A nation once deeply rooted in patriarchal traditions, Nepal continues to bear traces of the oppressive legacy. The influence can be seen in the male dominance in politics which fuels the perception that women are secondary players in leadership. Women in politics continue to face a pervasive narrative, rooted in historical stereotypes: men are meant to be strong leaders and women are supposed to be good supporters. Generalized instances of underperformance by women are frequently used to question the collective competence of women leaders. This fallacy not only reinforces irrelevant stereotypes but also disregards the reality that political efficacy is not determined by gender but by individual’s capability, dedication and output.
Renu Chand, a central committee member of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), Member of the Constituent Assembly and current National Assembly member firmly rejects the narrative that women’s electoral losses reflect their incompetence. “Every male who gets a ticket to run for the election doesn’t win; the same should go for women; this is how election results work” says Chand, rejecting the narrative that women’s electoral losses reflect on their personal incompetence. She dismantles the flawed logic that equates electoral losses with weakness for a particular gender only. Chand’s words highlight the double standard that continues to define Nepal’s political landscape; the idea that women must constantly prove they belong, while men are allowed to fail without being labeled or consequence.
Chand further sheds light on the overlooked struggles of women in politics - their inherent multitasking abilities of balancing family and professional roles, showcasing their resilience. She mentions, “some may struggle due to various relevant reasons but it is inaccurate to brand all women in politics as incapable”. Selective criticism on the basis of gender is simply used as a tactic to uphold patriarchal norms and discourage women leaders from pursuing leadership roles. It works by amplifying the shortcomings while ignoring similar failings in men. This bias leads to the continuation of the stereotype that men are better suited for leadership. She recalls how, during Nepal’s civil war during 1995-2006, many women joined the movement and they fought hand in hand with men. “But as soon as the civil war ended, many women were sent back to households while men continued to pursue their political career” she adds.
Member of Parliament Roshan Karki, also a senior leader of National Democratic Party (RPP), highlights, “women are inherently more giving in nature and often sacrifice their career, particularly as mothers, wives and to support their families”. She points out that, “in families where men are involved in politics, women frequently step back to let their male counterparts advance. This self-sacrificing nature along with the societal structures that favor men, pose a disadvantage for women in general”.
Nepali women have been held back, not because of lack of potential but due to denial of equal access to opportunities or acceptance. In Nepal the preference for male children is very strong and that is reflected in terms of educational attainment and other opportunities as well. While this is changing in modern times, its impact is still visible. Former Member of Parliament and Constituent Assembly member Shanti Pakhrin, a member of Communist Party of Nepal (UML), puts emphasis on the transformative journey that women of Nepal have undertaken from restricted domestic roles to prominent leadership positions, women are coming to the forefront. “Since the starting line was not the same for all, we cannot expect the same results instantly”. Pakhrin emphasizes the need for positive feedback rather than negative criticism. In addition, it is equally important to understand that meaningful change requires time and continual support and promotion.
Member of Constituent Assembly, Rita Shahi, a member of Nepali Congress Party, adds to Pakhrin’s narrative by saying, “there is a tendency to impose the incapability narrative while ignoring society’s own role in empowering women”. People easily bring out the incapability narrative but no one ever questions what have I done to make women capable or empowered? What is my contribution?
Echoing Pakhrin’s call to recognize women’s collective progress, Shahi adds another layer by addressing the issue of compartmentalizing women’s issues stressing that treating these concerns as separate will lead to the marginalization of more than half the population. To avoid this, it is necessary to view women’s issues as central to the overall progress of the society.
Women who are in politics of Nepal are slowly and steadily dismantling the barriers that take the form of a deeply ingrained myth of capability and incapability based on gender bias. By showcasing their resilience and determination in the face of these barriers and their stories of balancing family and a career, pioneering achievements and enduring scrutiny reveals their profound strength. This represents a transformation of the political landscape. As Nepal steps into a new era that opens doors for future generations of Nepali women leaders in various sectors, there is a call for action that rings loud and clear: to move beyond limiting beliefs and build a future where every woman’s voice is not just heard but also respected and empowered. The creation of a just society now depends on the young generation, a society where people support the rise of women who are to Nepal’s progress, growth and development.
