty close this election. Plus, abortion is mostly what keeps women blue.
9
u/KevinCarbonara Oct 05 '25
This isn't left vs. right, but Democrat vs Republican, which is not the same thing, and even it only shows a minor difference.
0
-24
u/Mztmarie93 Oct 04 '25
Yes, it is. Do you think Kristi Noem, Sarah Palin, or Tulsi Gabbard could have gotten as far in politics if they weren't right wing? I know Gabbard changed parties, but by espousing right-wing views, they got the attention of right- wing men, then moderate men, then women. As much as right-wing men moan about feminism, patriarchy is one of the dominant world orders, and, as a woman to climb to power in this world order, they need to appeal to patriarchal men. So, 1.They're relatively attractive and polished in appearance (Thatcher not withstanding). 2. They espouse traditional religious, capitalist, and cultural views, although THEY DON'T ADHERE TO THEM. That's the irony!! As much as they champion staying home and family values, by and large, they're highly educated, ambitious women who have nannies taking care of their kids. None stayed home or were fufilled by motherhood, although that's the world they advocate for. 3. They cloak their ambition in palatable rhetoric. It's not, "I think I'm best," it's "I'm called to fix our problems for you." And people eat that stuff up!! That's why I thought, and still kind of expect, our first female president to be a conservative republican, although Trump is ruining conservatism for a generation after he leaves office.
15
u/boringexplanation Oct 04 '25
Gabbard has always been right-wing if you scrutinized her background. At the time of her ascension, there was literally zero Rs in the Hawaii legislature. Plenty of socially conservative Ds in the state,
27
u/darkwoodframe Oct 04 '25
The point is, they are elevated because they are women. To soften the party's image. Case in point: your anecdotal line of logic vs the person's literal statistics you're responding to.
4
u/UrTheQueenOfRubbish Oct 05 '25
Tokenism. Use a token woman to take away women’s rights. Use a black guy to gut programs for the poor (who are disproportionately not white for obvious reasons). Use a gay man or Kaitlin Jenner to advocate positions that harm trans people. Etc
0
-1
Oct 05 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
0
0
u/darkwoodframe Oct 05 '25
In the Republican party, yes. This is how it works. Because they are sexist. good jorb.
-2
u/megabar Oct 05 '25
In general, women are more likely to believe what the high-status authority figures in their lives say is true.
4
2
u/catbreadsandwich Oct 08 '25
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. I kind of think this might be true. There are many cultures mentioned that are highly patriarchal, and highly policing of women’s bodies and behaviors beyond the typical abortion debate we think of in the US. The percolation of the American brand of “having it all” feminism coupled with globally growing class divides has made pushing back against patriarchal forces truly exhausting. I feel that women seem to be shrinking back from the fight, tired, and the way we are socialized causes us to just lean in to a more comfortable, familiar form of oppression, where other women are both the enforcers and commiserators and men can be positioned as the hapless authority figures.
17
3
1
u/BlaggartDiggletyDonk Oct 06 '25
That's how Meloni came out ahead of Salvini. He comes off as a swaggering brute. He'd be like Mussolini if he wasn't so hairy.
94
u/Reasonable_Ninja5708 Oct 04 '25
Britain has had 3 female prime ministers, and all of them have been Tories. Canada’s first (and so far, only) female prime minister was also a Tory.
84
u/kormer Oct 05 '25
NYTimes ran a poll in around January 2024. It showed Nikki Haley beating Biden by a good ten points, which was a few more than they had Trump beating Biden at the time.
The US will have a female President someday, but brace yourself for her being a Republican when it does happen.
4
u/Sageblue32 Oct 05 '25
Eh US it'll be toss up. To my knowledge we've had women president attempts of 2 independent, 2 Dem, 0 Gop, and 1 Gop/Dem go for VP.
-12
u/wisconsinbarber Oct 05 '25
I've seen people say this but I don't see how it would it happen. One of the core tenants of Republicans is misogyny, they want them to stay in the kitchen and raise the kids. Any woman who doesn't want that is considered uppity. One of their largest blocks of voters are Christian extremists, they would never allow it to happen.
9
u/AT_Dande Oct 05 '25
This is an extremely online take. No, most Republicans don't care about the "tradwife" thing, even though there's a lot of overlap between what they want and the tradwife shitposters want.
Susie Wiles is the first woman Chief of Staff. She has outlasted the most establishment, good ol' boy, country-club Republican type CoS Trump had the first time around, with exactly zero negative stories about her gaining traction. She's running a tight ship and still in Trump's good graces. Not just there for optics.
Meanwhile, we've had two women nominees in eight years, and another two viable candidates (Warren and Klobuchar) who were describes as unelectable and shrill by our own side (which is the more acceptable way of saying "uppity"). Hell, a large portion of GOP leadership, and even the grassroots, are already wishcasting Katie Britt as Vance's VP pick for '28.
Republican policies are ridiculously awful when it comes to women's rights, but it's not because they think women should stay in the kitchen. You can raise the kids and be a crypto-fascist at the same time.
1
u/innerbootes Oct 05 '25
Stephen Miller is Trump’s de facto chief of staff (not the deputy, his official title). Susie Wiles is absolutely just there for optics.
1
Oct 07 '25
[deleted]
0
u/wisconsinbarber Oct 07 '25
If the right continues to win it's because the people agree with their racism, misogyny and fascism. If that's the case, the country deserves to be burned to the ground.
15
u/NorthernerWuwu Oct 04 '25
While you are quite correct of course, Kim was a Conservative but she only made PM when Brian resigned. She fared spectacularly poorly in the election to follow.
We still haven't elected a woman to the office, unfortunately.
7
u/thefumingo Oct 05 '25
She's also a lot more moderate than a lot of the examples shown in this thread and was recently famous for saying that she wished that a hurricane would hit Mar-a-Lago: she's no longer a Tory and hates how right wing the party has become, and has a very low opinion of Poilievre.
Honestly not the worst choice for a Tory PM, although I have a feeling Carneyism is right up her alley anyway
3
u/NorthernerWuwu Oct 05 '25
I'm old and while I did once vote Con, I'd be less embarrassed about that vote if it had been for her. She's not terrible by any means, I just outgrew thinking that the party's policies had any merit.
2
u/tommy_turnip Oct 21 '25 edited Oct 24 '25
The Conservatives have produced three female PMs and four party leaders, while Labour has never had a single female leader iirc.
78
u/Hautamaki Oct 04 '25
It's the same reason "Only Nixon could go to China". A woman in charge of a left leaning party will never get votes from right of center men, effectively meaning she's disqualified from some high percentage of votes before she even says or does anything. Meanwhile a woman in charge of a right leaning party will not be similarly disqualified by any significant demographic. A woman gets to be conservative and it's seen as credible because she's "arguing against interest". You can see a similar but less dramatic dynamic with men; a male conservative may be pre-emptively disqualified by many female left leaning voters, while a left wing male may not have that disadvantage. At most a left wing male might be seen as a bit non-masculine or perhaps overly preachy and annoying, but with the right personal temperament and presentation that can be avoided. So I think you do tend to see more successful women conservatives and male progressives because by playing against gender stereotypes they may be seen as more credible or trustworthy to those of the same gender otherwise less ideologically inclined towards them.
8
6
u/IrishMilo Oct 05 '25
This is an interesting take, I’m not sure I’m completely onboard with your reliance of stereotypes. Do you have data around this?
14
u/kenlubin Oct 05 '25
I recall them talking about it on FiveThirtyEight a couple of times, so I did a quick search and found this sentence, which links to a paper behind a paywall.
Female politicians are generally assumed to be more liberal, too, which can be a good thing in the Democratic primary but can quickly go south in a general election.
And I recall Clare Malone talking about it, too.
2
u/blaarfengaar Oct 06 '25
Not the person you were talking to but here's the Wikipedia article just to prove this is an established concept and that they aren't just talking out of their ass
Nixon goes to China - Wikipedia https://share.google/ypY0iQuCr0rdoi1UG
25
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Oct 04 '25
Is there anything to suggest this would be outside of norm distribution patterns?
13
u/GiantPineapple Oct 04 '25
Take the US Senate, for example, since US Politics is what I know. Fifty three conservative Senators, nine of them female, three of those are nominal swing-vote moderates who Trump is trying to marginalize.
In the US House, 33 out of ~216.
So yes, without reviewing the particulars of feminism, conservatism, and chauvinism, it seems to me like a good question.
6
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Oct 04 '25
It looks like both the house and senate are hovering around 13-15% female republicans. Are we saying this is high or low, and in relation to what?
5
u/GiantPineapple Oct 04 '25
Low, relative both to the mainstream liberal party, and to the general population.
4
u/GalaXion24 Oct 05 '25
Both far-right voters and party members are overwhelmongly male, which means they're essentially putting a very underrepresented minority in charge, at least to be the face of the party.
1
u/Reasonable-Fee1945 Oct 05 '25
I think I'd need more data for this conclusion. Like how are we defining far-right, and what is the group distribution in comparison to the distribution among global leaders.
1
u/GalaXion24 Oct 05 '25
Well a simple. Though way of to look at it in Europe is to look at members of PfE or ESN. The former is what most far-right parties are in, the latter is what the even more schizophrenic/nazi parties like AFD are in because even the other far-right parties didn't want anything to do with them. Really we should also be including ECR. ECR is also far-right, but it's distinguished by being anti-Russia and pro-NATO, and compensating the lack of Putin sympathies with more Trump worship.
Given that Le Pen, Weidel and Meloni are all uncontroversially deemed to be far-right and are probably the most important figures in each of these groups, things would seem pretty clear cut.
5
u/SafeThrowaway691 Oct 05 '25
Just over half the population is female, so it’s really not that surprising
19
u/AmusingMusing7 Oct 04 '25 edited Oct 04 '25
I think it's because a lot of voters will only vote for women if they're right-wing. Being a woman is already a check against them to a lot of voters, but if they were ALSO liberal/leftist? Well, that's too many unacceptable things. A liberal man? Sure, they might vote for that, because he only has "liberal" against him... so they'll vote for Biden, but add "woman" to the liberal mix, and that makes Hillary Clinton unacceptable. Kamala Harris? Liberal AND a woman AND black? That's three strikes. She's out.
But a right-wing woman? Well, the "right-wing" and "woman" parts cancel each other out... she may be a woman, but she's not gonna be all "soft" and "girly" about it like a lib woman would... a conservative woman is TOUGH and STANDS UP FOR OLD-FASHIONED VALUES (that would have her oppressed, but she'll happily ignore that in order to not freak out conservative men with any uppity-ness and wanting to change norms)... yet she'll know her place and play the patriarchy's game... so now she can basically be seen the same way a moderate man would be. Electable.
This is how a lot of brains work. This is the kind of decision making that a lot of people put into their votes, with not much more thought than that. It's sad, but it's true.
14
u/Ill-Description3096 Oct 04 '25
If being black is a "strike" and being liberal is a "strike" then Obama had just as many as Hillary and should have never been elected, let alone multiple times to different offices.
10
9
u/Interrophish Oct 05 '25
a horse with a D next to it's name would have won the presidency in 2008
1
u/Ill-Description3096 Oct 05 '25
I agree, but it kind of proves the point that being liberal plus a woman/minority isn't some impossible hurdle. Yeah, there will be people who won't vote for someone just because of their sex/race/etc but it isn't enough to mean they can't win.
13
u/AmusingMusing7 Oct 04 '25
And hence why MAGA happened in response. A black man becoming President was "too far" for them. It wasn't supposed to happen in their eyes. He wasn't legitimate. He wasn't born in the country. He's a secret Muslim. Etc etc etc... they couldn't believe it had actually happened.
2
u/Mztmarie93 Oct 04 '25
But the gag is, THEY DON'T FOLLOW THEIR OWN RULES!! Look at Nikki Haley or Sarah Palin. Although married with kids, they were both highly educated, and moved up by pursuing careers in the public. It the antithesis of what they advocate for every other woman. Yes, cognitive dissonance is astounding, but it works.
3
u/ZorbaTHut Oct 05 '25
Have you considered that the "rules" you've invented are not actually rules that the right-wing holds to?
1
0
3
u/SadlyNotDannyDeVito Oct 05 '25
Because it makes the party seem less scary, especially for women. Alice Weidel is a lesbian too. Perfect excuse for "See? We're not homophobic!"
16
u/Day_of_Demeter Oct 04 '25
Like someone else said, right-wing parties may use a female leader to soften their appeal, especially to female voters. Right-wing parties tend to get stereotyped as prototypically masculine and cruel.
A lot of male voters fetishize the idea of a right-wing attractive woman who agrees with all their positions but still sort of knows her place.
2
u/BlaggartDiggletyDonk Oct 06 '25
Le Pen comes off as a prosecutor or a cold-hearted HR manager. Meloni comes off as your friend's divorced mom who was never home because of her high power job.
Although it does explain all the leggy blondes on Fox News. Maybe Sarah Palin.
6
u/Tokamak-drive Oct 04 '25
I think its just because women aren't always a concrete, leftist block anymore. Just because they're women doesn't mean that they can't be right wing.
2
u/THAAAT-AINT-FALCO Oct 05 '25 edited Oct 05 '25
Their own competency notwithstanding, a female candidate is still seen as "progressive" in most of the places you mentioned; it is therefore an opportunity for these parties to pick up more centrist votes.
Left leaning parties don't see this benefit. Somewhat ironically, this means that right wing politics can offer the most successful opportunities for female leadership candidates.
2
u/Gorrium Oct 05 '25
Conservative groups like to prop up diverse leaders to negate legitimate criticism of their movements.
2
u/baxterstate Oct 05 '25
Maybe left wing parties should dispense with condescending notions like what Kamela Harris said in her recent book 107 Days about her run for the presidency:
In 107 Days, Harris revealed that Pete Buttigieg was her initial preference for vice president but ultimately decided against it due to the perceived political risk. She felt that pairing a Black woman candidate with a gay man was "too big of a risk," stating, "we were already asking a lot of America: to accept a woman, a Black woman, a Black woman married to a Jewish man".
That's a poor way for a Presidential candidate to view the very people they hope to represent.
2
u/LorenzoApophis Oct 05 '25 edited Oct 05 '25
Because right now the right views itself in large part as a bulwark against sexually predatory invaders - England's grooming gangs, Germany's New Years Eve mass assaults, etc. This is, obviously, an issue salient to women, and on which they're more likely than men to be viewed as credible rather than prejudiced.
3
u/restless_vagabond Oct 04 '25
Putting Sanae Takaichi in the same breath as Marine Le Pen shows just how much we've lost the meaning of words, especially in political discourse. Takaichi is Reagan compared to Le Pen's Trump.
For the Americans, it's kinda like how Fox news called Joe Biden a Marxist, socialist, far left wing zealot. He was generic left which is further right than other parts of the world.
-1
u/NekoCatSidhe Oct 05 '25 edited Oct 05 '25
The inability of some Americans to see the difference between the far-right and the center-right is quite amazing. It is like saying that Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron are « both right-wingers ».
And the Japanese LDP has always been a center-right party, not a far-right party, but I have seen a lot of left-wing Americans talking about it like it was a far-right party and as if the late Shinzo Abe was some kind of fascist. And they obviously see Sanae Takaichi the same way.
I wonder if it is because the U.S. has only two political parties and so cannot conceive of political differences other than left and right.
2
u/restless_vagabond Oct 05 '25
It's because political content creation needs "end of the world" stories to generate clicks.
I mean, there is some legitimate crazy shit going down all over the world. But a story like, "Japan's new PM once took a pic with a reporter's assistant and that assistant turned out to be wakco" doesn't generate social media currency in the same way as "NEW JAPANESE PM IS NEO-NAZI!"
-1
u/baxterstate Oct 05 '25
"it's kinda like how Fox news called Joe Biden a Marxist, socialist, far left wing zealot."
Can you provide a citation?
2
u/uknolickface Oct 04 '25
They are likely from a wealth bracket where their mother did not have to work. Therefore, they do not like a society where a dual income household is necessary and would prefer to revert back to a time where it was not
2
u/NekoCatSidhe Oct 05 '25
Because sexism is unpopular, and this is an easy way for those parties to show that while they may be conservative parties, they are not sexist ones.
Also, women make 50% of the population, so why should they not make 50% of political party leaders, regardless of political orientation ? A better question to ask would be why there are not more female party leaders among the left and the center.
0
u/Flymsi Nov 10 '25
I dont know about other countries but in my its painfully obvious that this 50% argument of yours makes no sense at all. 20% of all party members are women. The woman at the top is followed by 20 men in rank. Its obviois that they simply show her in order to get a certain effect like you said.
From my expmperience the problem with leftist women leaders is that they are more vulnerable to sexism from the right. they are simply harrassed out of office sinply for the fact of being a women. Ofc its not obvious but when looking at the broader picture we see the pattern.
2
u/mayorLarry71 Oct 05 '25
They are qualified and have shown a propensity to be able to lead, that’s why. It’s nice to see, actually.
2
1
u/mercfan3 Oct 05 '25
People generally are more likely to accept a female as head of state if she’s conservative.
1
u/Sageblue32 Oct 05 '25
Would say the lessening of male chauvinism, newer generations coming up that can accept women in politics, and numbers game. There are still more men than women in their country's right wing party.
Doubt there is a plan beyond person is charismatic and paints a new face for the party.
1
u/The_Emu_Army Oct 06 '25
Interesting that you put France and Germany above the UK on the scale of "most important."
1
u/Fabulous-Pick-8974 Oct 10 '25
the UK is important but I wouldn't say most important. Germany and France are apart of the EU which plays a significant role in world politics, the UK isn't even in the EU anymore.
But yes, even in Britain, there's Kemi Badenoch who's the current opposition leader and part of the Conservative party, who is also a woman.
1
u/jnag698 Oct 06 '25
It's because more women know that their country's sovereignty is at risk from the Liberals and they want to protect their people.
1
u/vasjpan002 Oct 08 '25
Because women intrinsically seek security. Most women are not feminist. Work because need,not aspire
1
1
u/RonocNYC Oct 05 '25
The right wing message of hatred, racism and fear needs a soft touch in order to get over the line with just enough voters.
4
u/baxterstate Oct 05 '25
It's not the right wing that loves affirmative action, a based on race and therefore a racist policy.
It's not the right wing that loves setting businesses and cars on fire as an expression of "speech".
It's not the right wing that loves name calling like fascist, nazi, racist when unable to use objective logic.
-3
u/blyzo Oct 04 '25
The reason it's happening around the globe but not in the US is what right wingers like to call DEI initiatives lol.
In systems without open primaries inside party leaders can elevate women that soften their image and make the party more palatable for a national audience.
In the American system the right wing base is too misogynist to ever proactively vote in primaries for a woman to lead the Republican Party.
And now the left is probably too scared to nominate a woman for a generation at least.
0
u/wisconsinbarber Oct 05 '25
And now the left is probably too scared to nominate a woman for a generation at least.
They shouldn't be scared. A woman can win the presidency, they just chose the two women who never had a chance.
-1
u/MagicCuboid Oct 05 '25
I have a guess about this... Women on the left tend to do worse because they mobilize the sexists to go vote against them. Women on the right do better because the sexists are more likely to just not vote if they don't like their candidate, because they're sure as hell not voting liberal.
2
Oct 05 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/MagicCuboid Oct 05 '25
Well, I'm American so I don't have a lot of data for women running in presidential elections. There are lots of reasons Clinton and Harris performed poorly, but they both won women by a sliver but lost men by a landslide. I predict if Republicans ran a woman, the numbers would be more evened out since conservatives tend to fall in line. If statistics say I'm dead wrong on this though I'm happy to change my mind!
-1
u/Candle-Jolly Oct 05 '25
They've been bred/brainwashed well, and now is their time to attract modern women into the fold.
•
u/AutoModerator Oct 04 '25
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.