Why Female Leadership is Hard in a Patriarchal Society

I spoke recently at the American Association for Marriage and Family Leadership Symposium about how to navigate the rough terrain of female leadership. I shared problems that female leaders have and solutions to grabbing the microphone, whether the microphone is handed to you or not. One of the first things I said was don’t wait to be asked! Our patriarchal society doesn’t value female leadership because it is inherently afraid of female leaders. This means that the microphone will not be handed to you as easily or as quickly as it is handed to (white) men.

One of the problems I highlighted is that the male is norm. Patriarchy treats white men as the norm, the default standard by which we judge women, truth, and reality, and women are still being treated as the other, the “second sex” as Simone de Beauvoir writes. Seat belts in the car are designed for the male body and the medical profession diagnosing a heart attack by the symptoms men have, are classic examples of how the male is regarded as the norm. And with this being a leadership symposium for mental health professionals, I felt the following questions needed to be asked and answered.

· How are women affected by men being the norm, the truth and reality definer?

· How are female clinicians affected by white male theorists defining what is real and true?

· How can our female clients feel known in the therapy room if white men are the definers of truth and reality?

Even though the mental health profession is female dominated as clinicians and clients, most of the theories we learn in our training are created by white men. White men are teaching us how to understand ourselves as women, our female development, and how we relate in our relationships and families. Carol Gilligan and Naomi Snider write in “Why Does Patriarchy Persist?” the psychology of adolescence is the psychology of patriarchy. Our understanding of adolescent development is “steeped in a culture that was deeply gendered, where separation and achievement were seen as masculine and relationships and love were considered feminine, a culture where the masculine was elevated and the feminine at once idealized (as selfless and caring) and devalued (as the lesser sex).”

One of the struggles I had when I first started working with mothers and daughters was how to understand my clients’ unique perspective. Some of the tools I was taught in my training didn’t help me understand what mothers and daughters were feeling from behind their own eyes. The patriarchal voice that women have internalized and learnt to normalize that teaches them what they ‘should’ feel, think, and need got in the way and replaced their true thoughts, feelings, and desires. This led me to explore female human development theorists that are missing in our training or treated as an optional extra. And through this research I developed the Mother-Daughter Attachment® Model (MDAM). The MDAM helps me, and my students see our female clients from behind their own eyes. It uncovers our clients’ truth, emotional reality, and especially their generational experience with patriarchy.

Another point I made in my talk was that (white) men are treated as natural leaders. Even in this female dominated profession, men have more of the teaching and leadership positions. A student at the symposium told me that her fellow students are female and most of the professors are white men. And as I connected my laptop to the projector at the start of my talk, I realized that I was the first female to speak in that room. The two speakers before me were men. And as I looked out at the room, I noticed that not a single male had chosen to attend, which brought up the following questions for me.

· What does this say about the therapy profession?

· How can the therapy profession serve females if male knowledge and male leadership is promoted?

· How are female clinicians affected by the “men are leaders” norm?

A lot has changed for women since our mothers’ generation and yet very little has changed. All professions and organizations reflect the society they live in, and the mental health profession is no exception. This means that the sexism and gender imbalance that are being normalized within our patriarchal society will likely be normalized within the mental health profession. And the voices that patriarchy silences are likely to be silenced within the mental health profession. This means, as I said in my talk, that female human development and counseling theorists and leaders need to –

· Trust in their knowledge, experiences, and vision.

· Don’t wait for validation from others because it will be harder to find.

· Don’t wait to be asked. Claim the microphone!

· Be careful with well-meaning advice. Check that the advice fits with who you are.

· Don’t define your rights by other people’s sexism.

· Know that all progress relies on people thinking ‘outside of the box’.

And above all surround yourself with true champions and permission givers! Find a few colleagues and friends who truly see you, who know you from behind your own eyes, who don’t project their needs and internalized sexism onto you, and who have faith in your knowledge, power, and leadership.

This leadership symposium did make an effort to listen to and represent the voices that make up the mental health profession. And I hope that soon the norm will be that the speakers must reflect the audience, which means that if 70% of the audience is female, then 70% of the speakers will also be female. And all the other marginalized groups will also be listened to and represented on the stage.