Hillary Clinton is running for American president again, sparking the age-old debate regarding the role of women in electoral politics and furthermore what the possibility of having a female president signifies for the future of gender equality, both in America and across the globe.

Being a symbol for gender equality is a heavy burden for Clinton to carry and as some have argued, overshadows her proposed political policies. The Guardian’s Hadley Freeman, argued that “From the flurry of coverage this week about Hilary’s presidential candidacy, the primary focus was on the fact that she is a female.”

Furthermore professor of government at American University and Director of the Women & Politics Institute, Jennifer Lawless argued that the “Minute Clinton announced her candidacy, she became the official litmus test for true gender equality in the United States.”

What both Lawless and Freeman question is what will do more for gender equality: having a female president or a president that is good for women’s rights? Do these things have to be mutually exclusive; is having a female president the key to breaking down barriers to progressive change and gender equality?

It’s definitely something to think about and is explored further in Lawless’s article for the CNN. Read the full article here: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/12/opinions/lawless-hillary-clinton-electing-women/