Gendered Barriers in Political Life

It was a political environment that necessitated adaptive campaigning approaches that were not evocative of traditional models of mass mobilization and performative politics. In the case of women leaders, and specifically Sakeena Itoo, campaigning was done mainly through small, community based gatherings, focus on personal contact and depending on trust networks and not big public rallies. Such strategies did not pose as being just a tactical decision but rather they have been in reaction to structural and gendered realities which defined what would be possible, safe, and efficient.
This type of campaign was based on small and community-based meetings. Massive demonstrations, and traditionally connected to visibility and power in the political culture, were less available to women because of security measures, social conventions and the threat of confrontation. Smaller meetings which occurred in neighbourhood’s, domestic places or even in places like the local community enabled more contained environments where conversations could be conducted without going out of control. Such environments encouraged close interaction whereby leaders could hear concerns, clarify positions and foster rapport. Though small, these meetings were rich in the level of connection, compensating a smaller level of reach.
One-on-one was found to be an effective campaign tool. Interpersonal interaction permitted the establishment of relational trust especially in a community that was used to transactional politics or symbolic pledges. In case of women leaders, personal interaction also overcame the stereotypes of distance or frailty and proved they are accessible and committed. Such interactions usually went beyond the formal campaigning arrangement into attending social events, condolence visits as well as informal talks. Politics therefore amalgamated to daily living and this helped to affirm presence as a token of credibility.
Another adaptive strategy entailed the dependence on the trust networks. Without mass mobilization, campaigns existed on a chain of relation party workers, community elders, women organizations and local intermediaries who guaranteed credibility. The networks of trust were a means of communication and encouragement, extending further out through the power of social endorsement as opposed to spectacle. This dependency was necessitated by the lack of alternative and presented an opening since there were few formal structures yet the social networks provided strength and permanence.
The gender was considered a restriction at first, but it was transformed gradually into an asset of this campaign model. Women leaders also tended to have more access to the private or semi-private areas, which included homes, women groupings, and community forums where they could engage in political discussion without being in the public sphere dominated by males. These were the spaces where interaction with that women constituency whose voices were often not well represented in the official political platform took place. Matters like domestic safety, welfare, academic, and medical care came to the fore more easily during such interactions to enrich campaign discussions and policy attention.
Competent empathy was established to be a characteristic of this style of leadership. Women leaders frequently were required to listen, console, and mediate which was work with emotional labor but also the role of a relationship building. The empathy emerged as a response to political involvement in a society with trauma and loss in an area with conflict. Instead of dominance that expressed authority, leadership was manifested in caring along with attentiveness. This aspect of interaction made it easier to de-escalate certain situations, especially those that were stressful, since confrontational rhetoric would blow up grievances.
These practices changed the ways of seeing leaders with time. Gendered scepticism was finally replaced by an appreciation of effectiveness based on relational competence. Leadership started to be linked with other issues than assertiveness and spectacle and this is where reliability, responsiveness, and presence entered the picture. This change did not remove the prejudice of gender, but widened the range of rightful styles of leadership in Kashmiri politics.
Another aspect that had to be negotiated on was visibility when campaigning as a woman leader. Excess would be invisibility, and a lack might have been backlash. Acceptance had to do with adaptive strategies to set these tensions on a scale ensured by putting meaningful engagement on the scheme rather than a symbolic display. This balance was especially valued at those times when the open political activity might instigate suppression or danger. Smaller meetings and outreach based on trust enable the campaigns to proceed gently and create momentum without any provocation.
The interactive impact of such plans was that the leader was built with a sense of stability and trust. Mass mobilization was restricted but level of involvement went higher. It is through a repeated interaction that support was achieved as opposed to isolated incidences. This campaigning model was quite similar to the overall approach of governance that placed more focus on negotiation, presence and procedural involvement than flat confrontation.
The presence of gender barriers in political life of the Kashmiris create extra pressure on the Kashmiri women leaders and influence their definition of authority, behavior and power accessibility. The political career of Sakeena Itoo demonstrates the need to win the credibility of leadership over and over again in these limited contexts, and this should take a long time, be adaptive, and should involve people. The very fact of campaigning as a woman leader required creativity in approach small sessions, personal contact, and dependency on a network of trusts turned the female perceived weakness into an asset of strength.
Her gender as a constraint initially formed a trait that turned out to be an empathetic form of engagement and de-escalation, which fit the leadership practice with the requirements of a society impacted by a conflict. What these encounters reveal about political leadership of women in Kashmir is the fact that it is not characterised by lack or peripheral location but rather by dynamic staying power. Presence, empathy and negotiation allow women leaders to create spaces of gendered barriers allowing an expansion of political possibility by redefining the constructs of power that speak to lived experiences and realities.
In conclusion, this chapter brings out the point that gender is not just a background phenomenon of politics but a force that influences the way politics is exercised, understood, and maintained. Trust-based, listening-based and endurance-based leadership can provide an alternative to encountering conflict, and this kind of leadership is especially relevant to women who need to grapple with the unknown world of Kashmiri politics.

Campaigning as a Woman Leader

It was in a campaigning environment like this that it was necessary to devise strategies that were adaptive and unlike the traditional pattern of mass mobilization and performative politics. In the case of women leaders, and Sakeena Itoo in particular, campaigning took place at smaller levels, at the community level, laid stress on personal interaction, and appeal to trust than mass rallies. These practices were not only what were tactical decisions, but what response was made to structural and gendered realities that determined what could be done, what was safe and what worked.
The foundation of this type of campaign was community-based, smaller meetings. Big rallies, commonly linked to exposure and power within conventional political culture, could not be as far as women, as they were exposed to security issues, social conventions and the danger of conflict. Smaller groups, which were organized either in neighborhoods, homes, or communal localities enabled more manageable conditions, where conversations would not spiral out of control. Such environments provided a first-hand experience, where leaders could hear out issues, clear up stances, and establish a connection. Though small in scope, these kind of meetings brought richness in connection and made up of lack of scale of reach.
Face to face communication became one of the leading campaign tools. The concept of having face-to-face interaction meant that the development of relational trust could take place, especially in communities that were used to transactional forms of politics or symbolic pledges. Personal contact undermined distance or frailty stereotypes as well and showed access and dedication in the case of women leaders. All of these contacts usually went beyond actual campaigning to such an extent that people participated in the other social activities, condolence tours and even informal talks. Politics then became integrated in the daily life which made presence a measure of credibility.
The other adaptive strategy was relying on trust networks. The campaigns existed via relational chain without mass mobilization but were maintained by the vouching of credibility by party worker, community elders, women groups and local intermediaries. The trust networks acted as the transmitters of information and encouragement and extended by social validation instead of spectacle. Such need and opportunity were related to the necessity and opportunity because Organizational structures were restricted, but social networks provided stability and persistence.
Gender, which was first viewed as a constraint was slowly transformed into an asset in this campaign model. Women leaders were also more able to have more access to confined or semi-confined spaces such as homes, women meetings and community forums where they could hold a political conversation outside the male dominated open world. These platforms allowed interaction with those women constituents whose voices were not often heard in the formal political agenda. Domestic security, access to welfare, education, and health, became more easily discussed in these interactions, and added depth to campaign discourses and attention to policy.
Caring interactions became another characteristic of this type of leadership. Women leaders also tended to listen, console, and mediate which were emotionally demanding positions though connected, at the same time. Empathy was a political gesture that existed in a society that was traumatized and lost a lot of its people due to the conflict. Instead of exercising power by dominating others, leadership was enacted by being concerned and caring. This form of interaction made the de-escalation process possible, especially during heated situations, when confrontational discourse threatened to fuel complaints.
As time passed, such practices transformed the way people viewed leadership. Skeptical gender perhaps gave way to an intellectual effectiveness based on relational abilities. The constituents started to relate leadership not only to assertiveness or show but also to reliability, responsiveness and presence. This change has not removed gender bias, but rather made the repertoire of recognized legitimate styles of leadership in Kashmiri politics more comprehensive.
Being a woman leader also meant having to negotiate visibility on a continuous basis. Excessive presence would have been undetected, and excessive would have been met with opposition. Adaptive strategies mitigated all these tensions putting most of their emphasis on meaningful engagement and not on being symbolic. This balance especially worked in times of unrest, when there was an overt political activity that might be the catalyst of restriction or danger. Smaller gatherings and outreach on the basis of trust enabled campaigns to run unnoticed, giving them a steady flow without incitation.
The nettling impact of these measures was the development of a leadership personality, which was based on stability and trust. Although mass mobilization did not become an issue, there was intensity of engagement. The support was gathered by repetition and not by events. It was a model of campaigning that was consistent with the larger style of governance that focused more on negotiation, presence, and involvement of procedures, rather than confrontation. (To Continued)

Email: -------------------hsnarif37@gmail.com