While women represent about 51% of the EU population, they hold only 38.5% of seats in the European Parliament following the 2024 elections, marking the first decline in female representation in 45 years. Studio Europa Maastricht spoke with Julia van Zijl, researcher of gender and politics at Maastricht University and the University of Birmingham on the project TWICEASGOOD, about female representation in European politics and the struggles women candidates face during election campaigns.
Find out more about the topic on February 27, during Free Friday at Bonnefantenmuseum, where Studio Europa will present its interactive project “Talk EU to me”.
Experiences
Van Zijl led a pilot study exploring the everyday experiences of women candidates during the campaign for the 2023 Dutch Provincial Elections, as part of the European Commission–funded TWICEASGOOD project. Reflecting on her research, she underlines the resilience and persistence of many women candidates despite facing hostility and threats:
“I’m amazed by the commitment that many women have to continue running and by their conviction that they don’t want to be stalled by situations like this, whether that’s physical threats on the streets or hate on social media. Sometimes it’s also things they receive in their personal emails or even at their homes. The moment it becomes more personal and really invades your private space, that’s when people start doubting and begin to reconsider their political career and especially find this worrying for future generations of representatives. This is a worry especially among women politicians because of the type of threats. The attacks are often very personal and invasive, targeting their identity. It’s really about who they are, not what they stand for.”
“The attacks are often very personal and invasive, targeting their identity. It’s really about who they are, not what they stand for”
Her research highlights that political parties play a crucial role in shaping how women experience election campaigns and whether they feel supported in the face of hostility. Van Zijl stresses that parties must first acknowledge the problem rather than normalize or dismiss it:
“First of all, political parties have to be aware of it and not downplay it. Very often, it’s seen as the cost of politics – if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. I think especially left-wing political parties have some level of awareness, but what’s even more important is having direct support: a real structure that can help you, someone you can speak with, and a mentor who shows you how the party functions. Unfortunately, a lot of negative comments and hate also come from within the parties themselves.”
Criticism
She notes that hostility from within parties can be particularly difficult to navigate, as many candidates expect criticism from outside but not from colleagues:
“People tend to underestimate the impact this has. Many candidates are aware that they’ll receive negativity and pushback from the outside, but they don’t expect the struggle to come from within their own party. On the one hand, there needs to be awareness that our systems and institutions are not perfect and that things can go wrong. On the other hand, it’s crucial to have someone you can speak with, who can show you the ropes and also stand up for you. Not being the only woman, or the only woman of colour, in the room really helps. It also makes a difference to have allies who understand these dynamics, who speak up, give space to others, and are committed to creating an inclusive environment, not just in policy documents, but in practice.”
“Not being the only woman, or the only woman of colour, in the room really helps”
Large online platforms that have become central to political campaigning and democratic engagement in recent years, can also amplify hostility, Van Zijl emphasizes:
“When I was doing my research, Elon Musk had just taken over Twitter and many regulations changed. A lot of people decided to stop engaging with Twitter and moved to other platforms that don’t facilitate hateful algorithms in the same way. This has worsened in recent years, and these platforms have become very influential democratic spaces where journalists and politicians meet, discuss issues, and engage with their constituents. That’s why it’s so important that these platforms recognize their responsibility to remain inclusive and ensure they don’t become hostile environments for certain groups.”
Diversity
Van Zijl’s research also found that women of colour often face additional pressure, particularly when political parties attempt to diversify candidate lists without addressing deeper structural inequalities:
“We have to recognize that different political parties and political environments operate with different rules. Sometimes people are not aware of the language they use or the norms they reproduce. Institutions need to reflect on what diversity really means beyond simply saying, ‘We want at least one woman of colour on the list.’ If you invite someone in, how do you support them? Are you aware of their vulnerabilities? There can be whisper campaigns against these candidates, sometimes driven by envy, and exclusion can emerge in subtle and unexpected ways. Things are improving, but political parties still have work to do.”
The researcher also points out that avoiding conversations about race and inequality does not mean those issues are absent:
“In more right-wing political parties, conversations about race or whiteness often don’t take place. But silence doesn’t mean these issues aren’t present. In fact, it can create another kind of silence, where people of colour feel unable to speak about their experiences or challenges. Political parties should be aware of this. Some parties emphasize selecting candidates based purely on qualifications, rather than diversity, but this can imply that those not selected were less qualified. I simply don’t believe that’s the case. There is a strong desire among voters and party members to see change, but the institutional culture doesn’t always support that change yet.”
Violence
Looking beyond the Netherlands, van Zijl sees broader trends across European countries, particularly when it comes to awareness of violence and hostility in politics:
“Across Europe, we see a significant increase in awareness and willingness to talk about violence. Changes in media environments have also shaped how we understand violence and intrusion. It’s not always about the most extreme cases. Physical violence may happen once, but repeated hate speech online, be it messages you see on the screen in your own living room or emails in your work inbox, can have a much deeper and more lasting impact.”
She stresses that addressing these issues requires both institutional support and cultural change in how political violence is understood and discussed:
“We need better systems of support, such as email filtering, support teams, and more active check-ins. But we also need to change how we talk about these experiences. These conversations shouldn’t frame people as weak or unfit for politics. Instead, they should help us understand the structural challenges people face and how institutions can better support them.”
“Change doesn’t happen overnight. In a system like the EU, progress depends on cooperation and political will of the member states”
At the European level, van Zijl underlines the importance of sustained political commitment in Brussels to improving gender representation and the role that EU institutions can play in changing the narrative:
“Change doesn’t happen overnight. In a system like the EU, progress depends on cooperation and political will of the member states. But institutions like the European Parliament play an important role as examples. They send a message about what kind of values the European Union stands for, both to member states and to citizens. That’s why it’s important to keep pushing for change and to continue having these conversations, both in Brussels and at the national level.”
Julia van Zijl is a Lecturer at Maastricht University. She is also a PhD researcher in Political Science at the University of Birmingham, on the ERC funded project TWICEASGOOD. As part of the TWICEASGOOD project she led the ethnographic fieldwork in the Netherlands. She has been a visiting researcher at the Department of Political Science at the University of Copenhagen. Her research interests focus on gender and politics, political parties, and intersectionality.
