Gender-based violence is a global phenomenon and a tool used to maintain women´s subordinate status. All forms of violence prohibit women from occupying leadership position both in the public and private sphere. Of recent, SGBV has increasingly been “politicized”. It exists virtually in all countries of the world, affecting a significant number of women.⁣
Violence against women in politics (VAWP) is violence that occurs within the political sphere but that specifically targets women. It is a subset of violence against women and is slightly distinct from violence against women in elections. Whereas the latter includes violent acts during electoral periods, VAWP is perpetrated during electoral campaigns but also as women come into political positions (Krook/Restrepo Sanín 2016). VAWP has been defined as any act of violence that results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual ,or psychological harm or suffering to women politicians, including the commission of such acts, coercion ,or arbitrary deprivation of liberty in public or private life (Ertürkin 2009).⁣
The main aim of VAWP is to discourage women from engaging in politics or becoming active in politics because of their gender using various forms of violence (physical violence, psychological violence, economic violence, and symbolic violence). Ironically, countries with high levels of women in parliament and a gender-friendly constitution that guarantees a quota for women also have high levels of GBV.⁣
Accordingly, we’ll be discussing the various types of violence inflicted on women in the political spheres. Physical violence tops the list, as it is the commonest. This form of violence involves physical and bodily injuries inflicted on female political actors or their family members and includes domestic abuse, beating, abduction, and even assassination.⁣
Secondly, Sexual violence comprises sexual acts and attempts at sexual acts by coercion. For this reason, women are inhibited from assuming political positions. They are pretty vulnerable when it comes to sexual violence. Research has shown that as men are likely to experience physical violence so also women experience more sexual assault than men in the political sphere. ⁣
Thirdly psychological violence is not left out. It entails hostile behavior and abuse intended to cause emotional damage or mental breakdown as punishment or to hinder action. This form of violence includes threats of physical violence, psychological intimidation, death and rape threats, stalking, character assassination, social boycotts, social sanctions, and family pressure and has the purpose to socially harm the woman in question. ⁣
Furthermore, in a bid to restrict the resources of women, they limit access to economic resources that are otherwise available to men. This approach leaves women frustrated and backing out on politics. The lack of financial support may pose greater barriers to women than to men, as women do not have the same access either to the formal and informal networks that supply campaign funds or to the personal resources to compensate for denied expense claims (Sidhu/Meena 2007).⁣
Fortunately, there are concrete ways policymakers can help put an end to the ravaging violence in politics. These articles will be discussing the three major ways.⁣
Firstly, what we need do is to remove the barriers to employment. As a condition of employment, some job applicants are asked or required to sign agreement that binds them to endure any subsequent disputes—including sexual harassment claims—to arbitration. This means that they are handicapped in the pursuit of the legal remedies they can pursue to combat harassment. Other new hires may be required to sign nondisclosure agreements that Inhibit their ability to speak up about their place of employment, which may effectively discourage or inhibit sexual harassment victims from coming forward.⁣
Furthermore, these types of barriers have hindered women in taking up significant positions in society. As it seems they are undermined in the workspace and barriers to utilize important anti-discrimination protections and enforcement tools. These types of pre-employment barriers undermine workers’ ability to utilize important anti-discrimination protections and enforcement tools—including access to trained investigators—that are essential to surfacing, investigating, and remedying sexual harassment. Policymakers should pass legislation that prohibits these types of agreements so that applicants are not constrained in their ability to address workplace harassment.⁣
Secondly, the need to strengthen the implementation of sexual harassment laws. As it seems lost in much of the conversation about sexual harassment has been a focus on the tools needed to ensure that the law is enforced consistently and aggressively. This means having the resources necessary to investigate claims fully and conduct compliance reviews where applicable.⁣
It also means improving data collection so that there is better information to assess different rates and trends in claims filings and resolutions by industry, occupation, and other factors. Listed here is some agency which deals basically in ensuring equal opportunity: Federal enforcement agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. Also, policymakers should target more enforcement dollars toward the extensive analysis of systemic barriers and employers’ effectiveness in promoting women and people of color, as well as industry-specific analyses of the prevalence of sexual harassment.⁣
Thirdly, another important aspect of eradicating sexual harassment is helping reform and transform workplace cultures. This change has got to start by establishing a fundamental perceptive of sexual harassment not solely as a clash between individuals, but also as a total workplace problem in need of a structural solution. Too often, concentration is focused on resolving a particular contention without more deeply exploring the workplace environment from which the allegation came from.⁣
In the same vein, to identify the barriers that can aid, shield, or dismiss harassing behavior, policymakers must take a closer look at how many workplaces function. While employers should take the lead in changing workplace culture, policymakers can take action as well. It is two-way progress. They could, for example, promote legislation requiring employers to provide new hires with basic information about their sexual harassment policy, internal mechanisms for reporting complaints, and available legal protections. Policymakers could also require employers to report annually to federal enforcement officials a summary of recent settlements related to sexual harassment and any formal findings of discrimination violations, as well as place limits on the awarding of lucrative federal contracts to repeat violators of discrimination laws. All this would in no small measure help in combating sexual harassment⁣


Leave a Comment