«

»

GENDER CHARACTER OF ELECTORAL PREFERENCES

In the political quarters of our country discussions arise from time to time concerning the possibility of participation and the level of support by the Belarusian electorate of a woman-candidate for presidency. Quite a number of people speak in favour of this idea referring to the experience of the neighbouring countries (Germany, Finland, Lithuania, etc.), in which women rather confidently pushed men out of the highest political office. May this idea be realized in Belarus? What is the attitude of the Belarusian electorate to a woman-candidate and does she have any chance to outdo a man-candidate in fair competition (It is clear that the specific character of the presidential election campaign in Belarus does not afford any ground for the gains of other candidates today at all)? Surely, much depends on concrete personal traits, on the role of the person in the social life as well as many other factors. But nevertheless a general attitude of the electorate to this idea might appeal to the readers. Moreover, the data of IISEPS June survey make it possible to evaluate this attitude.

As the opinion poll data show, today the electorate’s support of a woman-candidate is still rather insignificant: only 6.6% of respondents expressed their willingness to vote for a woman (42.7%, for a man, another 46% asserted that the candidate’s gender did not make any difference for them). These data are also confirmed by the answers to another question dealing with the topic (Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question, “There are different points of view on the participation of women-candidates in the presidential election. Which one do you accept?” (more than one answer is possible)

Variant of answer

%

Against (55.6%)

A country should be ruled by a man

27.1

Politics is not a woman’s business

17.1

There are no worthy candidates among women

6.9

A woman must keep the house and raise children

4.5

For (18.2%)

If a woman becomes president, care about people and people’s needs will improve

5.1

If there are more women in politics, there will more orderliness

4.1

I will vote in favour of a woman-candidate for presidency, as her womanhood will have a positive effect on the political environment in general

4.0

I am a woman, I am at one with women and I will support them at the elections

2.6

I am tired of men in politics, for positive changes it is necessary involve more women in this sphere

2.4

Neutral (60.2%)

A woman will never be elected president in Belarus

18.0

A candidate’s gender won’t influence my choice

42.2

As can be seen, there appeared three times fewer declarations in favour of a woman-candidate than against her (18.2% vs. 55.6%). Thus, the present-day Belarusian society is not largely ready to support the idea of a woman-president.

Let us take a look at the social ”portraits” of the proponents and opponents of a woman-president. For this purpose we shall use the grouping of respondents according to the results of answering the question, “The candidate of which gender would you prefer to vote for at the next presidential election?” Those willing to support a woman-candidate will be nominally referred to as “phylogynists” and their opponents as “misogynists”.

Even the socio-demographic characteristics of both the groups reveal significant differences (Table 2). Naturally, among the phylogynists women prevail, and among misogynists, men, though one can see that there are enough women among the latter as well (44.6%).

Table 2. Socio-demographic characteristics of the population depending on the attitude towards women-candidates for presidency, %

Criterion

Phylogynists (6.6)

Misogynists (42.7)

Gender:
Male (46.2)*

21.8

55.4

Female (53.8)

78.2

44.6

Age:
Under 50 yrs (61.1)

70.2

54.5

50 yrs plus (38.9)

29.9

45.5

Education:
Subsecondary (21.2)

21.1

24.2

Secondary and vocational (64.3)

68.0

63.5

Higher (incl. incomplete) (14.5)

10.9

12.4

Social status:
Private sector employee (24.8)

22.2

22.8

Public sector employee (37.1)

42.8

34.8

Student (6.2)

5.4

4.5

Pensioner (26.7)

20.7

33.4

Average income per capita:
Under MCB (52.9)

63.6

53.3

Over MCB (46.9)

36.4

46.4

* Hereinafter results of the nation-wide poll are given in brackets

Phylogynists are vividly younger than misogynists, which is also quite foreseeable in view of a stronger addiction of senior citizens to patriarchal vows. As for education level, individuals with secondary general and vocational training dominate among phylogynists. Among misogynists this level of education is also prevailing, however in this group the percentage of undereducated individuals and individuals with higher education is slightly higher as compared to phylogynists.

Among phylogynists there are one quarter more public sector employees than among misogynists, while in the latter group there are 1.6 times more pensioners. As regards the level of income per capita, one can see that misogynists are a bit richer than phylogynists, which, frankly speaking, might have been expected due to age differences.

According to the data of Table 3, the economic preferences of people depending on the attitude towards women-candidates differ not very much. Though in both the groups those predominate, for whom the economic situation in the country is more important than its independence, yet among phylogynists there are slightly more such people in comparison with misogynists (71.2% vs. 64.7%). Correspondingly, there are slightly more independence supporters among the latter than the former (27.6% vs. 22.7%). In the misogynist group the number of those, whose material standing has improved for the last quarter, is insignificantly higher (17.2% vs. 12%), among phylogynists there are more of those whose standing has worsened (25% vs. 20%).

Table 3. Economic preferences of the population depending on the attitude towards women-candidates for presidency, %

Criterion

Phylogynists (6.6)

Misogynists (42.7)

Say, which is more important: improvement of the economic situation in Belarus or independence of the country?
Improvement of the economic situation (62.3)

71.2

64.7

Independence of the country (30.4)

22.7

27.6

How has your material standing changed for the last three months?
Improved (13.9)

12.0

17.2

No change (65.1)

62.1

61.4

Worsened (19.7)

25.0

20.0

Which point of view concerning Belarus is closer to you?
We might expect deepening of the crisis and accumulation of the problems connected with it (17.1)

24.5

16.3

The crisis has already reached “the bottom” and it is not going to become worse (35.7)

32.5

34.9

Belarus has already begun to come out of the crisis (35.3)

33.0

39.5

In your opinion, how will the socio-economic situation in Belarus change in the coming years?
It will improve (24.7)

18.4

29.7

It won’t change (52.9)

60.8

48.3

It will get worse (13.6)

17.5

12.7

Phylogynists are more pessimistic about the opportunities for the economic development of the country as compared to misogynists. In the first group there are 1.5 times more of those who anticipate a further deepening of the economic crisis in the country, while in the other group there are by 20% more of optimists thinking the crisis is coming to an end. Among phylogynists the number of those who do not see socio-economic opportunities in Belarus in the near future, is almost a third higher, while among misogynists there are 1.6 times more those in hopeful mood as compared to the first group.

As for political preferences the differences are more distinct (Table 4). Thus, among phylogynists the percentage of those approving of the line of social development selected by the government of the country and of those disapproving thereof is almost even (the approving subgroup slightly prevails, by 3.1 points), among misogynists this ratio is 2 to 1 in favour of the approving. The percentage of those who would like changes in the country to happen is a bit higher (by 4.9 points) among phylogynists versus misogynists. It is noteworthy that in both the groups more than 60% of respondents support the idea of changes.

Table 4. Political preferences depending on the attitude towards a woman-candidate for presidency, %

Criterion

Phylogynists (6.6)

Misogynists (42.7)

In your opinion, is the state of affairs in our country generally developing in the right or in the wrong direction?
In the right direction (49.5)

43.7

58.6

In the wrong direction (33.6)

40.6

28.8

What statement do you agree with?
Belarus needs changes (62.0)

67.7

62.8

Belarus does not need changes (25.4)

22.7

24.2

What candidate did you vote for at the local election?
For a candidate-supporter of A. Lukashenko (31.2)

26.5

39.0

For a candidate-opponent of A. Lukashenko (9.4)

9.2

8.3

For an alternative candidate (10.7)

15.6

9.6

Do you consider the declared results of Local Council Deputies’ election trustworthy?
Yes (52.6)

48.9

59.0

No (27.3)

28.3

26.0

Trusting:
State mass media (47.9)

44.4

54.0

Non-state mass media (43.9)

44.4

44.7

Among misogynists there are 1.5 times as many of those who have supported the president’s proponents at the local elections, and 1.2 times as many of those who trust the results declared by the authorities. The number of those who trust governmental mass media among them is also a bit higher. Generally, we may conclude that in terms of political preferences there are more supporters of the current political regime among misogynists, while among phylogynists there are more of those who would like to change the regime.

Similar conclusions might be suggested by the analysis of the attitude towards the incumbent leader of the country in both the groups (Table 5). Thus, among misogynists almost two thirds trust the president, and among phylogynists the percentage of the trusting is below 50% (44%).

Table 5. Attitude towards the head of the state depending on the attitude towards a woman-candidate for presidency, %

Criterion

Phylogynists (6.6)

Misogynists (42.7)

Do you trust the president?
Trust (54.3)

44.0

63.0

Don’t trust (34.1)

36.4

28.0

If the presidential election in Belarus were held tomorrow, who would you vote for? (open question)
A. Lukashenko (45.6)

29.3

54.5

Other politician (15.0)

17.5

19.0

A regular presidential election in Belarus is pending. Some politicians and public figures have already announced (or might announce) their bids for presidency. If their names are on the ballot list, who would you vote for? (closed question)
For A. Lukashenko* (48.3)

31.5

56.1

For A. Milinkevich (9.9)

10.2

10.9

For A. Kozulin (7.5)

5.4

7.0

For S. Gaidukevich (3.5)

3.6

4.5

* Other politicians gained less than 3% each

The open rating of A. Lukashenko is 56.1% among misogynists, whereas it is lower among phylogynists, 30%. The correlation of the closed rating in both groups is approximately the same: 56.1% vs. 31.5%.

However in respect of foreign policy problems the divergence in views in both groups proved less expected (Table 6).

Table 6. Attitude towards some foreign policy problems depending on the attitude towards women-candidates for presidency, %

Criterion

Phylogynists (6.6)

Misogynists (42.7)

If nowadays a referendum were held in Belarus on the question, whether Belarus should enter the European Union, what would be your choice?
For (36.4)

32.9

38.0

Against (39.4)

48.6

38.1

If a referendum were held today on the integration of Belarus and Russia, how would you vote?
For integration (29.3)

28.1

32.0

Against integration (48.6)

54.7

45.9

If you had to choose between integration with Russia and European Union membership, what would you choose?
Integration with Russia (37.7)

47.7

37.7

EU-membership (38.9)

35.4

36.9

As can be seen, among misogynists there exists an ideal fifty-fifty split concerning the issue of EU-membership or choice between Russia and EU. In each case the opposing points of view are held almost by two of five representatives of this group. Only when choosing a solution in respect of the integration of Belarus and Russia, the opponents of this idea numbered 1.5 times as many as the supporters (45.9% vs. 32%).

Yet, among phylogynists the percentage of advocates of integration in any direction is below 30%, whereas there are 1.5-2 times more of opponents. Otherwise, in this group the advocates of non-integration prevail. Only when the question is put alternatively – either Russia, or EU – there appear to be one third more supporters of the integration with Russia among them (47.7% vs. 35.4%). This position might be considered immanent in this group of respondents, whereas the misogynists’ views in this respect are probably influenced by the position of the country’s leadership.