By Evi Tsakali,
“Behind every great man, there stands a woman” you have probably heard of that cliché before. It is a saying that I personally find problematic in many ways, especially in the contemporary context; yet it took me a university course related to gender studies to realize that -though controversial- this cliché finds its dose of truth when examined through the lens of the concept of social capital.
Even though he was not the one that introduced the notion of “social capital”, Robert Putnam related the term to the field of political science, and it is his definition that I will use to base this article. According to Putnam, social capital refers to “features of social organizations, such as network, norms and trust that facilitate action and cooperation for mutual benefit”.
As it was common in the field of political analysis during the 20th century, indifference for the gender-related factor resulted in bias in favor of men when it comes to social capital. Even Putnam’s initial research in Italy was conducted basically in mostly male populated spaces, like sports clubs. Hence, the claim that men are richer in social capital is rather misleading, since at the time there was no essential piece of information regarding women’s social capital. It was towards the end of the century that Peter Hall illustrated through his research how social capital has been retained in Britain especially through the increasing participation of women in local affairs. Putnam maintained a more neutral position in the beginning, however -in his latest work “Bowling alone”- he admitted that not only women are not to blame for the crisis of social capital, but -on the contrary- they have a leading role in its preservation. Both researchers examined how women -either working or not, either within or outside the domestic environment- invest more time in the community than the average man; be it by choice or need.
Surveying a larger and more diverse part of the population, they found out that women are more likely to participate actively in local affairs in forms such as but not limited to: being elected in community councils, volunteering, fundraising, getting to know and maintaining good relationship with their neighbors. The aforementioned as well as the general preoccupation of women to sustain strong bonds with their social entourage is associated with their will to ensure the wellbeing of their family. The same research outcomes showed how women are usually the ones to ensure frequent contact and good relations with relatives, to whom they tend to turn to for help for financial and health issues (their male counterparts in the survey turn mostly to their partners, especially in the second case). Besides, the majority of the participants, regardless of their gender, were more likely to trust women when it came to serious matters and turn to them for help.
Thus, the more suitable question is not who is richer in social capital; it is the type of social capital that is different between genders. However, what explains the lower female participation in politics is that -for women- this type of social capital is at the same time a blessing and a curse. The very participation in local affairs and the trust of the entourage that could pave the way to a path in politics is the obstacle that may deter women from political participation; an obstacle that men can take advantage of. Sustaining strong social bonds is definitely an asset, but it a time and energy-consuming one. Therefore, it is not rare that men enjoy the benefits of a social circle and important acquaintances that the women in their life have struggled to build when they decide to plunge in the field of politics. In the end, there is a gender-based difference between who gets on and who gets by, which gives the phrase “Behind every great man, there stands a woman” its special meaning…
References
- Vivien Lowndes (2004), “Getting on or getting by? Women, Social Capital and Political Participation”. British Journal of Political Science and International Relations: vol. 6, is. 1, pg 45-64
- Μάρω Παντελίδου-Μαλούτα, «Το Φύλο της Δημοκρατίας». Σαββάλας: Αθήνα, 2004
