1. Introduction
Gender equality is recognised as a fundamental human right and a core principle of democratic societies, enshrined in international instruments like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). However, beyond its status as a normative goal, gender equality has increasingly become a significant political issue. Governments and political actors now frequently use gender-equality policies, rhetoric, and institutions within their wider political strategies. This raises the question of how and why gender equality is used as a political tool.
This essay will explore this question, arguing that gender equality has increasingly become a political tool through which governments seek legitimacy, improve their international reputation, mobilize voters, and advance broader political agendas. The use of gender equality in this way is not inherently negative and can sometimes produce meaningful reforms. However, it can also lead to the adoption of purely symbolic policies, the selective implementation of reforms, and the general instrumentalization of women’s rights, where progress is pursued only when it aligns with other political objectives. This essay will examine the various ways gender equality is deployed politically and consider the consequences for achieving genuine, substantive equality.
2. Conceptual Framework: The Instrumentalization of Gender Equality
To understand how gender equality is used as a political tool, it is necessary to distinguish between its different dimensions. As a human right, gender equality is an end in itself, demanding equal rights, responsibilities, and opportunities for all genders (UN Women, n.d.). As a policy objective, it becomes a target for government action, pursued through legislation and specific programmes. However, when gender equality is used as a political instrument, its promotion is motivated, at least in part, by its utility in achieving other goals, such as winning an election or enhancing a state’s international prestige.
This is known as the ‘instrumentalization’ of gender equality, a term used to describe situations where political actors promote gender equality primarily because it helps achieve another, separate political objective (Htun and Weldon, 2018). This is distinct from a genuine policy commitment, where the primary goal is the advancement of equality itself. Instrumentalization often manifests as political symbolism, where governments engage in high-profile but low-impact activities, such as making speeches or appointing a few women to visible posts, to create an impression of progress without addressing systemic inequalities. This strategic use of gender equality allows political actors to reap the rewards of being seen as progressive while avoiding the costs of deep structural reform.
3. Gender Equality and Political Legitimacy
One of the primary reasons governments instrumentalize gender equality is to build and maintain political legitimacy, both domestically and internationally. In the modern era, a commitment to gender equality is often seen as a hallmark of a progressive, democratic, and modern state. By adopting gender-responsive laws and policies, governments can present themselves as aligned with global norms of human rights and democracy.
For example, a government in a post-conflict or transitional state might pass a new constitution with strong gender equality provisions to signal a break with a repressive past and gain acceptance from the international community. However, a significant gap often emerges between the laws on the books and their practical implementation. A government can gain political legitimacy from adopting advanced legislation on gender equality even if enforcement is weak, funding is inadequate, and cultural barriers remain unaddressed (Htun and Weldon, 2018). This creates a situation where the state can claim credit for being progressive while the real-life situation for many women remains largely unchanged, illustrating a clear instrumental use of equality principles.
4. Gender Equality in Elections and Domestic Politics
In the realm of domestic politics, gender equality has become a key issue in electoral competition. Political parties and candidates increasingly use gender equality issues to attract specific demographics, particularly women and younger voters who often prioritise social justice issues. Progressive or left-leaning parties may embed gender equality into their core political identity, proposing policies like gender quotas for political office or expanded parental leave to distinguish themselves from their opponents.
Conversely, conservative or populist parties may adopt a more selective approach. They might support policies that promote women’s participation in the economy while simultaneously opposing reproductive rights or upholding traditional family structures (Geva, 2015). This demonstrates that gender equality is not politically neutral; it is a contested field where different political ideologies compete. The strategic use of gender equality in campaigns can mobilise voters and shape political identities, but it also risks reducing complex issues to simple electoral soundbites, with policies being designed for maximum political appeal rather than maximum effectiveness.
5. Gender Equality, National Identity and International Reputation
Gender equality is also a powerful tool in the construction of national identity and the management of international reputation. States increasingly use their records on gender equality to project ‘soft power’ and present themselves as global leaders. International rankings, such as the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report, have created a competitive environment where countries are conscious of their international image. A high ranking can be used in diplomatic circles to claim a place among the world’s most ‘advanced’ nations.
This can also be used to construct national identity by "othering" different cultures or nations. Political leaders may highlight the oppression of women in other countries to reinforce a narrative of their own nation as a superior defender of women’s rights, a phenomenon sometimes termed 'femonationalism' (Farris, 2017). This strategy can conveniently divert attention from domestic gender inequalities. For instance, a Western government might criticise the treatment of women under a particular regime elsewhere while downplaying ongoing issues at home, such as the gender pay gap or high rates of domestic violence. This selective focus shows how gender equality can be instrumentalized not for the universal benefit of women, but for specific geopolitical and nationalist projects.
6. Gender Equality in Foreign Policy
The use of gender equality as a tool of international reputation is perhaps most explicitly seen in the rise of ‘Feminist Foreign Policy’ (FFP). Pioneered by Sweden in 2014 and since adopted in various forms by countries like Canada, France, and Mexico, FFP aims to apply a gender perspective to all aspects of foreign policy, from diplomacy and trade to defence and development aid (Aggestam, 2021). Proponents argue that FFP represents a genuine commitment to structural change, promoting peace and security by empowering women and challenging patriarchal systems.
However, critics question whether FFP is a substantive policy shift or a strategic branding exercise. Adopting the "feminist" label can significantly boost a country’s international image, positioning it as a progressive and principled global actor. The risk is that the feminist language is used to "gender-wash" conventional foreign policy interests. For FFP to be considered genuine, it must be matched by consistent policies, adequate funding for gender-focused initiatives, and a willingness to challenge allies, not just adversaries, on their gender equality records. The debate over FFP highlights the central tension between genuine commitment and strategic instrumentalization.
7. Critical Analysis: Symbolic Politics versus Genuine Progress
A key danger of the political instrumentalization of gender equality is that it encourages symbolic actions over substantive reforms. Governments may find it politically easier to focus on highly visible but less transformative measures. For example, appointing a woman as a foreign minister or achieving a certain percentage of women in parliament through quotas are important symbolic steps. Such measures achieve descriptive representation—the presence of women in political institutions (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2023).
However, descriptive representation does not automatically translate into substantive representation, which is the actual influence of women on policy and political outcomes (Htun and Weldon, 2018). A political system can promote women to visible positions while leaving the deeper, male-dominated structures of power intact. Similarly, governments may engage in selective implementation, where they advance gender equality only when it aligns with their interests. For example, a government might promote women’s entrepreneurship because it boosts GDP but ignore calls for stronger action on gender-based violence, which may be seen as more politically difficult or costly. This selective approach means that progress can be patchy and dependent on political whim rather than a consistent commitment to women's rights.
8. Conclusion
This essay has argued that gender equality is frequently used as a political tool by governments and other political actors to achieve a range of objectives, including enhancing legitimacy, winning elections, and building a positive international reputation. The political use of gender equality is not always a negative development; political incentives and international pressure can accelerate the adoption of progressive laws and policies.
The critical issue, however, is the distinction between the genuine political pursuit of equality and cynical instrumentalization. The danger emerges when the rhetoric of gender equality serves as a substitute for action, leading to symbolic gestures, weak implementation, and selective application of rights. To assess whether progress is real, one must look beyond what governments say and examine what they do. The key indicators of genuine commitment are not political speeches or participation in international forums, but the consistent implementation of well-funded policies that produce measurable improvements in the daily lives and structural position of women and other marginalised genders. Ultimately, the goal must be to ensure that gender equality remains a non-negotiable human right, rather than a convenient political instrument to be deployed or discarded according to shifting political interests.
References
Aggestam, K. (2021) ‘The ‘F-Word’: Sweden’s Feminist Foreign Policy’, in J. Thomson and K.E. Smith (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Farris, S.R. (2017) In the Name of Women's Rights: The Rise of Femonationalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Geva, D. (2015) ‘Not All a Bed of Roses: Gendering the New European Right’, Politics & Gender, 11(4), pp. 783-792.
Htun, M. and Weldon, S.L. (2018) The Logics of Gender Justice: State Action on Women's Rights around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Inter-Parliamentary Union (2023) Women in Politics: 2023. [Online] Available at: https://www.ipu.org/women-in-politics-2023 (Accessed: 15 October 2023).
UN Women (n.d.) Gender equality and women’s empowerment. [Online] Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/gender-equality-and-womens-empowerment (Accessed: 15 October 2023).
World Economic Forum (2023) Global Gender Gap Report 2023. [Online] Available at: https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-gender-gap-report-2023/ (Accessed: 15 October 2023).
