It's not that women don't enter politics. How can we change the "political environment that is difficult to enter"?

"Why aren't more women participating in politics?"

At first glance, this question seems to be asking about the number of women interested in politics or the motivation of women themselves.

However, is that really the question we should be asking?

An article published on August 16, 2026, in Northern Ireland's political media "Slugger O'Toole" approaches this issue from a completely different angle.

It's not that women lack ability or interest in society. Some women run businesses, while others hold responsible positions in schools, healthcare, administration, community activities, and charities.

Yet, they do not enter the world of politics sufficiently.

So, rather than thinking "women lack motivation," shouldn't we consider whether the cost of entering the political world is too high?

This question is equally applicable to Japan.

"Is it worth it?" rather than "Do you want to?"

The original article was written by Elizabeth Clarke, who, after building a career in the public sector for about 20 years, began engaging in politics more seriously in her 40s.

Interestingly, she was not uninterested in politics or community during her youth.

The real issue was that it took time for her to feel she could "go to the political side."

Long-established professional stability. Family life. Child-rearing. Income. Social credibility. And the intense public scrutiny that begins the moment one becomes a politician.

Choosing to run for office is not a simple career change.

For an ordinary company employee, changing jobs doesn't mean having their entire family's names and photos, past statements, attire, and social media posts scrutinized by many strangers.

It's different for politicians.

The moment someone aspires to be a politician, their entire life can be treated as "public property."

And this burden is not necessarily equal between genders.

Especially for female politicians, aspects unrelated to policy—such as attire, makeup, age, marriage, childbirth, children, family life, manner of speaking, expressions, and personality—tend to be subject to evaluation.

The original article does not depict a problem of "no women wanting to do politics."

Instead, it questions whether many people, after calculating what they might lose by participating in politics, decide they don't want to become politicians at such a cost.

The numbers in Japan show the same problem

Looking at Japan, this issue is not an abstract theory.

In the House of Representatives election in February 2026, women accounted for 24.4% of the candidates.

The percentage drops to 14.6% among those elected.

The government has set a goal of having women make up 35% of the candidates in the House of Representatives elections by 2030, but there is still a significant gap from the current situation.

This means that even before voters go to the polls, there is already a significant gender disparity.

This is very important.

When discussing the low number of female legislators, the argument often arises that "it's because voters don't vote for female candidates."

Of course, election results need to be considered.

However, even before that, about three out of four candidates are men.

As long as there is a bias at the entry stage for candidates, discussing the issue solely based on seats is not sufficient.

What really needs to be considered is,

"Why are there so few women running for office?"

That is the question.

The "family" barrier that becomes visible

A survey on women's political participation published by the Cabinet Office in 2025 provides very specific figures on this issue.

Among female local assembly members, 73.6% reported having "challenges" in balancing political activities with family life.

For male assembly members, it was 36.4%.

That's nearly double the difference.

Comparing female and male assembly members further reveals significant differences in areas such as "the assumption or custom that politics is for men," "harassment," and "balancing with housework, childcare, and nursing care."

What emerges from this is that it's not a simple matter of "finding capable women will solve it."

The job of a politician often involves meetings at night or on holidays, community events, election campaigns, responding to supporters, and legislative activities, making "working hours" ambiguous.

Especially in local politics, even local festivals, meetings, and ceremonies can be considered political activities.

So, what about politicians with small children?

What about politicians caring for their parents?

Who will bear that burden within the family?

As long as the burden of housework and childcare is not completely equal between genders in Japanese society, the "job with unclear time boundaries" of a politician tends to be a higher barrier to entry for women.

This is not a matter of personal resolve.

It's a matter of the design of the political profession.

Is the "unique perspective of women" necessary?

Here, there is one thing we must be cautious about.

In discussions about increasing female legislators, it's sometimes said that "women understand women's issues because they are women."

However, not all women have the same political ideology.

Opinions differ among women on childcare policies, social security, defense policies, and the use of different surnames for married couples.

Turning female politicians into "women's issue specialists" can also become another stereotype.

The significance of increasing female legislators is not because "women will necessarily promote specific policies."

It's about not leaving the composition of decision-makers too different from the people who make up society.

People who have experienced caregiving.

People who have worked while raising children.

People who have experienced non-regular employment.

People with disabilities.

People living in rural areas.

People running businesses.

People with roots in foreign countries.

Politics needs individuals with each of these experiences.

Gender is one important aspect of this diversity.

SNS can be both an entry point and a huge barrier to politics

In considering modern politics, SNS cannot be avoided.

SNS has clear advantages.

Even newcomers without financial power or large support groups can directly deliver information to voters.

They can explain policies through videos.

They can also create connections with young people who previously had no interest in politics.

On the other hand, this feature of "direct connection" also means that attacks on politicians are delivered directly to them.

Especially for female politicians, policy criticism can sometimes shift to comments on appearance, age, personality, and family.

A study analyzing hostility towards female politicians online, published in 2026, pointed out that while general hostility is not always higher towards women than men, high-profile female politicians are more likely to face gendered attacks targeting their gender or appearance.

In Japan, the dual nature of SNS is already clearly evident.

Japan's first female prime minister and "female politicians in the SNS era"

In 2026, Japan witnessed an extremely symbolic event.

The presence of Sanae Takaichi, Japan's first female prime minister.

The fact that a woman became prime minister is a significant change in Japan's political history.

However, it is not as simple as "having a woman at the top solves the issue of women's political participation."

Even now, women make up less than 15% of the House of Representatives.

Having one woman at the top and having equal access to political participation for both genders are separate issues.

The SNS phenomenon surrounding Takaichi is also intriguing.

In early 2026, Takaichi's bags, pens, and favorite items gained attention on SNS, leading to a phenomenon called "Sana-katsu," where related products and styles became popular, especially among young people.

In terms of making politicians feel more relatable to those who felt distant from politics, this serves as an entry point for political participation unique to the SNS era.

However, there are challenges here as well.

Male politicians' watches, meals, and fashion also become topics of discussion.

Therefore, it is not necessary to label the attention on politicians' private lives as "gender discrimination."

The problem arises when appearance, family, and behavior become the focus of evaluation over policies, affecting the assessment of their capabilities as politicians.

While SNS makes female politicians more relatable, it also has the potential to strengthen the phenomenon of being evaluated as women before being evaluated as politicians.

What can be seen from the SNS reactions to the original article

The Slugger O'Toole article was just published on August 16, and as of August 17, not enough time has passed to analyze SNS reactions as a large-scale public opinion.

 

Therefore, it is not appropriate to make exaggerated summaries like "there are mixed opinions online."

As far as can be confirmed, the official X of Slugger O'Toole introduced the article, and political figures have also shared it.

Northern Ireland politician Doug Beattie posted on X about how female politicians face not only external pressure and intense scrutiny but also internal biases within organizations.

In other words, one of the currently confirmed reactions aligns with the original article's awareness of the problem that there are barriers both inside and outside of politics, rather than a lack of confidence among women themselves.

This is not a matter of indifference in Japan either.

The limitations of the solution "Women should be more proactive"

In methods to increase female legislators, the following phrases are often used.

"Let's get more women interested in politics."

"Women should actively run for office."

"Women need to have confidence."

Of course, political education and human resource development are important.

However, these words only show half of the problem.

If becoming a politician means,

having to quit your job.

having an unstable income.

finding it difficult to balance with childcare or caregiving.

having the possibility of your family being attacked on SNS.

being persistently commented on regarding appearance or age.

having unconscious biases remain within the organization you belong to.

If such an environment exists, simply calling for "more courage to run for office" is not enough.

What is needed is not to demand courage, but to reduce the amount of courage needed.

Is harassment something "politicians should endure"?

Harassment is a particularly big issue.

According to the latest survey by the Cabinet Office, 53.8% of female local assembly members reported experiencing harassment against themselves, their families, or supporters.

There is also a significant difference in perception between male and female legislators.

Politicians are in a profession that is subject to criticism.

Criticism of policies.

Pursuit in the legislature.

Evaluation through election results.

Monitoring of tax usage.

These are indispensable to democracy.

However, political criticism and personal attacks are not the same.

There is a difference between refuting a policy and hurling sexual words.

There is a difference between demanding accountability from a politician and attacking their children.

If the culture spreads that "since you became a politician, you have to accept whatever is said," those ultimately excluded from politics will not be those who cannot endure the attacks.

It will be those ordinary people who want to protect their normal lives and have to calculate the possibility of being attacked.

As a result, the types of people who can become politicians will narrow.

Is "special treatment for women" necessary?

##HTML_TAG