The Poison of Perception

Mention the word president, prime minister, or premier, and chances are the image that comes to mind is of a man rather than a woman.  

Not only has the idea been ingrained in the popular consciousness after centuries of observing men in seats of power, but it is also supported by the current data. According to the Reykjavik Index for Leadership,* which measures how people perceive the suitability of men and women for leadership roles, women are seen as 15–20% less suited to be leaders than men, regardless of experience or qualifications. These findings suggest that fostering women’s leadership requires a profound shift in attitudes across several social and cultural factors.

Appearance 

Women candidates face greater scrutiny than men with respect to their physical appearance. Not only are women held to higher standards of attractiveness, but their looks figure more significantly in voters’ overall attitudes toward them. Women deemed “unlikable” face even tougher barriers to entry. A recent study in France found that women candidates who were not smiling in photographs reduced their chances of selection by 3% more than unsmiling men. At the same time, those who smiled too much were seen as too frivolous and “feminine”— and thus too “weak”—to handle “weighty” matters such as national security, crime, or foreign policy. 

Younger Men, Stronger Bias

Data indicate that men are generally less likely to support the idea that women are as suited for leadership as men. Strikingly, this gap is compounded by generational factors. Contrary to expectations, the Reykjavik Index found that younger respondents (aged 18–34) in general, and younger men in particular, exhibited equal or greater levels of bias against the idea of women’s leadership than older respondents. Such divergences suggest that traditional social biases, rather than dissipating, are merely evolving in ways that ultimately reinforce a gendered status quo.

Feminine and Masculine Work

Long-standing cultural associations between gender and specific types of work have traditionally consigned women to certain professional sectors, such as education, healthcare, and childcare. While it is noteworthy that the Reykjavik Index records higher rates of acceptance of women’s leadership in these areas, this positive reception does not extend to areas such as defense, engineering, and, crucially, governance, all of which are linked to “masculine” traits such as physical strength and decisiveness. Such stereotypes continue to limit opportunities for women while also constraining men who may wish to enter fields deemed “feminine.”

The implications of these (mis)perceptions are far-reaching. Politically, they influence voting behavior and candidate selection, thus limiting representation and fostering inequitable policy. Socially, they reinforce unhelpful gender norms, shaping expectations from an early age and perpetuating cycles of inequality. It is only by challenging and overturning entrenched biases such as these that women can truly step forward on an equal footing and heed the call to lead.

Sources: The Conversation; Lean In; LSE Business Review; Northwestern University Institute for Policy Research; Reykjavik Index for Leadership; Unstereotype Alliance; World Economic Forum

*The 2025–26 Reykjavik Index reports data gathered primarily among developed countries (the G7, Iceland, Australia, and New Zealand), with the addition of Kenya and Nigeria.