Watch out: the ‘difficult women’ of the world are coming, and they’re after the biggest prizes in leadership.
From Hillary Clinton’s race for the White House, to the two female Conservative leaders currently fighting it out to become the next British Prime Minister, the rise of the ‘difficult woman’ shows no signs of abating.
Indeed the problem is concerning. These women aren’t just determined leaders, like their male equivalents would be, they’re females who stand their ground and have somehow managed to knock down everything in their way — including a few men, no doubt — to get the the top. And they’re not just difficult, they’re “bloody difficult” and should they finally fill those leaderships spots they will be even more “bloody difficult”: wanting things done a certain way, giving their directives, speaking when they should be spoken over. The list of concerning future challenges continues.
We’re wondering what makes a woman a “bloody difficult woman” after the next potential leader of the UK was described as such earlier this week.
Theresa May is one of two women set to become the next leader of the Conservative party, and therefore the next British PM when David Cameron steps down.
The problem is that she’s a “bloody difficult woman”.
At least that’s what Ken Clarke, a 76 year old Conservative politician, said when he didn’t realise the cameras were rolling during a television interview. He went on to compare her to Margaret Thatcher saying, “she won’t be any more difficult than that.”
And so social media responded with the hashtag, #bloodydifficultwoman and #proudtobedifficult with people all over the world supporting May and coming up with suggestions for why she really might be considered difficult.
Is it because she’s gotten to where she is and stuck around, having survived six years in the Cabinet as Interior minister? Is it because she’s somehow managed to break through in politics in the first place, when she should have been knocked off the ladder long ago? Is it because she’s more intelligent than most of the men around her? Is it because she won’t back down? Is it because she continues talking, even when a man attempts to speak over her? Is it becomes she’s strong and assertive? Is it because she’s passionate about her views and is therefore unlikely to be moved?
So what really makes a “bloody difficult woman?” And does any woman who makes it to the top of a male-dominated field have to be “bloody difficult” to get there?
And finally the big question: Is it better to be ‘difficult’ or ‘easy’ when it comes to being a woman?
As for a “bloody difficult man”, well we can only imagine he’d probably be described as being determined, strong-willed, a brilliant strategist, passionate and assertive — he’d be a leader, never a difficult man.
So here’s to all the “bloody difficult women” rising up all over the world, as well as those we have here in Australia. Julie Bishop, Tanya Plibersek, Michalia Cash, Linda Burney, the list goes on and recently acquired a few more names following the weekend’s election. In business and in leadership, such women might be frustrating to some, but they’re inspiring to others and transforming how things are done.
As Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader tweeted: “Amen, sisters.”
