Hungary – Women in Politics in Hungary – Historical to Modern

While in the more advanced half of the
world the call for equal opportunity for both genders in the
social and political spheres has by now become a reality, in
Hungary the change in regime did not bring with it a
substantial qualitative change in the approach to women’s
issues, nor in the opportunities open to women in the practice
of politics. The issue of women’s equality is not among the
priorities of political and economic decision making. As
paradoxical as it may seem at first glance, the gradual
exclusion of women in political decision-making is a
phenomenon of our democratized society. In every one of the
countries involved, following the change in regime, women were
forced into the periphery of the political arena, and nowhere
else as blatantly as in Hungary. In order to ensure that the
social transformation should not be detrimental to women to an
even greater extent than now, it is paramount that we
recognize the danger to women’s interests and,
correspondingly, to strengthen the institutions engaged in
serving their interests. The political sphere has a
fundamental role to play in this respect that cannot be
replaced by any other sphere, nor relegated to any other
sphere, since only this sphere has the means (legal,
institutional, and financial) that are indispensable for
turning intent into reality.

Women are underrepresented
in all layers and spheres of political life. After the change
in regime, the number of female Parliamentary representatives
was drastically reduced, and today, with its present ratio of
women (10.6%), out of 173 countries, Hungary is 120th in line.
This discrepancy is equally glaring in comparison to the
countries of the European Union and the post-socialist
countries alike. In the first elected Parliament after the
change in regime, there were no women in the upper echelons of
political office holders at all. The breakthrough came in
2002, when Dr. Katalin Szili was elected President of
Parliament. Women are also underrepresented in the area of
committee leadership, with their numbers being even lower than
among the representatives.

In accordance with
international trends, the number of women elected as mayors
shows a more favorable ratio than their representation in
Parliament. Opportunities for women in the small towns and
settlements are substantially greater than in big towns and
cities and the lower levels of local government. These are the
entryways through which women have a better chance of entering
the political arena. Women are at an advantage when elections
are based on personal knowledge, since only personal contact
can counteract the adamantly recurring prejudice against them.
Though women enjoy a greater scope in forums of local
decision-making than nationally, their ratio of participation
does not satisfy the principle of parity democracy, which
relies on the ratio of men to women within a particular
population as its gauge.

The number of women in
government is negligible. In the wake of the change in regime,
one woman was entrusted with the office of minister without
portfolio, while today two women hold top government posts
(Dr. Kinga Göncz and Dr. Mónika Lamperth). In the second layer
there are 2 – 4 under-secretaries of state, and 4 – 5 deputy
under-secretaries of state who are women. While the
institution of government itself has been showing steady
development, the substantial setback we are experiencing today
in the role that the institution responsible for equal
opportunities are playing has resulted in these institutions
being relegated to a lower level of the hierarchy. The
elaboration of a policy for women in government is yet to be
worked out.

The ratio of women leaders at the top of
the various parties and unions is also low. Simultaneously
with the change in regime and as part of it, the women’s
movement was pluralized and the various parties and unions had
sections dealing with women’s issues. The women’s
organizations are playing a major role in the recognition,
popularization and safeguarding of women’s interests. The
women’s sections of the parties and unions, on the other hand,
lack effective power, and the number of organizations in the
developing civil or public sector dealing with women’s issues
is extremely low (189 out of 65 thousand). The civil sphere is
under-financed, and its influence is limited. Given the lack
of government support and sufficient experience, further
organization along these lines is difficult. The movements are
not strong enough to organize themselves, while their efforts
and attention are directed at the everyday struggle for
survival. Women in general also show little interest, while
the active nucleus has not yet found the common goals and
programs that would make the mass of women spring into action.
The cooperation between the feminist movement and
scientific-academic feminism as well as the various women’s
organizations representing different ideologies is next to
nonexistent.

When compared to their importance to
society, the insufficient participation of women in the
decision-making bodies holds up a mirror to their place in
society.

Their greater participation in politics
presupposes a change on every level of political activity,
while the cooperation of everyone in politics is necessary for
the development of a “female friendly” perspective.

The
political leadership is insensitive to women’s issues and
women’s equality. The demands for equal opportunity and its
major strategies worked out by the European Union can be found
only in traces. If the political leadership pays attention to
the subject at all, it does so exclusively with regard to
population growth and the family, with disregard to the
special needs, expectations, and opportunities for women, the
conditions for their fulfillment and their development as
human beings. Since women’s policies and their handling as a
priority issue is lacking on the governmental level, any steps
taken do not crash through the barriers of financial
priorities. The priority of the European Union for equal
opportunity has not been realized in action. The Union is much
more interested in economic stabilization than the policing of
equal opportunities strategies. For lack of demand from
outside, the demand for equal opportunities for women has
always been and will remain a function of economic
interests.

Parliamentary and local elections also
clearly indicate that election results depend on all the
participants, the parties, the nominees, and the voters. The
parties do not nominate women who could run for office in
sufficient numbers, the women do not accept their nomination
in sufficient numbers, while the majority of the voters vote
for male candidates. Unlike in the leading countries of the
European Union, political parties in Hungary do not resort to
“positive discrimination” in order to satisfy or increase what
might be considered the acceptable ratio of men to women in
politics. The political parties do not feel the negative
effect of the absence of women’s abilities because there are
plenty of “suitable” men for the political posts. The ability
of men to achieve their aims and their capitalizing on their
connections is greater than that of women, and the men in
decision-making prefer to see other men in positions of power.
Except for the young, metropolitan, educated layer of society,
popular opinion is conservative, and considers the wider
participation of women in politics unnecessary. People trust
women less than men, and as voters, they let the country know
it.

From the point of view of education, the
necessarily social conditions for women to participate in
politics are given. Other conditions, however, are not
favorable. The level of women’s employment has declined and is
appreciably below the European Union average. The declining
financial conditions of Hungarian families and the burden of
working men (given than they have jobs at all) increasingly
bind women to the traditional role of homemaker, an activity
that in itself is becoming more and more difficult to
organize, leaving women little energy for taking further care
of the family, for relaxation, and the pursuit of hobbies. The
conditions necessary for coordinating the dual rule of women
as workers and homemakers are themselves unsatisfactory (the
reduction of the network of childcare institutions, out of
date home utilities, methods of homemaking left over from the
middle of the last century, the lack of quality services, and
the high price of subscribed meals). The political activity
and presence of women with families in decision-making is not
possible without a reduction in their dual duties and without
the necessary help from society.

The women’s movement
has not lighted upon the things that women’s interests hold in
common, and for lack of this common ground, its definition of
its aims in arbitrary. Given the present social environment,
it is still too weak to become a factor in shaping the face of
contemporary politics. Due to their role in society, women are
missing from their customary set of roles the ability to
integrate into the manly world of power politics. The traits
they have gained in the process of socialization, the
competence gained in the school structure and the workplace,
are not in unison yet with the requirements of a successful
political career. Their style of leadership, however, may come
to fruition during the present century. In the terrain of
political opportunities open to them today, women’s interests
can at best trickle into the political arena through narrow
channels, as a result of which women are being left out of the
redistribution of political power. This leads to a paradoxical
situation, namely, that although democracy is a basic
requirement for bringing the interests of special groups to
the surface and asserting them, it is a society in the process
of democratization that is pushing the disadvantaged layers,
including women, to the periphery of the political
sphere.

If we are to find the alternatives for change,
when searching for the channels of change and opportunity, we
must look at the factors defining the political activity of
women. The example of the advanced market economies proves
that the speeding up of the integration of women and the
acceleration of the recognition that women should be
integrated is the byproduct of the recognition of mutual
interests. Pressured by European requirements, and in the wake
of ratified treaties, the government will hopefully recognize
the necessity for engaging a larger proportion of women in
process of policy making. It will probably take the European
Union’s equal opportunities policies to make the government
change its views on this issue, because the forces that could
bring about the dynamics of change without outside pressure
are missing inside (knowledge and preparedness, openness,
moderation and self-restraint).

The leading party
organizations, during the preparation for the elections will,
in the future, hopefully recognize the necessity of
approaching the principle of parity democracy and will place
more women candidates running for top office on their lists.
The union leaders, too, will hopefully realize that their
sphere of influence with regard to the safeguarding of
interests will have to shift toward female employees, and will
reshape their policies in accordance with the policies of
their more advanced European partners worked out in the
1980s.

In the civil sphere – including the civil
women’s organizations – it is hoped that there will be
increased recognition that self-organization is the major
means of representing special interests and setting limits on
power. It is hoped that in the wake of this new recognition,
they will organize their interest group networks in a more
efficient manner, and that they will make a point of
representing and keeping on their agenda the need for the
realization of equal opportunities, which is part and parcel
of any democracy. The women’s movement will, hopefully,
continue to gain strength as women will come to understand
that they are endangered, and it is hoped that women will join
forces with the activists fighting for the recognition and
enforcement of their interests. They will hopefully define,
from the body of common interests, the aims and goals whose
representation they can trust to willing politicians – men and
women both.

On the basis of the above, we may assume
that a more “female friendly” social environment than what we
are experiencing today will inspire all talented and qualified
women to take up the cause of furthering and safeguarding
women’s interests in the interest of society. What they
achieve may very well convince the political parties to
nominate more women, and the voters to vote for them in
greater numbers. In this process, which will affect every
member of society, education, a means of consciousness raising
on the level of society, should be ensured a major role.