War's Changing Nature Offers Chance to Redefine Leadership, Empower Women

The underrepresentation of women in politics stems from a system built on male-dominated concepts of power, leadership, and warfare, according to legal scholar Irit Rosenblum. She argues that as long as war and physical strength are primary metrics for authority, men hold an inherent advantage, not due to superiority, but because the "game" was historically designed around these traits.

Rosenblum emphasizes that women have proven their capabilities in military roles, but their entry into these systems often requires them to adopt a "masculine" language of toughness, deterrence, and dominance. This dynamic traps women, forcing them to prove they can perform traditionally male roles, sometimes even better, rather than changing the system itself. Researcher Cynthia Enloe is cited, highlighting how war shapes perceptions of power and leadership, defining who is seen as strong and authoritative.

Rosenblum contends that women, comprising half the population, should not be viewed as a minority to be "integrated" but rather as integral to society. The debate should shift from why women need to be included in politics to why politics fails to represent the society it serves. This failure, she suggests, is partly due to the continued centrality of war in defining leadership.

Furthermore, war simplifies political discourse into "us vs. them" narratives, overshadowing complex societal issues like family structures, aging populations, AI, housing, healthcare, and education. However, the nature of warfare is evolving, with cyber, AI, and knowledge-based capabilities increasingly replacing physical strength. This shift from "muscle" to "mind" in warfare could level the playing field, diminishing the biological advantage men historically held.

Rosenblum calls for women to redefine power not just as the ability to destroy or conquer, but as the capacity to build stable, prosperous societies that do not need war to prove themselves. The true breakthrough, she concludes, will occur when society stops viewing war as the ultimate expression of leadership, allowing for leaders to be chosen based on their ability to build and manage life after conflict, an area where men have no inherent advantage.