Madam, - The concept of representation advanced by A Leavy (March 11th) - that is, that women are "under-represented" by politicians because most politicians are men - is clearly ludicrous. Are men and women so fundamentally different that a male politician cannot represent the views of his female constituents, and vice versa?
If you accept the preposterous notion that elected officials should be demographically representative of the population they work for, then surely an equally pertinent question is one of age, as a cursory glance at the age profile of our TDs reveals it to be radically different from that of our voting body at both extremes: there are few politicians whose age falls even within a decade of mine or my peers', and similarly, voters in their 80s and 90s are somewhat starved of representation. And of course, the question arises as to where exactly we draw the line as to what demographic representation should cover?
Should 12 per cent of our elected officials be colour-blind? Should 10 per cent be gay? Should one in every nine be left-handed, so as to ensure that the left-handed people in their constituency are fully represented?
Women are fully represented at political level because every woman of voting age in this country gets a vote; beyond that, any gender differences in the make-up of our government are down to voter preferences. If women are choosing to elect male politicians, then so be it. The important thing in an election is the quality of the candidates and not their chromosomal differences. - Yours, etc,
NIALL SHERRY, Moyville, Dublin 16.
Madam, - Mary Stewart's letter and Breda O'Brien's column, both in last Saturday's edition, made excellent contributions to the debate on the under-representation of women in positions of power.
Breda O'Brien rightly highlighted the 21st-century motto that arrogance will get you everywhere. Mary Stewart's point - that women who "consider rearing their families to be more important than having ultra-successful careers" are making valid choices - is also well made.
Both make the unarguable point that women are different. Neither, however, answers the question as to why in a democracy this difference should make women so unequal as to be grossly under-represented in most parliaments of the world. - Yours, etc,
A LEAVY, Shielmartin Drive, Sutton, Dublin 13.
Madam, - Cllr Marie Baker (March 9th) implies that women's educational advantages over men are being wasted through poor representation in management and in the Dáil.
As an educated woman, I feel obliged to remind Cllr Baker of a recent report which suggested that senior managers in Ireland enjoy a lower quality of life than the gravely ill. In light of this report I have to reject her implication that women are wasting their talents by opting out of such demanding, stressful and obviously unrewarding roles.
Education gives us the skills necessary to make informed choices for our own lives as individuals and as members of society. Has it occurred to Cllr Baker that the women she regards as wasting their talents are actually putting them to much better and much more fulfilling use outside the superficial confines of the boardroom? - Yours, etc,
EMER FITZPATRICK, Glendale Estate, Leixlip, Co Kildare.