The Subtle Gender Bias in Politics: What’s in a Name?

At Women for Election, we know that names have great power in politics. How a politician is labelled affects how the public sees them and, in turn, this can either boost or harm their reputation. A clear gender gap we’ve noticed is highlighted by the fact that female politicians are often called by their first names. In contrast, male politicians are often addressed by their last names.  

This slight difference affects how people see women leaders’ credibility and authority, creating a challenge for female candidates and politicians.

In Australia, former Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop were often called “Julia” and “Julie” in the media. At the same time, their male peers were granted the more formal last-name treatment, such as “Turnbull” or “Morrison.” Similarly, New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern was frequently referred to by her first name when she was PM.  

Kamala Harris is the first female Vice President and a Democratic candidate for the U.S. presidential race. She is frequently referred to as “Kamala,” in the media and on the campaign trail. At the same time, male political figures like Biden, Trump or Obama retain the formality of their surnames.

This phenomenon is more than just anecdotal. A study from Cornell University found that men are twice as likely to be called by their last names as women in leadership roles. This bias can extend beyond politics to areas like science and medicine. However, the stakes are often higher for politicians as their public image directly affects their chances of being elected.

Impact on Female Candidates & Leadership

Using first names for women in leadership roles reinforces a perception of informality and familiarity, which can undermine their credibility. While familiarity may make female candidates seem more relatable, it can diminish their perceived authority. This is especially problematic in politics, where voters associate leadership with assertiveness, professionalism, and command—qualities often linked to using last names. 

This can adversely affect a female candidate’s election chances. Voters might see male candidates as more qualified or capable. This is because they are often addressed in a formal way that earns respect. When women are called by their first names, it can perpetuate the idea that they are less serious candidates. 

At Women for Election, we’ve seen that name familiarity can also extend to name discrimination as Australian candidates with non Anglo-Celtic names feel their campaigns can be overlooked by voters and their names go unnoticed on a ballot sheet. This can extend to the business world with research out of King’s College, London, showing that job applicants from ethnic minorities were almost half as likely to receive a call back than applicants with an Anglo-Celtic name. 

In addition, studies suggest that this naming disparity and discrimination reinforces a gender gap in media coverage. Female candidates and politicians are more likely to be subject to commentary on personal traits, family life, or appearance rather than their policy positions. This reinforces stereotypes and distracts from their capabilities as leaders.

Strategies for Change: Addressing the Bias

How does Women for Election suggest that this gender bias for women in politics can be counteracted?

  1. Media Awareness: Media outlets can play a significant role by ensuring female candidates and politicians are given the same respect as their male counterparts. Referring to all politicians by surnames or full names helps maintain professionalism. Media watchdogs can promote more equitable language in political reporting. 
  1. Cultural Shift in Campaigning: Female candidates can embrace the power of their surname. During her presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton frequently used “Hillary” to distinguish herself from her husband. However, as women run for office, using their last names in campaign materials and speeches can foster a sense of authority and command.
  1. Electoral Training and Education: For women considering entering politics in Council or in Canberra, training courses should be sought to help bolster women of all political persuasions and backgrounds to navigate these biases. The Women for Election EQUIP workshop and Masterclass series, as well as the accompanying digital resource ‘Campaign in Your Pocket’, supports future candidates on how to present themselves, manage media, and project authority in their campaigns while focusing on their strengths as candidates.
  1. Public Awareness Campaigns: Educating the voting public on these biases can go a long way. Raising awareness of this issue can encourage more conscious use of language and, in turn, foster a more level playing field for all candidates.

The Path Forward for Equal Representation

Names may seem trivial, but they are a key component of image, authority, and perception in politics. Female candidates face an uphill battle when they run for public office and this subtle bias is just one of the barriers we’ve identified. Others include the candidate selection process, a confidence deficit experienced by women, the potential for an adversarial political culture, increased caring responsibilities that women bear and less cash to deploy for campaigns. However, we can take meaningful steps toward levelling the playing field by increasing awareness, educating voters, and encouraging the media to adopt more respectful naming conventions.

Whilst biases still exist, it’s clear that increasing the number of women in our parliamentary chambers improves culture and inspires other women to see themselves as future political leaders and get involved. Women for Election programs offer women the training to overcome gender bias, develop a strong campaign strategy and build the confidence to get elected. When women are able to exercise political leadership in a manner that is authentic to them, there are gains not just for women and girls, but for the whole of society.