María Elena Wapenka, a former deputy in Paraguay, believes that gender quotas have been a fundamental tool for women to enter politics in a traditionally male-dominated system. She sees quotas as an effective means to increase female representation, as they ensure that women’s voices are heard in decision-making processes—something that was nearly impossible before due to structural barriers. Without quotas, she argues, many women would continue to be excluded from the political system because quotas help balance power and promote equity in a patriarchal system. While not perfect, they address historical discrimination.
On the other hand, Patricia Bullrich, Minister of Security in the government of Argentine President Javier Milei, has expressed her opposition to gender quotas, arguing that such measures can be seen as a form of reverse discrimination and that equality should be achieved through merit and competition.
Both positions are nuanced, and the debate remains a crucial issue in global politics. Critics argue that quotas sometimes result in women gaining political representation without sufficient public support or experience, which could reinforce stereotypes that women access these spaces based on gender rather than ability.
Have Quotas Been Effective in Increasing Women’s Political Participation?
Global experience, particularly in the Americas, shows that quotas have been effective, as there are clear numerical differences in female political representation between systems that implement them and those that do not. Today, it is widely accepted that quotas have successfully increased women’s presence in political spaces, as they help create a “critical mass” necessary for the introduction of gender-related issues. Research suggests that a 30%–40% female presence is required for such topics to be meaningfully addressed.
However, gender parity in Latin America and the Caribbean is still far from being achieved, with women holding an average of only 30% of decision-making positions. Despite advances in quota laws and constitutional reforms in several countries, patriarchal political systems continue to hinder true equality. Women hold 28.7% of ministerial positions, with parity achieved only in Chile and Costa Rica. In national parliaments, female participation stands at 34.9%, with projections indicating that it could take another 40 years to achieve full parity. According to the World Economic Forum, the region has closed 74.3% of its gender gap, showing progress in political empowerment and economic opportunities.
Yet, the reality remains that very few women reach positions of real power, even fewer stay in them (often holding hyper-feminized, low-influence roles), and almost none manage to incorporate a feminist perspective into public policies and government actions that would change women’s conditions.
Reports and common sense alike emphasize the benefits of greater female participation in decision-making. Yet, statistics show that women continue to be excluded from power. Progress is slow and often regresses. Women’s rights are constantly being negotiated, with no structural changes—only women adapting to masculine norms to hold onto power. Every day, at every moment, women’s rights are overlooked, threatened, and undermined.
Parity as the New Standard
In October 2024, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) approved General Recommendation 40, which places gender parity (50-50) at the forefront. According to the Committee, failing to achieve parity will prevent states and the international community from effectively addressing urgent national, regional, and global challenges, including peace, political stability, economic development, climate change, and technological advancements such as artificial intelligence.
CEDAW defines parity as crucial to meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. As of May 2023, none of the 17 SDGs had been fully met, with Goal 5—Gender Equality—lagging significantly behind global expectations. General Recommendation 40 asserts that all forms of inequality are exacerbated by structural discrimination and existing gender disparities in both public and private spheres.
This recommendation marks a shift: parity is no longer seen as a temporary measure or affirmative action but as a universal and permanent principle. Radical feminism has long demanded this: “Without parity, there is no democracy,” and “Parity is a fundamental right of democracy.”
Parity aims for true equality of opportunities and participation between genders, ensuring full equity, structural transformation through changes in power dynamics, and sustainable leadership balance. However, achieving parity is complex as it is a highly ambitious goal. It requires more than just legislative changes—it demands a profound transformation of power structures and social mindsets. It is not just about adjusting numbers but creating a cultural shift to dismantle deeply entrenched patriarchal traditions that hinder gender equality.
Personally, I am convinced that the fight for parity is akin to the struggle for suffrage. It is not a concession from political parties, governing boards, or presidents when selecting their cabinets; it is a political right.
How Can Parity Be Substantive Rather Than Merely Formal?
To achieve meaningful parity, a structural transformation of gender roles and responsibilities in both public and private spheres is necessary. This means fostering a system where men and women can balance professional obligations with family and caregiving responsibilities equally. Solutions could include new labor organization models and redefining concepts such as productivity, monetization, and the care economy.
According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the success of parity in countries like Mexico, Chile, and Argentina has been due to the coordinated efforts of various actors: Women politicians, organized through intra- and inter-party coalitions; Electoral oversight bodies committed to gender equality; Political parties and leaders who genuinely support parity in decision-making spaces; and Social feminist movements that monitor and denounce non-compliance
Often, a dual strategy could be effective: initially implementing gender quotas to ensure immediate representation and visibility while simultaneously working toward long-term parity. This approach would ensure that, as progress is made, political and social structures are capable of sustaining true gender equality.
While some argue that quotas do not solve all problems, such as authentic representation or the quality of participation, it is undeniable that they open doors and highlight female talent in historically male-dominated environments.
The feminist agenda is an agenda of equality, not inclusion. It is not about fitting into a patriarchal system that values masculinity over femininity but about designing a new system where men and women live under equal conditions. Therefore, a national agreement on parity is urgently needed—one in which the state, political parties, the private sector, and civil society commit to creating the conditions for more women to access power.
*Machine translation proofread by Janaína da Silva.
Autor
Psicóloga. Master en Políticas Públicas con enfoque de género. Especialista en Transformación Cultural y Coaching Ontológico. Directora de FeminismoINC. Autora de "Incomodar para Transformar" y "Atrevidas: Manual de trabajo personal por el activismo feminista".
