What Will It Take to Make A Woman President?: Conversations About Women, Leadership and Power (41 page)

MS
: There was a recent article in
The New York Times
about women holding more power in the Senate, saying that having more women in the Senate is affecting the “tenor” of the climate there. There was this quote from this Republican senator, Rob Portman. He said of women in Washington, “I don’t want to generalize, because this isn’t true of all of them, but they tend to be interested in finding common ground, so I think it’s going to have and is having a positive impact on the Senate.” Beyond basic equality and fairness, why is it important to have more women represented or to have a woman president? Steering away from making big generalizations, what do you think women would bring to leadership?

EL
: Well, it is generalizations, because obviously there are great differences among all groups, but some generalizations have actually been mapped now, especially in the corporate world. There are so many studies done about how there is a women’s way of leadership that’s different from men’s. Again, I just want to reiterate, some men are more female-like in their leadership, and some women are more male-like, so it’s not everyone,
but you can generalize to say that women tend to be more inclusive, they tend to listen better, they tend to bring people to consensus, and they also tend to think outside of the box of priorities, because they’ve been strangers in the strange land, so they’re not as acclimated to the priorities that have already been set. So they’re not so much on autopilot. They tend to—and this is the same in corporate America as well—ask why. “Why have we been doing it like this the whole time?” And, “We do it a different way.” They question the way things have always been done, because they haven’t been doing them. And this is the same for all minorities. It’s uncomfortable, but it’s a good idea to get new thinking in. And women, whether we like it or not . . . [over] thousands of years—it doesn’t matter if it’s nature or nurture—have been trained to nurture the family. We’re very intelligent people, like men, and our domain has been the family or elementary school, and we have learned deeply what it takes to care for other people. This has been our domain. Fortunately, we’re being allowed now to be in many domains, but we have a collective wisdom in an area that is the most needed now. How do we care for each other? How do we care for our home, the Earth? We know something about this, because we’ve been doing it.

MS
: All these studies say that in addition to the structural obstacles that are there, there may also be self-imposed obstacles that hold women back from wanting to run for office, or even negotiating for a raise or just generally advocating for themselves. Do you think that there are psychological factors that are holding women back from valuing their voice enough to want to pursue leadership positions?

EL
: Absolutely, 100 percent yes. I could not agree more with Sheryl that [part of this] potent brew of social conditioning is that it’s good to be demure, and that makes women second-guess their ability to raise their
hand and say, “My way! Let’s do it my way.” So we’ve been conditioned that way, and some of that is deeply standing in our way, and we must work on it in order to get into positions of power. On the other hand, some of what keeps us from barging through obstacles is actually a great strength that this society does not honor. It’s the value women have, which is: listen to other people, ask for directions, be vulnerable within relationships—meaning, bare your soul, tell your truth, admit your weakness. These are good qualities. I would hate to think that in our race to the top we would let go of some of our most stellar qualities, the very qualities that a new leader needs. This is our big challenge now: to be strong, resolute, not concerned if we’re not liked, able to ask for what we want, able to believe that “I know as much as he knows” . . . I don’t know if you’ve ever watched Brené Brown’s TED talk, the most-watched TED talk. Now, TED is a bastion of masculine thinking, and TED values the brilliance of the mind and technology, but of all the talks that ever were on TED, it’s this woman talking about the power of vulnerability. It’s gotten something like nine or ten million hits. Something in the culture all over the world now knows that there is great power in being vulnerable in relationships, not being dominating, baring your weakness, saying, “I don’t know, I am wrong, I am sorry.” These are not very well-honed traits in the males of our species, and it is what we need, and women need to teach it, and it’s a huge dilemma. How do we remain vulnerable as we race to the top? I don’t have the answer, but I know it can be done—as long as we keep saying that it’s important.

MS
: With the launch and development of the Omega Women’s Leadership Center, and also previously, through the conferences, you’ve been immersed in many of these themes. What have you learned about how to cultivate woman leaders and the whole notion of leadership? What stands out to you as being interesting or surprising or important?

EL
: Well, it always surprises me the hunger women have. You can almost hear a collective sigh and collective shoulders dropping down from ears and a relaxation when you say things like, “Do you think your workweek is way too long and each day extends too long, so that this battle you’re in every day is, how do I balance children and home with work?” It shocks me that these conversations aren’t happening more, but it also touches me that there’s a great hunger for something other than just power for power’s sake, money for money’s sake. Women seem right away to light up and say, “Oh my God, we’ve got to talk about this. This isn’t being talked about. What do we want to create with our power?” And also, [there’s] this kind of looking around guiltily, like,
Am I allowed to talk about this?
Is there really room in any conversation about leadership to talk about my health, my depression, my fears, my children, my marriage? Is there room in this conversation? Isn’t that getting too personal? Isn’t that mixing work and home life? And with the tiniest bit of encouragement—like, no, it’s appropriate. It’s valid. We’ve got to lead in this area. We’ve got to talk about childcare, maternity and paternity leave, shared jobs, priorities for governments. We’ve got to talk about this. We can’t only talk about equal pay and gender parity in heads of corporations. We’ve got to talk about the why—there’s a hunger in women if you get them alone in a room and give them props.

MS
: From an evolutionary perspective, looking at where humanity is on a spiritual level with what’s happening in the world and the paradigms that are changing, are you feeling optimistic, not just regarding women, but in general? Obviously, we are facing serious problems with the condition of the Earth, and with war and violence around the world, yet lately I do feel a little bit of a shift, a little bit of a rising of consciousness. Do you feel hopeful?

EL
: I live and breathe in hope. I am just a lover of life and humans, and I think it’s all a mysterious and glorious dance, even when it’s really hard. But I don’t presume to know what God really has in store for us. I think our modes of perception—our brains, our senses—they’re very tiny and puny and inadequate to really know what’s going on. So I try not to get myself all worked up and even ask that question. I feel like if I can stay full of joy and love and service and do it out of a sense of love and not out of a sense of fear and panic and hatred . . . if I can just stay faithful, then I think my work will be better. So if you ask, am I hopeful? Are we evolving? To be honest, I would have to say I don’t know, but I think so, and I choose so. I choose to know that in my heart of hearts.

KATHY NAJIMY

“I don’t know a girl, a teenager or woman
—
no matter how smart, how feminist, how educated, how cool, how sequestered in the country, how raised by feminist parents
—
I don’t know one who doesn’t have at least three-quarters of her thought process sucked up by how fat or thin she is. So when you have a whole gender, when you have most of the female population, concentrating on something that ultimately means nothing, it usurps the time they might be dreaming of becoming . . . perhaps . . . the president of the United States. So you have fewer women who are up for it, fewer women armed with what it takes to overcome all this smothering of spirit, and, therefore, fewer female candidates to choose from. Maybe
that’s
why we don’t have a woman president.”

K
ATHY
N
AJIMY IS
an award-winning actress, writer, director, speaker, and activist. Her work includes memorable performances in more than twenty-five films and several TV projects, as well as on- and off-Broadway plays. Her films include
Sister Act, Sister Act 2, Hocus Pocus, Hope Floats
, Oscar winner
WALL-E, Soapdish, The Guilt Trip
with Barbra Streisand,
The Wedding Planner, The Fisher King
, and more. Her memorable TV roles include Showtime’s
The Big C;
three seasons as Olive on
Veronica’s Closet
with Kirstie Alley; CBS’s
Numb3rs;
fourteen seasons as Peggy Hill on the Emmy Award–winning Fox hit
King of the Hill; Five
,
directed by Jennifer Aniston;
Desperate Housewives; Chicago Hope;
and more. Kathy starred on Broadway as Mae West in
Dirty Blonde
and won an Outer Critics Best Actress award.

With Mo Gaffney, Najimy starred in and wrote
The Kathy and Mo Show
, her long-running, multiaward-winning, off-Broadway feminist play that won an Obie Award and became two hit HBO specials. In 2005, Kathy was named Woman of the Year by
Ms. Magazine
. For her thirty-plus years of AIDS activism, she has been honored with the L.A. Shanti Founder Award, as well as the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center’s Distinguished Achievement. She is an enthusiastic supporter of women’s and girls’ rights, AIDS awareness, LGBT rights, animal rights, and reproductive rights. Kathy frequently travels around the country to keynote-speak on these issues.

MARIANNE SCHNALL
: Why do you think we’ve never had a woman president?

KATHY NAJIMY
: I think, even with the advances that we’ve made, which are considerable, there’s been a lot of backlash as well. I believe that sexism and misogyny are as alive today in some places as they were twenty years ago. We know women are as smart as, if not smarter than, men, and as capable as, if not more capable than, men, and we actually had a woman running for president who was more qualified than the men running for president. But still, all the knowing doesn’t affect the gut sexism that lives within. Across America and the world, there are still men and women who believe that women are second-class citizens, inferior, and that their sole purpose is birthing, mothering, wifing, and maybe . . . kindergarten teaching. It seems we are not ready to hand our beloved country
over to someone who we really believe—not instinctually or authentically, but because we’ve been taught and conditioned to believe it—is not as qualified simply because she is a woman.

MS
: Are you feeling hopeful? Do you foresee a woman president in your lifetime?

KN
: Yes. In my opinion, I think Hillary Clinton is, at this moment in time, the most qualified person for president. She spent eight years in the White House, not just planning tea parties but affecting change and legislation and traveling the world, building foreign relations—accumulating experience. And for those reasons, I think she is supremely qualified to run this country. One of the only things keeping her out of the White House is our shared agreement that we will care more about her hairstyle and her pantsuit than we do about her experience, intelligence, and how fiercely qualified she is. I can’t think of anybody who would be better for the position. But I also would not be surprised if the wave of fear washes over our country and she never gets the chance.

MS
: I remember interviewing Sheryl Sandberg, and she was talking about the likability hit and the backlash that powerful women often experience—about how women who are openly ambitious or confident are often perceived as unattractive and unlikable, and how one deals with that conundrum in terms of a very intrinsic problem. I’m not sure what the simple answer to that is, other than seeing more women leaders and becoming comfortable with that.

KN
: Well, wanting to have a likable president is human nature. I think if somebody got up there and they reflected all of my personal values but they seemed like the most unlikable person ever, I think I might be hesitant,
because it’s human nature. We gravitate toward things we like. So, man or woman, I don’t think unlikable is going to be voted president. However, we know the reasons that Hillary Clinton is called unlikable are not issues of personality. She’s actually hilarious—hilarious, smart, kind, fierce, committed, charming, perceptive, gracious, and a wonderful, supremely intelligent person. It’s the sexist misconception of what she must really be like to have gotten where she is, and what she must be like to want to be—God forbid—a woman who runs America. Ambition and focus in women scare men, and I think they scare women. Perhaps because she is showing us full potential, and sometimes, someone living their full potential is threatening to folks; it brings up their own insecurities regarding lack of drive and ambition. We’re taught from birth that an assertive, driven woman—a strong, successful, powerful woman—is somehow unattractive, unlikable.