The July Revolution of 2024 brought with it a wave of hope for a more inclusive political landscape in Bangladesh. The revolution’s promise of equality and reform fueled unprecedented expectations for women’s political participation. Yet, a year later, that promise seems to have been largely unfulfilled.
While the rhetoric of “female” inclusion persists in formal speeches and declarations, women’s participation national politics remains a distant dream. This stark contrast is particularly evident when comparing the political environment of student council elections, like the ongoing event of Dhaka University Central Students’ Union (DUCSU), with the national political arena. Right now, 62 female candidates are competing in the DUCSU election for the central position, while female leaders are rare in national politics. The question is, why does a university campus offer more fertile ground for female leadership than the national stage? The answer may lie in the distinct requirements and systemic barriers that define each domain.
The upsurge in female student participation in DUCSU elections represents a hopeful paradox within Bangladesh’s challenging political environment. How are women becoming prominent in student councils in this environment, and why don’t we see a similar trend in national politics?
This discrepancy highlights the core issue: the fundamental differences in the demands regarding leadership – demands of campus politics versus national politics. University politics, while competitive, is often more progressive, inclusive, and insulated, especially following the student-mass revolution. The issues at hand are immediate and community-focused, such as campus safety, academic rights, and residential hall facilities. This creates a direct and tangible link between a candidate’s actions and the outcome, making the political process more transparent and rewarding for those who are genuinely committed to change. In this environment, female candidates don’t need the “money or muscle power” that is so often required to compete in national elections. The significant presence of female candidates in recent DUCSU elections proves that when these barriers are lowered, women not only participate but also lead.
Besides, student politics provides a unique space for young women to sharpen their leadership skills without the crushing financial burdens or the threat of severe political violence. The national political arena, conversely, is defined by an entrenched system where success is often predicated on a candidate’s financial and physical power. This reality is reflected in BIGD’s “Youth Politics in Bangladesh” research project. In this study, we found that: a woman’s political prospects in a locality like Sreepur, for instance, are often judged based on the “good family or personal background” of her husband or father, a clear indication that personal merit is secondary to an inherited, male-centric network. This is a vicious cycle where a woman’s value in politics is measured by the pre-existing “money or muscle power” of the men in her life, rather than her own attributes and activities. While both men and women in this society need these resources, women face far more pressure and are burdened with acquiring them, making survival in national politics “nearly impossible” for many.
Furthermore, woman’s political identity, whether new or old, is constantly under threat of character assassination and slut-shaming, regardless of her merits or dedication. It’s a system where “constructive criticism” is replaced by personal attacks based on gender, and social media and the internet have made this situation infinitely worse;
Therefore, the challenges for women in national politics extend beyond financial and security concerns to a deep-seated patriarchal culture that values women for their symbolic roles rather than their substantive contributions. Even women with established political backgrounds are not immune to this pervasive male-dominated culture. Having no established political background makes it makes it even more difficult. The common thread in both cases is that these women, despite their different levels of experience and political backgrounds, faced backlash simply because of “man”-ly politics.
So, the path forward requires a deliberate and multi-pronged approach to dismantle these systemic barriers. First of all, political parties must move past “tokenism” and truly invest in qualified and deserving female candidates by providing a safe space and ensuring their political rights and agency. Otherwise, only showcasing female representation could lead to tremendous backlash. Moreover, all stakeholders need to work together to cultivate a political culture where debate is substantive, not personal, and where women are not judged by a different, harsher standard. Lastly, perhaps most importantly, genuine female participation will only be ensured if there is deep-rooted reform within political parties themselves. This means practicing internal party democracy and ensuring transparency in party financing, which are crucial for creating a truly enabling environment for women in national politics. Otherwise, as previously mentioned, their position will continue to depend solely on dynasty or money. Therefore, without these fundamental changes, Bangladesh’s revolution towards a truly inclusive democracy will remain an unfinished one.
