It is a groan-worthy platitude that American politics is dominated by old men. The United States ranks 75th in the world for women’s representation in government, with women comprising only 25 percent of the Senate and 23 percent of the House. But increasingly, candidates from outside the “Old Boys’ Club” are challenging outdated notions of what an American leader should look like. The power of young women, and the obstacles they face to actualizing that power, remain under-evaluated and unresolved in a country that has yet to elect a woman president. In “GIRLS GIRLS GIRLS,” we explore the potential of young women to shape American and global politics, giving them the analytical attention popular media often fails to.
In the final issue published by the HPR’s 51st editorial board, four writers consider the role of young women in American politics. In “The Nuanced Push for American Sex Education,” Rachel Janfaza investigates the roadblocks to comprehensive sex ed in the United States, despite its far-reaching and widely accepted benefits for adolescents. Alexa Jordan calls for a more inclusive Mormonism in “More for Mormon Women,” warning that current doctrine may drive young women out of the religion. In “The Rise of the Pynk Vote,” Kate Gundersen considers the increasing influence of young female voters, who are pushing for action on climate change, gun control, and the right to choose. Chloe Levine uses high school Quiz Bowl tournaments as a lens into early gendered discrimination in “The Academic Edge,” arguing that women’s educational disadvantages begin long before college.
At the Harvard Political Review, we are no strangers to these challenges. When I joined the magazine in 2016, less than one third of our leadership positions were filled by women. There were infrastructural barriers to women’s success, the gravest being the absence of reporting infrastructure for cases of sexual harassment and assault. But beyond these tangible infrastructural failures, our magazine faced challenges common across academia, politics, and journalism alike: In male-dominated fields, women are less likely to see themselves in leadership, a form of disenfranchisement that perpetuates male dominance. This year, we have worked tirelessly to combat gendered barriers in our content and our community, as well as those affecting ethnic, racial, and sexual minorities. We have done this not only because it is the ‘right thing to do,’ but also because we fail in our mission to serve as a platform for Harvard students when we fail to represent our campus’s many voices.
It is with both happiness and nostalgia that I write my final note to you, our readers, as president of this magazine. It has been an honor to work alongside the 200-plus editors, writers, designers, tech wizzes, photographers, and business gurus who together create the content you see, in print and online. I am most proud of the progress we have made this year toward becoming an accessible, inclusive, and welcoming platform for Harvard students of all identities, not just those who historically see themselves in politics and journalism.
Our progress became clear to me during our early November election, a cacophonous and exhausting 10-hour process that resulted in the magazine’s first-ever majority-female masthead, and likely the most ethnically and racially diverse team in our history. These women have long been vital to our success yet chronically underrepresented in our leadership. It is with great pride and confidence that I pass the reins to our first female president in five years, Alexis Mealey, whose vision for the magazine has been pivotal to my own. I hope you continue to enjoy our magazine for many years to come, and thank you for being part of our extended family.
