Page 1
Page 1 of 134
APPENDIX I.
Telephone Survey of Public Attitudes towards Female Political
Leadership
[Interviewer read out: We would like to ask about your views on social and political participation
in Hong Kong, such as becoming government officials, legislators, political party members,
community leaders, leaders in policy advocacy, non-official members serving on public sector
advisory and statutory bodies and so on.]
Desired Qualities of Political Leaders
[Interviewer read out]: In general, do you think each of the following characteristics is more true
for men, more true for women, or equally true for both?
1. More true for women
2. More true for men
3. Equally true for both
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
[CATI: RANDOMISE ITEMS]
QUAL_SEX1. Competent
QUAL_SEX2. Compassionate
QUAL_SEX3. Visionary
QUAL_SEX4. Persuasive
QUAL_SEX5. Prioritising the public interest
QUAL_SEX6. Collaborative and working out compromises
QUAL_SEX7. Hard-working
QUAL_SEX8. Honest and ethical
QUAL_SEX9. Standing up for what they believe in despite political pressure
[Interviewer read out: In general, do you think female or male leaders are more capable of
dealing with the following issues?
1. Male leader is more capable
2. Female leader is more capable
3. No difference
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
QUAL_AREA1. Economics, finance, and trade
QUAL_AREA2. Security affairs
QUAL_AREA3. Social welfare (such as poverty alleviation, medical service)
QUAL_AREA4. Infrastructure and development
QUAL_AREA5. Environment
QUAL_AREA6. Education
QUAL_AREA7. Political reforms
Page 2
Page 2 of 134
QUAL_AREA8. Labour issues
Perceptions of Gender Equality and Female Political Leadership in Hong Kong
PERCEPT1. In Hong Kong, do you think men or women generally make better political leaders?
1. Men
2. Women
3. No difference
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
PERCEPT1a. In Hong Kong, do you think men or women generally perform better as
community/grassroots leaders?
1. Men
2. Women
3. No difference
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
PERCEPT 1b. In Hong Kong, do you have greater confidence in the performance of female or male
members in the Legislative Council and District Councils?
1. More confidence in female council members
2. More confidence in male council members
3. Similar confidence in male and female council members
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
PERCEPT2. Do you think men or women leaders in Hong Kong have greater influence on social
and political issues?
1. Women have greater influence
2. Men have greater influence
3. No difference
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
Page 3
Page 3 of 134
Barriers Faced by Women in Attaining Political Leadership
BAR1. In Hong Kong, do women or men face more challenges when attempting to attain higher
political leadership positions (e.g. Legislative Council members, senior government officials)?
1. More difficult for men
2. More difficult for women
3. No difference
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
[Interviewer read out: In Hong Kong, other than personal choices, do you think the following
factors prevent men or women from attaining political leadership?]
1. Obstacle for men
2. Obstacle for women
3. Obstacle for both men and women
4. Not an obstacle for either men or women
88. Don’t know
99. Refused to answer
[CATI: RANDOMISE ITEMS]
BAR_W1. Traditional attitudes towards gender roles (e.g. “women are to take care of the
family while men are to work outside”)
BAR_W2. Domestic responsibilities
BAR_W3. Lack of confidence
BAR_W4. Lack of experience
BAR_W5. Lack of support from political parties and organisations
BAR_W6. Lack of support from family
BAR_W7. Lack of social network and connections
BAR_W8. Double standards between genders to prove themselves
Views on Policies to Increase Female Political Leadership
POLICY1. Around 20% of the Legislative Council and District Council members and 37% of
government officials on the directorate pay scale are women. Should we increase the proportion of
women in political leadership positions?
1. Yes
2. No
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
Page 4
Page 4 of 134
[Interviewer read out: What should be done to increase women’s political leadership? Among the
following measures, which item(s) would you support?
1. Support
2. Do not support
3. Neither support or against
7. Insist not to answer these questions (do not read out)
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
POLICY1a. Make more female role models and mentors available
POLICY1b. Provide training for potential female leaders
POLICY1c. Implement family-friendly policies (e.g. maternity/paternal leave, subsidised care
services, flexible work arrangements, etc.)
POLICY1d. Encourage women to lean in for opportunities
POLICY1e. Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of gender equality
POLICY1f. Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of women
POLICY1g. Reserve a certain number of seats for women in the Legislative Council, District
Councils, and Government units
Others (do not read out)
POLICY2. If Hong Kong is to establish the above-mentioned quota system in the Government and
councils, in general what should be the percentage allotted to women?
1. 50% or higher
2. 40–49%
3. 30–39%
4. 20–29%
5. 10–19%
6. Below 10%
7. Do not agree (do not read out)
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
Sociodemographic Status
AGE. Which age group are you in?
1. 15–24
2. 25–34
3. 35–44
4. 45–54
5. 55–64
6. 65 or above
9. Refused to answer
Page 5
Page 5 of 134
SEX. What is your gender?
[Note to interviewer: don’t read out the options]
1. Male
2. Female
3. Other
MARITAL. What is your marital status at present?
1. Never married
2. Now married
3. Other
Cohabiting
Separated
Divorced
Widowed
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
EDU. What is the highest level of education you have attained?
1. Primary or below
2. Lower secondary (Form 1 to Form 3)
3. Upper secondary (Form 4 to Form 7)
4. Tertiary non-degree
5. Bachelor’s degree
6. Postgraduate (master’s or doctoral degree)
7. Other (please specify _______)
8. Don’t know
9. Refused to answer
W1. Are you currently employed? If not, are you doing housekeeping, a student, retired or looking
for a job?
1. Employed
2. Housekeeping
3. Retired
4. Unemployed/looking for a job
5. Student
6. Other (please specify:______)
9. Refused to answer
INCOME. What is your average monthly income?
[Note to interviewer: Read out options 1 to 5 only]
1. Less than HK$10,000
2. HK$10,000–19,999
3. HK$20,000–29,999
4. HK$30,000–49,999
5. HK$50,000 or above
Page 6
Page 6 of 134
8. Unstable income
9. Refused to answer
CHILD. Do you have any children aged 18 or under?
1. Yes
2. No
POL. Which political camp do you think best reflects your political orientation?
1. Pan-democrates
2. Moderate groups
3. Pro-establishment
4. Localist
6. (Do not read) None
7. (Do not read) Others (please specify)
8. (Do not read) Don’t know/hard to say
9. (Do not read) Refused to answer
Page 7
Page 7 of 134
Web-based Survey of Public Attitudes towards Female Political Leadership
AGE. Which age group are you in?
1. 15–17 (Please answer CONSENT) 2. 18–24 3. 25–34 4. 35–44 5. 45–54 6. 55–64 7. 65 or above
CONSENT. If you are at the age of 15-17, did your parent/guardian consent to your participation in this survey?
1. I am under 18 and my parent/guardian consented to my participation in this survey (PROCEED TO SURVEY)
2. I am under 18 and my parent/guardian DID NOT consent to my participation in this survey (END SURVEY)
SEX. What is your gender? 4. Male 5. Female 6. Other
Desired Qualities of Political Leaders In general, do you think each of the following characteristics is more true for men, more true for women, or equally true for both?
1. More true for women
2.More true for men
3. Equally true for both
QUAL_SEX1. Competent
QUAL_SEX2. Compassionate
QUAL_SEX3. Visionary
QUAL_SEX4. Persuasive
QUAL_SEX5. Prioritising the public interest
QUAL_SEX6. Collaborative and working out compromises
QUAL_SEX7. Hard-working
QUAL_SEX8. Honest and ethical
QUAL_SEX9. Standing up for what they believe in despite political pressure
In general, do you think female or male leaders are more capable of dealing with the
Page 8
Page 8 of 134
following issues?
1. Male leader is more capable
2. Female leader is more capable
3. No difference
QUAL_AREA1. Economics, finance, and trade
QUAL_AREA2. Security affairs
QUAL_AREA3. Social welfare (such as poverty alleviation, medical service)
QUAL_AREA4. Infrastructure and development
QUAL_AREA5. Environment
QUAL_AREA6. Education
QUAL_AREA7. Political reforms
QUAL_AREA8. Labour issues
Perceptions of Gender Equality and Female Political Leadership in Hong Kong
What do you think about the following questions regarding male or female political leaders and officials?
1. Men
2. Women
3. No difference
PERCEPT1. In Hong Kong, who do you think generally make better political leaders?
PERCEPT1a. In Hong Kong, who do you think generally perform better as community/grassroots leaders?
PERCEPT 1b. In Hong Kong, do you have greater confidence in the performance of female or male members in the Legislative Council and District Councils?
PERCEPT2. In Hong Kong, do women or men face more challenges when attempting to attain higher political leadership positions (e.g. Executive Council members, Legislative Council members, senior government officials)?
Page 9
Page 9 of 134
In the context of Hong Kong, do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
1. Strongly agree
2. Agree 3. Neither agree nor disagree
4. Disagree 5. Strongly disagree
PERCEPT3. Women and men should have an equal role in running the government.
PERCEPT4. Female leaders have a responsibility to represent the interests of women in society at large.
PERCEPT5. Male leaders have a responsibility to represent the interests of men in society at large.
PERCEPT6. The more women leaders there are in government and councils, the greater influence they will have on political priorities and policy.
PERCEPT7. Male leaders can sufficiently represent the interests of women in politics.
PERCEPT8. Female leaders can sufficiently represent the interests of men in politics.
PERCEPT9. Women are 50% of the population and should be as equally represented as men in decision-making positions.
PERCEPT10. Women’s presence will increase the political legitimacy of government and councils.
PERCEPT11. Women should be represented in decision making because this right is enshrined in laws.
PERCEPT12. Women bring
Page 10
Page 10 of 134
different views, perspectives and talents to politics. PERCEPT13. The empowerment of women will lead to the development of society at large.
PERCEPT14. Including more women will increase the electoral appeal of political parties or groupings.
Structural and Other Barriers Faced by Women and Men in Attaining Political Leadership BAR1. Has your gender helped or hurt your political career, or made no difference?
1. Helped my political career 2. Hurt my political career 3. Made no difference to my political career
BAR2. The following factors commonly hinder career success/promotions and candidacy for political leaders and government officials. According to your experience, are they preferable for describing males or females?
1. Males
2. Females
3. Obstacle for both men and women
4. Not an obstacle for either men or women
5. Yourself
BAR_W1. Traditional attitudes towards gender roles (e.g. “women are to take care of the family while men are to work outside”)
BAR_W2. Domestic responsibilities
BAR_W3. Lack of confidence
BAR_W4. Lack of experience
BAR_W5. Lack of support from political parties and organisations
BAR_W6. Lack of support from family
BAR_W7. Lack of social network and connections
BAR_W8. Double standards between genders to prove themselves
BAR2A. Regarding factors that commonly hinder career success/promotions and candidacy for political leaders and government officials, according to your experience, is another
Page 11
Page 11 of 134
factor preferable for describing males or females?
1. Male
2. Female 3. Obstacle for both men and women
4. Not an obstacle for either men or women
5. Yourself
BAR_W9. Other, please specify:______
BAR3. What can contribute to your successful advancement in your organisation? (Select all that apply)
Should adopt
BAR3a. Mentoring and experience sharing
BAR3b. Provide training to those with potential
BAR3c. Improve promotion pipelines BAR3d. Implement family-friendly policies (e.g. maternity/parental leave, subsidised care services, flexible work arrangements)
BAR3e. Provide chances for me to lean in for opportunities BAR3f. Improving gender awareness and talking openly about the issue of gender equality
BAR3g. Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of seats based on genders
BAR3h.Reserve a certain number of seats at the leadership and managerial levels based on genders
BAR3i. Other, please specify BAR3j. None of the above
Page 12
Page 12 of 134
Views on Policies to Increase Female Political Leadership
POLICY1. Around 20% of the Legislative Council and District Council members and 37% of government officials on the directorate pay scale are women. Should we increase the proportion of women in political leadership positions?
1. Yes 2. No
POLICY2. In which of the following areas would it be good to see more women? (Select all that apply)
1. Senior government officials (e.g. secretary for a bureau) 2. Legislative Council 3. District Councils 4. The legal system 5. Party leaders 6. None of the above
POLICY3. What should be done to increase women’s political leadership? Among the following measures, which item(s) would you support?
1. Support
2. Neither support nor against
3. Do not support
POLICY3a. Make more female role models and mentors available
POLICY3b. Provide training for potential female leaders
POLICY3c. Implement family-friendly policies (e.g. maternity/parental leave, subsidised care services, flexible work arrangements, etc.)
POLICY3d. Encourage women to lean in for opportunities POLICY3e. Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of gender equality
POLICY3f. Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of women
POLICY3g. Reserve a certain number of seats for women in the Legislative Council, District Councils, and Government units
POLICY3h. What should be done to increase women’s political leadership? Except for the above measures, what other measures would you support? POLICY3h. Other (please specify: ________) POLICY4. If Hong Kong is to establish the above-mentioned quota system in the Government and councils, in general what should be the percentage allotted to women? 1. 50% or higher 2. 40–49% 3. 30–39% 4. 20–29% 5. 10–19% 6. Below 10% 7. Do not agree
Page 13
Page 13 of 134
POLICY5. What are your views on the following statements regarding the use of gender quotas to increase women’s participation in governments, councils, and parties?
Strongly agree
Agree Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree Strongly disagree
Policy5a. Quotas are a necessary measure to address the under-representation of women and increase their numbers in governments and councils.
Policy5b. Quotas should only be implemented on a temporary basis.
Policy5c. Voluntary quotas adopted by political parties are preferable to quotas legislated by governments and councils.
Policy5d. Quotas that are legislated must be accompanied by enforcement provisions.
Policy5e. Quotas are useful but not sufficient and must be accompanied by other measures, such as awareness programmes.
Policy5f. Quotas are not useful and lead to tokenism for women.
Policy5g. Quotas are not necessary. Women should be elected on merit.
Policy5h. Quotas are discriminatory. Policy5i. Leaders who gain their mandate through reserved seats, political party quotas or appointments are viewed differently to other leaders.
Page 14
Page 14 of 134
Sociodemographic Status MARITAL. What is your marital status at present?
1. Never married 2. Now married 3. Cohabiting 4. Separated 5. Divorced
6. Widowed EDU. What is the highest level of education you have attained?
1. Primary or below 2. Lower secondary (Form 1 to Form 3) 3. Upper secondary (Form 4 to Form 7) 4. Tertiary non-degree 5. Bachelor’s degree 6. Postgraduate (master’s or doctoral degree) 7. Other (please specify _______)
W1. Are you currently employed? If not, are you doing housekeeping, a student, retired or looking for a job? 1. Employed 2. Housekeeping 3. Retired 4. Unemployed/looking for a job 5. Student 6. Other (please specify:______) INCOME. What is your average monthly income?
1. Less than HK$10,000 2. HK$10,000–19,999 3. HK$20,000–29,999 4. HK$30,000–49,999 5. HK$50,000 or above
8. Unstable income
CHILD. How many children aged 0–15 or at or above the age of 16 do you have?
Child/children aged 0–15 _____ Child/children at or above the age of 16 _______
POL. Which political camp do you think reflects your political orientation? 1. Pan-democrates 2. Moderate groups 3. Pro-establishment 4. Localist 6. None 7. Other (please specify) FAM_HISTORY. Do you have family members who have served in politics?
Page 15
Page 15 of 134
1. Yes 2. No
Leader-level Identification Q2. What is/was your position? (Select all that apply)
Past Current 1. Government: Directorate pay officials
2. Legislative Council members 3. District Council members 4. Members of Advisory and Statutory Bodies 5. Party leaders 6. Non-government organisation (NGO) /non-profit organisation (NPO)
leaders
7. Community organisation leaders
8. Think tank leaders 9. Private organisation leaders 10. Other, please specify:
Q29a. Do you think you are a political leader now (at any level)?
1. Yes, I think I am currently a political leader 2. No, I think I am not a political leader
Q29b. Do you want to be a political leader?
1. Yes, I do 2. No, I don’t
Q30. If you have further views concerning the previous questions, you are welcome to leave your contact information and we may contact you later: Email address: Phone number:
Page 16
Page 16 of 134
APPENDIX II.
Interview Guide
A Study on Public Attitudes towards Female Political Leadership
In-depth Interview Guide
Part 1: Personal experience
(More about past experiences for former leaders and more about estimations for
potential leaders
1. Can you share with us your journey leading to your current position: when and how
did you start your current role, or how did you expect to take up leadership?
• In your opinion, what is a leader?
• What experience/who inspires you most?
2. What were some highlights and low points of your journey? Did you experience any
barrier(s) in the process, or what barriers do you expect to face in the future?
3. What is the most challenging part of your role as a leader?
• How did you overcome these challenges? Did you receive any help from
anybody along the way?
• What is the most important leadership lesson you have learned?
4. Regarding your male and female colleagues/working partners (randomise: male and
female/female and male), what kinds of difficulties and opportunities may they face
in moving up towards leadership positions?
• Do you think men and women face the same challenges? And do you think that
women will encounter more challenges in moving up towards leadership
positions?
• What are the important characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of being a
male leader or a female leader?
5. What kind of support did you get, or would you like to get at every step of your career,
or when you are gradually moving up to be a leader?
6. What motivates or inspires you to continue to persevere as a leader or be willing to
take up a leadership role?
• How do you see yourself in five years’ time in terms of further development in
your current role?
(Note for the interviewer: please ask this follow-up question if applicable)
For the following groups (if you belong to one or more of these groups), do you have
specific experience of and views regarding being/becoming a political leader in Hong Kong?
If yes, would you please share with us? Ethnic minorities; persons with disabilities; other
(please specify).
Part 2: Your views on the situation in Hong Kong
Page 17
Page 17 of 134
1. How well is Hong Kong doing in terms of gender ratio at senior political
leadership and decision-making levels? How would you evaluate it (how about
the ideal gender ratio)?
• What are the active spheres within the political field for men and women
leaders (randomise: men and women leaders/woman and men leaders)?
2. What factors are affecting women/men from being political leaders (at any level)?
• Prompt (let respondents name, elaborate, and rank them for men and women
respectively):
- General attitudes towards gender roles;
- Domestic responsibilities;
- Overly long working hours;
- Lack of confidence;
- Lack of experience;
- Lack of support from political parties, organisations, mentors;
- Lack of support from family;
- Lack of social network and connections;
- Double standards between genders that require them to do more to
prove themselves.
• Can you share any best practices that address some of these barriers (or the
kinds of support that help to overcome these barriers)?
Prompt (let respondents name, elaborate, and rank them for men and women
respectively):
- Make more female role models and mentors available;
- Provide training for potential female leaders;
- Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of
women;
- Reserve a certain number of seats for women in the Legislative
Council, District Councils, and Government agencies;
- Enhance family-friendly policies (such as leave, care services,
flexible work arrangements);
- Encourage women to lean in for opportunities;
- Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of
gender equality;
- Minimise the issue and shift the attention away from gender.
• What systems or organisations can play a role in these processes
(Government, party, social organisation, education bureau, etc.)?
3. How do you evaluate and estimate the current and future trends of their
representativeness for men and women leaders (randomise: men and women
leaders/woman and men leaders)?
• Are you aware of some effective measures to address the issues
(Prompt: quota system, financial support, etc.)?
Page 18
Page 18 of 134
4. What suggestions would you like to offer young or aspiring female leaders?
Finally, what kinds of policies do you think the Government, political parties or
other political organisations can implement to assist more women to become
leaders?
Page 19
Page 19 of 134
APPENDIX III.
Supplementary Graphs for the Telephone Survey (Chapter 4) and the Web-based Survey (Chapter 5)
Figure 4.2.2 Public perception: “Competent” (by subgroups) (*: P<0.05)
4.0 4.7 3.0 4.0 5.7 7.6 5.2 2.6 4.4 3.3 5.0 2.07.6 7.5
3.6 4.1
13.3 9.57.7
9.7
15.115.0
13.8
8.1 6.2 8.9
15.9
10.9
11.6
24.4
9.7 9.7
82.785.8
89.286.3
79.2 77.481.1
89.3 89.4 87.8
79.2
87.180.8
68.1
86.7 86.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 20
Page 20 of 134
Figure 4.2.3 Public perception: “Compassionate” (by subgroups)
23.7 26.3 29.724.4 22.5 21.8 25.3 26.4 24.6
30.723.1 23.9 26.8 28.8
24.4 25.1
10.6 6.84.4
7.7 12.3 16.0 8.9 5.34.4
6.8
11.9 6.9
10.714.3
7.5 8.0
65.7 66.9 65.9 67.9 65.2 62.2 65.9 68.2 71.162.5 64.9
69.262.5
56.9
68.1 66.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 21
Page 21 of 134
Figure 4.2.4 Public perception: “Visionary” (by subgroups)
2.15.8
0.8 3.8 6.5 9.34.7 1.5 0.5
6.2 5.6 2.7 5.9 4.5 3.1 4.2
33.2 25.3
26.225.8
34.1 31.7
32.0
26.4 25.6
25.233.4
25.9
33.6
46.8
30.6 25.5
64.768.9
73.1 70.4
59.4 59.063.2
72.1 73.868.6
61.1
71.4
60.5
48.7
66.270.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital Status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 22
Page 22 of 134
Figure 4.2.5 Public perception: “Persuasive” (by subgroups)
22.926.9
16.4
29.7 26.831.6
26.321.8 19.5
29.3 27.4 24.9 25.4
37.4
22.0 24.6
17.7 10.3
20.0
12.311.0
10.514.2
15.1 16.4
13.812.4 15.4 12.0
16.6
12.514.0
59.3 62.7 63.658.0
62.258.0 59.5
63.1 64.056.9 60.3 59.7 62.7
46.0
65.461.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 23
Page 23 of 134
Figure 4.2.6 Public perception: “Prioritising the public interest” (by subgroups)
7.913.2
8.9 7.914.4 14.9 12.8
7.6 8.2 10.0 12.87.9
14.5
25.1
6.8 10.0
14.88.5
4.212.0
16.1 15.513.5
8.4 5.58.9
16.8
10.3
13.0
12.6
11.911.1
77.3 78.386.9
80.1
69.5 69.673.7
83.9 86.381.0
70.4
81.8
72.5
62.3
81.3 78.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 24
Page 24 of 134
Figure 4.2.7 Public perception: “Collaborative and working out compromises” (by subgroups)
26.1 25.7 23.427.0 26.6
30.825.0 24.3 22.6
30.326.1 24.1
28.3
41.8
23.5 24.5
12.1 12.58.4
15.1 12.612.6
13.0 11.98.8
14.4
13.813.5
10.9
12.5
15.2 11.1
61.8 61.868.2
57.9 60.856.6
62.0 63.968.7
55.360.1 62.5 60.9
45.8
61.3 64.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age Education level Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 25
Page 25 of 134
Figure 4.2.8 Public perception: “Hard-working” (by subgroups)
11.219.4
8.213.0
22.827.9
15.710.1 11.6 10.4
20.312.6
19.2 16.7 16.6 14.7
8.4
6.2
5.0
7.4
8.6
12.2
8.8
4.2 3.0 8.6
9.6
6.7
8.021.1
6.75.0
80.474.4
86.979.6
68.759.8
75.5
85.6 85.480.9
70.0
80.772.8
62.1
76.780.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 26
Page 26 of 134
Figure 4.2.9 Public perception: “Honest and ethical” (by subgroups)
22.018.0 20.3 19.3 20.2 21.4 24.9
16.3 14.8
27.520.0 18.9 21.3
34.8
16.2 19.2
4.85.0 2.3 4.2
7.39.1
7.2
1.7 2.5
2.0
7.94.0
6.2
5.2
4.45.2
73.277.0 77.3 76.5
72.6 69.5 68.0
81.9 82.6
70.5 72.077.1
72.5
60.0
79.375.6
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 27
Page 27 of 134
Figure 4.2.10 Public perception: “Standing up for what they believe in despite political pressure” (by subgroups)
9.1 6.9 3.67.7 11.1
15.98.2
4.5 4.99.4 9.5 6.5 9.9 12.4
7.5 7.2
25.5
20.7 27.9 18.2
23.922.9
27.0
20.5 23.219.6
24.323.1
22.8
28.2
24.821.6
65.572.4
68.574.1
65.061.3
64.7
75.0 71.9 71.066.1
70.4 67.359.4
67.7 71.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children Employment Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 28
Page 28 of 134
Figure 4.3.2 Female or male leaders are more capable in “economics, finance, and trade” (by subgroups)
3.1 3.0 3.5 2.9 3.0 4.0 3.3 2.6 2.8 4.0 3.0 3.2 3.0 4.2 4.8 2.1
56.0
48.2
56.0
48.851.9 51.8 53.8
50.9 50.351.8 53.8 50.8 53.6
64.8
48.8 51.7
40.9
48.8
40.5
48.345.1 44.2 42.9
46.5 46.9 44.3 43.3 46.0 43.4
30.9
46.4 46.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Education level Marital status and children Employment Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 29
Page 29 of 134
Figure 4.3.3 Female or male leaders are more capable in “security affairs” (by subgroups)
2.0 1.8 2.8 1.6 1.6 2.0 2.4 1.6 1.8 2.3 1.8 1.2 2.9 1.5 1.6 2.0
73.2 70.273.3
67.274.6 74.8 74.0
69.0 70.365.4
75.869.9
74.084.5
75.067.7
24.8 28.024.0
31.223.8 23.2 23.5
29.5 27.932.3
22.429.0
23.1
14.0
23.430.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age Education level Marital status and children Employment* Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 30
Page 30 of 134
Figure 4.3.4 Female or male leaders are more capable in “social welfare” (by subgroups)
44.3 41.7 44.4 45.040.1 39.9
48.441.1 40.2
48.342.9 44.2 41.5
52.4
38.844.5
3.83.7 1.6
4.1
5.09.0
3.7
1.5 2.4
2.65.2 3.2
4.4
2.5
3.2
4.1
51.9 54.6 54.1 50.954.9
51.2 47.9
57.4 57.449.1 51.9 52.6 54.2
45.1
58.051.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age Education level* Marital status and children Employment Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 31
Page 31 of 134
Figure 4.3.5 Female or male leaders are more capable in “infrastructure and development” (by subgroups)
1.1 1.6 1.5 1.8 0.8 1.5 1.6 1.1 1.3 2.0 1.1 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.2
45.3 43.335.9
42.351.9
57.549.1
35.9 36.141.0
51.3
40.3
49.7
60.8
40.5 42.9
53.6 55.162.6
55.947.3
41.049.2
63.0 62.656.9
47.6
58.5
48.7
37.6
58.0 55.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 32
Page 32 of 134
Figure 4.3.6 Female or male leaders are more capable in “environment” (by subgroups)
23.717.6 21.0 20.0 20.8 21.6 22.7
18.9 18.824.9
20.2 21.8 19.0
28.4
19.5 19.8
7.2
8.7 3.4 6.512.4 13.7 10.0
4.4 3.7
7.710.7 5.3 11.5
15.8
6.6 7.2
69.173.7 75.6 73.6
66.8 64.8 67.3
76.7 77.5
67.4 69.172.9 69.4
55.8
73.9 72.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 33
Page 33 of 134
Figure 4.3.7 Female or male leaders are more capable in “education” (by subgroups)
35.427.9
35.130.6 29.7
34.8 33.329.1 29.5
33.4 32.4 32.8 29.934.3
29.3 32.7
4.7
5.7
3.74.5 7.0
8.05.2
4.0 4.43.0 6.7 3.5 7.4
4.8
5.25.0
59.966.4
61.1 65.0 63.357.1
61.666.9 66.1 63.6 60.8 63.7 62.7 60.9
65.5 62.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Education level Marital status and children Employment* Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 34
Page 34 of 134
Figure 4.3.8 Female or male leaders are more capable in “political reforms” (by subgroups)
5.7 5.4 6.0 5.9 5.0 6.1 6.2 5.0 5.7 7.0 4.9 5.5 5.711.6
4.9 4.5
32.7
24.230.3
23.331.5 30.9 30.3
26.2 27.3 24.5 31.2 26.630.8
30.6
27.1 29.4
61.570.4
63.770.8
63.5 63.0 63.568.8 67.0 68.6
63.967.9
63.557.9
68.0 66.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Education level Marital status and children Employment Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 35
Page 35 of 134
Figure 4.3.9 Female or male leaders are more capable in “labour issues” (by subgroups)
11.0 12.2 9.9 12.8 11.6 13.7 13.69.5 10.4 11.2 12.8 10.6 13.0 14.8 11.5 11.4
22.4 16.815.7
15.126.0
26.7 23.5
14.0 12.719.4
24.0
17.0
22.8
32.8
16.1 18.7
66.671.0 74.4 72.1
62.4 59.6 62.9
76.4 76.969.4
63.2
72.364.2
52.4
72.4 69.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 36
Page 36 of 134
Figure 4.4.3 In Hong Kong, do you think men or women generally make better political leaders? (by subgroups)
14.7 12.2 9.6 8.5
20.2 17.4 15.310.3 8.2 7.1
19.7
11.715.4 17.9
12.6 12.8
6.9 9.3
4.7 7.9
10.7 13.9
6.1
7.25.2
11.3
8.9
6.7
10.1
15.5
5.7 8.0
78.4 78.5
85.6 83.6
69.1 68.7
78.682.6
86.581.6
71.4
81.574.5
66.6
81.8 79.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency*
Men Women No difference
Page 37
Page 37 of 134
Figure 4.4.4 In Hong Kong, do you think men or women generally perform better as community/grassroots leaders? (by subgroups)
10.1 7.4 8.4 5.711.6 11.4 8.8 7.6 8.6 6.1
10.0 7.8 10.0 8.9 10.2 8.2
13.9 17.9 18.016.5
14.218.4
17.214.4 14.6
22.8 14.014.7
17.9 19.09.8
18.9
76.0 74.6 73.677.8
74.270.2
74.078.1 76.7
71.176.0 77.5
72.2 72.0
80.073.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Educational level Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
Men Women No differnce
Page 38
Page 38 of 134
Figure 4.4.5 In Hong Kong, do you have greater confidence in the performance of female or male members in the Legislative Council and
District Councils? (by subgroups)
7.1 5.6 3.58.1 6.7
9.8 7.74.0 4.2
10.56.0 6.2 6.6
11.0
2.97.0
11.19.1 10.7
6.412.9
14.6
9.6
8.4 9.5
6.412.0
8.212.4
14.4
9.4
9.7
81.785.3 85.8 85.5
80.475.6
82.887.6 86.3
83.0 81.985.7
81.074.5
87.683.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
More confidence in female council members More confidence in male council members Similar confidence
Page 39
Page 39 of 134
Figure 4.4.6 Do you think men or women leaders in Hong Kong have greater influence on social and political issues? (by subgroups)
5.08.6
4.67.7 7.6 6.7 8.3 6.1 6.3
9.36.3 6.9 6.9
15.6
7.74.6
33.730.2
42.9
28.9 27.224.0
36.4
32.638.2 30.0
28.931.9 32.0
28.4
29.6 34.3
61.3 61.2
52.5
63.4 65.269.3
55.361.3
55.460.7
64.861.2 61.1
55.962.7 61.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
Women have greater influence Men have greater influence No differnce
Page 40
Page 40 of 134
Figure 4.4.7 In Hong Kong, do women or men face more challenges when attempting to attain higher political leadership positions? (by
subgroups)
12.28.4
4.511.1 13.3 13.2 13.7
6.7 6.412.8 11.8 9.9 10.7
21.2
5.210.5
32.8 39.954.3
33.6 27.1 29.0
37.6
39.346.9
27.734.0 37.3 35.8
27.5
34.6
39.1
55.0 51.7
41.2
55.359.7 57.8
48.754.0
46.7
59.554.2 52.8 53.5 51.3
60.2
50.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
More difficult for men More difficult for women No difference
Page 41
Page 41 of 134
Figure 4.5.2 Public perception: “Traditional attitudes towards gender roles (e.g. ‘women are to take care of the family while men are to
work outside’)” (by subgroups)
2.8 3.3 1.2 3.2 4.3 3.8 4.5 1.8 1.3 4.8 3.6 2.6 3.7 4.7 1.5 3.2
51.0
60.3
73.8
57.7
41.8 44.7
53.062.8 66.3 57.4
48.357.2 54.5
48.2 56.756.9
13.9
11.9
9.4
12.5
15.517.4
15.29.3
14.5
8.3
13.7
13.312.3
13.8
13.1 12.6
32.224.6
15.5
26.6
38.534.0
27.2 26.117.9
29.534.4
26.9 29.533.2
28.7 27.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 42
Page 42 of 134
Figure 4.5.3 Public perception: “Domestic responsibilities” (by subgroups)
6.0 4.7 3.0 6.5 5.9 7.7 5.8 4.0 3.5 4.2 7.0 4.4 6.5 7.2 5.3 4.8
59.068.4 68.4
65.259.8
51.2
64.1 69.565.5
71.359.9 66.7 60.4
66.765.0 63.0
17.1
13.7 20.412.7
14.2
18.2
15.413.7 21.0 8.0
14.514.6
16.1
11.713.2 17.2
17.813.3
8.215.6
20.1 22.914.7 12.8 10.1
16.5 18.614.3 16.9 14.4 16.5 15.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 43
Page 43 of 134
Figure 4.5.4 Public perception: “Lack of confidence” (by subgroups)
7.0 6.7 5.3 6.6 8.1 8.6 7.5 5.5 5.1 8.2 7.2 5.5 8.3 8.0 6.5 6.4
20.317.2
15.318.2
21.5 22.418.4
17.5 15.2
18.8 20.916.1
22.218.6 21.7
17.4
33.2 42.1 51.1
33.4
32.8
39.7
37.137.6
48.527.1
35.4
38.6
37.0
29.8
36.739.9
39.434.1
28.3
41.837.6
29.437.0 39.4
31.2
46.036.4 39.8
32.5
43.735.1 36.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 44
Page 44 of 134
Figure 4.5.5 Public perception: “Lack of experience” (by subgroups)
3.6 2.1 2.6 1.9 3.9 4.5 3.4 1.8 1.7 2.7 3.5 2.5 3.2 1.6 3.3 2.6
13.7 15.0 11.8 12.3
18.1 15.8 16.212.7 10.9 9.7
19.1
11.917.7 21.0
13.3 13.6
42.7
51.5 56.3
43.6
44.5 51.247.1
45.755.6
40.4
44.5
44.3
51.039.5
47.6 48.7
40.031.3 29.2
42.233.6
28.633.2
39.831.8
47.3
32.941.2
28.1
37.9 35.8 35.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 45
Page 45 of 134
Figure 4.5.6 Public perception: “Lack of support from political parties and organisations” (by subgroups)
6.0 4.6 6.3 3.3 6.4 5.6 6.3 4.5 6.4 3.8 5.3 4.9 5.8 8.8 5.7 4.5
16.8 23.115.6 20.0
23.3 21.8 23.6
17.2 15.5 21.9 22.419.1
21.522.3
16.6 21.8
40.5
42.7 53.1
38.7
36.3 43.742.7
39.9
49.2
32.0
40.841.1
42.3 31.244.5
42.0
36.729.7
25.0
38.034.0
28.9 27.3
38.4
29.0
42.3
31.6 35.030.4
37.733.1 31.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 46
Page 46 of 134
Figure 4.5.7 Public perception: “Lack of support from family” (by subgroups)
6.61.1 2.5 2.9 5.3 7.9
3.3 2.3 3.4 2.5 4.5 3.3 4.4 6.3 4.8 2.8
36.3
35.4 35.2 37.3 34.934.4
39.034.6 32.5
42.6 35.534.0
38.430.5
41.2
34.8
25.932.8
35.226.2 28.6
30.7 30.0
28.437.8 17.2 29.0
29.6
29.2
18.0
29.4
31.6
31.2 30.7 27.133.6 31.2
26.9 27.734.7
26.2
37.830.9 33.1
27.9
45.2
24.530.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Poltiical tendecy*
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 47
Page 47 of 134
Figure 4.5.8 Public perception: “Lack of social network and connections” (by subgroups)
8.5 5.9 7.3 5.6 8.514.2
4.0 6.2 7.8 6.2 7.2 6.8 7.6 6.7 9.2 6.1
20.717.2
9.317.1
27.1
25.4
21.3 14.7 11.4 11.7
27.5
16.522.1
32.3
17.816.9
38.0 47.255.4 41.7
35.0
38.7
45.3
42.952.3
41.4
36.6
43.3
42.329.2
40.3 46.7
32.8 29.8 27.935.6
29.521.6
29.536.2
28.5
40.6
28.733.5
28.031.8 32.7 30.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 48
Page 48 of 134
Figure 4.5.9 Public perception: “Double standards between genders to prove themselves” (by subgroups)
4.8 3.1 3.4 3.2 4.8 5.1 3.7 3.5 2.8 5.3 4.0 3.7 4.1 4.8 6.52.2
43.4 49.9 52.848.2
41.347.6 48.1 45.8 49.2
51.0
43.5 47.1 46.5
35.4
45.750.2
18.6
22.321.9
20.2
20.0
23.520.1
19.4
22.9 16.2
20.720.0 21.2
20.6
17.821.5
33.224.7 21.9
28.433.9
23.828.1 31.3
25.1 27.531.8 29.2 28.2
39.230.1 26.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lower
secondary
or
below
Upper
secondary
Tertiary
or
above
Never
married
Married
w/children
Married
w/o
children
Employed Non-
employed
Pro-
estab
Non-
estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children Employment Political tendency*
Obstacle for men Obstacle for women Obstacle for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 49
Page 49 of 134
Figure 4.6.2 Should we increase the proportion of women in political leadership positions? (by subgroups)
32.639.1
44.8
36.929.4
34.439.1
34.9
44.3
35.131.1
36.2 35.930.0
41.934.2
55.746.7
42.553.0
54.950.0
49.552.1
42.355.2
55.052.4
49.056.0
47.2
52.6
11.7 14.2 12.7 10.115.7 15.6
11.5 13.0 13.59.7
13.9 11.515.0 14.1 10.9 13.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Yes No Don't know
Page 50
Page 50 of 134
Figure 4.6.4 Perception: “Make more female role models and mentors available” (by subgroups)
57.463.1
68.7
59.156.0
59.163.4
59.265.5
60.956.8 59.0
62.459.3 61.1 61.0
10.3
7.0
6.8
9.39.0
6.5
7.210.1
8.1
5.710.0 8.6
8.3
5.0
9.8 8.7
32.3 29.924.5
31.635.0 34.4
29.4 30.726.3
33.5 33.2 32.5 29.335.7
29.1 30.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Educatio level Marital status and children Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 51
Page 51 of 134
Figure 4.6.5 Perception: “Provide training for potential female leaders” (by subgroups)
69.1
79.6 81.276.4
68.6
76.2 74.7 74.278.0
75.0 72.1 74.9 74.580.0
70.176.2
10.2
6.8 5.68.2
10.5
8.26.3 10.0
8.5
7.19.0
7.6 9.6
6.1
9.6
8.2
20.713.7 13.2 15.4
20.915.6
19.015.8 13.5
17.9 18.8 17.5 16.0 13.920.4
15.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 52
Page 52 of 134
Figure 4.6.6 Perception: “Implement family-friendly policies” (by subgroups)
73.1
82.0 79.4 80.974.0
77.481.1
76.3 78.685.1
74.479.4
76.1 78.082.6
75.2
10.5
7.5 11.3 6.5
9.46.7
4.7 12.411.4
2.4
10.27.4
10.9 7.9
7.0
10.3
16.510.5 9.3
12.716.6 15.9 14.2 11.3 9.9 12.5
15.3 13.2 13.0 14.010.3
14.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 53
Page 53 of 134
Figure 4.6.7 Perception: “Encourage women to lean in for opportunities” (by subgroups)
69.5
80.4
69.0
76.8 78.1 78.081.0
70.5 71.775.3 77.6
74.4 76.6 76.9 79.872.5
12.9
7.3
13.8
10.3 7.1 5.74.6
15.3 14.9 7.18.0
9.510.7
6.97.9
11.8
17.612.3
17.313.0 14.8 16.3 14.4 14.2 13.4
17.614.4 16.1
12.816.2
12.215.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 54
Page 54 of 134
Figure 4.6.8 Perception: “Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of gender equality” (by subgroups)
70.276.7 79.4
71.2 71.974.9 76.1
71.8
80.3
68.371.6 71.1
77.1
68.1
79.072.1
11.1
5.65.1
8.5 9.97.9 5.1
10.3
7.0
6.8
9.57.5
9.0
10.3
7.5
8.3
18.7 17.8 15.520.3 18.2 17.2 18.7 17.9
12.7
24.918.9 21.3
13.9
21.6
13.519.6
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Education level Marital status and children* Employment* Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 55
Page 55 of 134
Figure 4.6.9 Perception: “Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of women” (by subgroups)
28.2
40.3 38.633.6 32.8
41.237.1
30.336.4 34.2 33.8 33.5 36.1
29.334.7 35.3
47.3
34.331.7 40.6
46.134.9
36.145.8 31.8
45.8 44.040.8
40.1
45.838.9 40.2
24.6 25.429.7
25.821.1 23.9 26.8
24.0
31.8
20.0 22.225.7 23.9 24.9 26.4 24.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 56
Page 56 of 134
Figure 4.6.10 Perception: “Reserve a certain number of seats for women in the Legislative Council, District Councils, and Government
units” (by subgroups)
29.3
37.7 39.434.0
29.636.5 37.8
30.0
38.034.4
30.733.8 33.7
29.035.1 33.5
49.136.1 31.2 41.5 50.3 38.7 38.0
46.6 31.8
47.1
47.1 42.8 41.6 49.3 39.0 42.7
21.626.2
29.424.5
20.124.7 24.2 23.4
30.3
18.522.2 23.4 24.8 21.6
25.9 23.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Education level Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency
Support Do not support Neither support nor against
Page 57
Page 57 of 134
Figure 4.6.12 What should be the percentage allotted to women? (by subgroups)
15.7
23.5 25.518.4 17.3 20.3 19.0 20.2 23.0 20.5 17.5 20.0 19.7
13.0
21.6 20.7
16.5
17.819.6
17.615.3
16.6 19.9 15.8
20.2
15.116.4
16.7 18.0
12.2
23.1
15.0
18.7
16.4
22.4
16.3
15.1
18.218.7
16.4
19.1
15.6 17.117.8 17.1
18.6
17.1
17.4
30.722.1
13.3
28.333.0 20.4
20.7 32.315.7
34.330.0
27.5 24.6
32.9
24.9
25.3
18.4 20.1 19.2 19.4 19.324.5 21.7
15.422.0
14.519.0 18.1 20.7 23.3
13.3
21.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15to34
35to54
55or
above
Lowersecondary
orbelow
Uppersecondary
Tertiaryor
above
Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Employed Non-employed
Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderategroups
Gender* Age* Education level* Marital status and children* Employment Political tendency*
50% or above 40 - 49% Below 40% Do not agree Don't know
Page 58
Page 58 of 134
Figure 5.2.2 Perception: “Competent” (by subgroups) (*: P<0.05)
3.310.3 10.0 7.1 4.0 8.2 4.5 5.4
16.1
4.4 5.911.9
2.17.0
1.8 2.110.2 6.3
7.71.8 1.7 3.6 8.7
4.73.0
6.8
6.5
4.45.9
3.6
5.25.1
5.3 8.31.7 5.8
89.0 87.9 88.3 89.3 87.3 87.192.5
87.877.4
91.2 88.2 84.592.7
87.993.0 89.6 88.1 88.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 59
Page 59 of 134
Figure 5.2.3 Perception: “Compassionate” (by subgroups)
24.4
39.431.7 29.4 32.5 36.5 34.3
27.0
41.9
28.132.7 29.8 33.2 34.9
21.1
33.325.4
33.5
6.2
3.0
3.3 5.14.8
2.41.5
6.8
0.0
3.5
5.94.8
3.6 3.3
7.0
2.1
5.1
4.7
69.4
57.665.0 65.5 62.7 61.2 64.2 66.2
58.1
68.461.4 65.5 63.2 61.9
71.964.6
69.561.8
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 60
Page 60 of 134
Figure 5.2.4 Perception: “Visionary” (by subgroups)
1.05.5
10.02.0 2.4 4.7 1.5 2.0
12.9
2.6 1.36.0
0.5 3.3 1.8 2.16.8
2.1
30.6 21.216.7
27.9 27.0 25.9 31.3 30.4
41.9
25.4 30.127.4
30.6 28.8 33.339.6
18.6 30.4
68.473.3 73.3 70.1 70.6 69.4 67.2 67.6
45.2
71.9 68.6 66.7 68.9 67.9 64.958.3
74.667.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Marital status and children Education level* Income* Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 61
Page 61 of 134
Figure 5.2.5 Perception: “Persuasive” (by subgroups)
21.526.7
16.725.9 23.0 20.0
29.923.0
32.323.7 22.9 22.6 23.8 23.3 21.1 25.0 23.7 24.1
9.68.5
11.7
8.68.7
9.4
13.4
7.4
6.5
8.8 10.5 9.5 8.8 10.27.0
14.66.8 8.9
68.9 64.871.7
65.5 68.3 70.6
56.7
69.661.3
67.5 66.7 67.9 67.4 66.571.9
60.469.5 67.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 62
Page 62 of 134
Figure 5.2.6 Perception: “Prioritising the public interest” (by subgroups)
3.8
15.8 11.7 8.6 8.7 10.6 9.0 8.8
19.4
7.9 9.2 13.17.3
11.63.5 6.3
13.69.4
12.0
6.18.3
8.1 11.9 5.9 6.0 10.1
9.7
6.19.2
7.1
7.87.4
7.06.3
3.4 9.9
84.278.2 80.0 83.2 79.4
83.5 85.1 81.1
71.0
86.081.7 79.8
85.0 80.989.5 87.5
83.1 80.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 63
Page 63 of 134
Figure 5.2.7 Perception: “Collaborative and working out compromises” (by subgroups)
16.3
35.2
20.027.4
21.428.2 25.4 26.4 29.0 26.3 27.5 25.0 28.5 28.4
19.327.1 30.5
26.2
17.7
9.7
10.0
13.216.7
10.6 13.416.9
19.4
7.0
19.0
10.7
16.1 13.5
17.5
16.7 6.8 16.2
66.0
55.2
70.059.4 61.9 61.2 61.2
56.851.6
66.7
53.6
64.355.4 58.1
63.256.3
62.757.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 64
Page 64 of 134
Figure 5.2.8 Perception: “Hard-working” (by subgroups)
11.521.8
10.018.3 15.1 14.1 19.4 17.6
25.8
11.420.3 17.9 16.6 19.1 14.0
20.815.3 17.3
3.3
3.6
5.0
3.03.2 4.7
3.0 2.70.0
2.6
4.63.6 3.1 3.3
3.50.0
1.74.7
85.274.5
85.078.7 81.7 81.2 77.6 79.7 74.2
86.075.2 78.6 80.3 77.7 82.5 79.2 83.1 78.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 65
Page 65 of 134
Figure 5.2.9 Perception: “Honest and ethical” (by subgroups)
10.516.4
8.315.2 11.9 11.8 14.9 14.2
25.8
11.4 13.717.9
11.415.3
8.816.7 16.9
12.6
2.9
1.2
1.7
1.53.2 2.4
1.5 2.0
0.0
0.93.3
0.0
2.61.9
1.8
0.0 1.72.6
86.682.4
90.083.2 84.9 85.9 83.6 83.8
74.2
87.783.0 82.1
86.0 82.889.5
83.3 81.4 84.8
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 66
Page 66 of 134
Figure 5.2.10 Perception: “Standing up for what they believe in despite political pressure” (by subgroups)
7.712.7
8.3 10.2 10.3 8.2 11.9 10.8
25.8
9.6 8.513.1
8.3 11.67.0
14.68.5 10.5
11.09.1
6.710.2 11.1
7.1
16.410.1
19.4
6.112.4
10.710.9
12.1
5.3
6.310.2
12.0
81.3 78.285.0
79.7 78.684.7
71.679.1
54.8
84.279.1 76.2
80.876.3
87.779.2 81.4 77.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level* Income Political position Political tendency
More true for women More true for men Equally true of both
Page 67
Page 67 of 134
Figure 5.3.2 Female or male leaders are more capable in “economics, finance, and trade” (by subgroups)
1.9 2.4 1.7 3.0 0.8 1.2 4.5 2.7 3.2 1.8 3.3 3.6 2.1 3.3 1.8 2.1 3.4 2.6
32.126.1 28.3 28.4 30.2 29.4
32.829.7
32.3 32.5 29.435.7
28.031.2
21.1
37.530.5 29.3
66.071.5 70.0 68.5 69.0 69.4
62.767.6 64.5 65.8 67.3
60.7
69.965.6
77.2
60.466.1 68.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 68
Page 68 of 134
Figure 5.3.3 Female or male leaders are more capable in “security affairs” (by subgroups)
2.4 1.8 1.7 1.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 2.0 0.0 2.6 1.3 2.4 1.6 1.4 1.8 4.2 1.7 1.0
51.7
40.6 43.3 46.248.4
43.546.3
52.761.3
50.046.4
51.247.7 49.8 49.1
58.3
39.050.3
45.9
57.6 55.0 52.847.6
56.550.7
45.338.7
47.452.3
46.450.8 48.8 49.1
37.5
59.3
48.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 69
Page 69 of 134
Figure 5.3.4 Female or male leaders are more capable in “social welfare” (by subgroups)
32.5 35.831.7 32.0
36.5 35.3 35.8 34.541.9
34.2 34.642.9
32.637.2
28.1
39.6
28.836.1
5.34.2
6.7 5.63.2 3.5 6.0
4.7
3.2
3.5 6.5
2.4
5.25.1
3.5
8.3
3.4
4.7
62.2 60.0 61.7 62.4 60.3 61.2 58.2 60.854.8
62.3 58.854.8
62.257.7
68.4
52.1
67.859.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 70
Page 70 of 134
Figure 5.3.5 Female or male leaders are more capable in “infrastructure and development” (by subgroups)
2.4 1.8 0.0 2.0 3.2 0.0 3.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.6 1.4 1.8 0.0 0.0 2.1
36.432.7
31.734.5 34.9
32.935.8 37.2 41.9
35.135.9 40.5 34.2 35.3 36.8
52.1
25.4
35.6
61.265.5 68.3
63.5 61.967.1
61.2 61.5 58.164.9 61.4 59.5
64.2 63.3 61.4
47.9
74.6
62.3
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 71
Page 71 of 134
Figure 5.3.6 Female or male leaders are more capable in “environment” (by subgroups)
12.419.4
15.0 15.7 14.320.0 16.4 13.5
32.3
16.7 12.4
26.2
11.9 15.8 15.8 14.6 16.9 16.2
7.2
5.56.7 6.6 6.3
3.5 9.08.1
6.5
5.39.2
2.4
8.37.9
1.812.5
3.4 7.3
80.475.2 78.3 77.7 79.4 76.5 74.6 78.4
61.3
78.1 78.471.4
79.8 76.382.5
72.979.7 76.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 72
Page 72 of 134
Figure 5.3.7 Female or male leaders are more capable in “education” (by subgroups)
18.225.5 26.7
21.817.5
27.1 26.9
16.222.6 20.2 22.9
29.8
18.7 21.915.8
20.827.1
20.4
5.3
4.8 5.05.1
5.6
3.5 6.0
5.4
6.52.6
7.22.4
5.25.6
3.5
6.33.4
5.8
76.669.7 68.3
73.1 77.069.4 67.2
78.471.0
77.269.9 67.9
76.2 72.680.7
72.9 69.573.8
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 73
Page 73 of 134
Figure 5.3.8 Female or male leaders are more capable in “political reforms” (by subgroups)
1.9 4.2 3.3 3.0 2.4 2.4 6.0 2.7 3.2 1.8 4.6 4.8 2.6 3.7 3.5 4.2 1.7 3.7
16.717.0 16.7 17.3 15.9 16.5 11.9 18.9
25.8
16.715.7 19.0
14.016.7
12.3
29.2
10.2
16.2
81.3 78.8 80.0 79.7 81.7 81.2 82.1 78.471.0
81.6 79.7 76.283.4 79.5
84.2
66.7
88.180.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 74
Page 74 of 134
Figure 5.3.9 Female or male leaders are more capable in “labour issues” (by subgroups)
5.710.9
6.7 8.1 7.9 9.4 11.9 8.8
22.6
5.310.5 11.9 8.8 10.7 8.8 6.3 6.8
11.5
12.47.9
10.0 10.2 11.1 8.210.4
10.1
12.9
9.6
9.8 10.78.3
10.28.8 16.7
8.5
8.9
81.8 81.2 83.3 81.7 81.0 82.477.6 81.1
64.5
85.179.7 77.4
82.9 79.1 82.577.1
84.779.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Female leader is more capable Male leader is more capable No difference
Page 75
Page 75 of 134
Figure 5.3.11 In Hong Kong, who make better political leaders? (by subgroups)
3.69.7 9.6 6.5 5.1 8.2 6.0 6.1
19.4
5.3 5.9 6.0 6.2 6.0 7.0 10.46.8 6.3
11.95.8 7.7
9.78.5
5.914.9
8.1
9.7
5.311.8 8.3 9.8 9.8 7.0
20.8
5.1 7.3
84.5 84.4 82.7 83.8 86.4 85.979.1
85.8
71.0
89.582.4
85.7 83.9 84.2 86.0
68.8
88.1 86.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level* Income Political position Political tendency*
Women Men No difference
Page 76
Page 76 of 134
Figure 5.3.12 In Hong Kong, who perform better as community/grassroots leaders? (by subgroups)
10.4 13.69.6 11.4 13.6
8.2 11.9 13.5 12.9 10.5 13.1 14.39.8 12.1 8.8
16.78.5 12.0
7.87.8
9.6 7.07.6
8.26.0
6.8 6.55.3
8.5 9.5
6.28.8
1.8
8.3
3.4
7.9
81.9 78.6 80.8 81.6 78.883.5 82.1 79.7 80.6 84.2
78.4 76.283.9
79.1
89.5
75.0
88.180.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Women Men No difference
Page 77
Page 77 of 134
Figure 5.3.13 In Hong Kong, do you have greater confidence in the performance of female or male members in the Legislative Council
and District Councils? (by subgroups)
4.19.7 7.7 8.1 4.2 1.2
10.4 7.416.1
3.5 7.2 7.1 5.7 7.0 7.0 10.4 6.8 5.8
12.47.8
7.7 10.311.0
7.1
11.99.5
19.4
7.09.2 11.9
7.8 8.4 8.8
12.5
8.5 8.9
83.4 82.5 84.6 81.6 84.791.8
77.683.1
64.5
89.583.7 81.0
86.5 84.7 84.277.1
84.7 85.3
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level* Income Political position Political tendency
Women Men No difference
Page 78
Page 78 of 134
Figure 5.4.2 In Hong Kong, who face more challenges when attempting to attain higher political leadership positions? (by subgroups)
30.1
46.1 50.0
36.231.4
49.441.8
33.1 32.338.6
43.150.0
36.840.9
36.841.7
54.2
35.6
9.8
5.2
7.7
5.910.2
5.9
9.0
7.43.2
7.97.8
7.1
7.38.4
1.8
12.5
1.7
7.9
60.1
48.742.3
57.8 58.5
44.749.3
59.564.5
53.549.0
42.9
56.050.7
61.4
45.8 44.1
56.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Women Men No difference
Page 79
Page 79 of 134
Figure 5.4.3 Perception: “Women and men should have an equal role in running the government” (by subgroups)
3.6 4.59.6
2.2 5.90.0 0.0
6.8 3.2 0.9 3.9 1.2 1.6 2.8 3.5 0.0 3.4 3.14.1 3.9
3.8
3.84.2
3.5 3.0
5.46.5
4.43.9
3.6 4.1 4.2 3.5
0.0
6.8 4.7
9.316.2
15.4
14.111.0
15.3 13.4
10.19.7 15.8 11.1 14.3 9.8
12.1 8.8
12.5
11.9 13.1
33.7
35.119.2 36.2 36.4 40.0
31.3
33.1 41.934.2
33.3 31.0 37.335.8 38.6
37.5
28.835.6
49.240.3
51.943.8 42.4 41.2
52.244.6
38.744.7 47.7 50.0 47.2 45.1 45.6
50.0 49.243.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 80
Page 80 of 134
Figure 5.4.4 Perception: “Female leaders have a responsibility to represent the interests of women in society at large” (by subgroups)
10.96.5
17.3
5.911.0
4.7 4.512.2
3.2 5.310.5
4.8 6.7 7.9 5.3 2.1
11.97.9
20.7
14.3
15.4
18.916.9
16.5 19.4
19.6
16.118.4
19.6
19.020.2 18.1
19.3 25.013.6 18.8
34.2
37.0
25.0 38.437.3
32.935.8
35.1
22.6
38.634.6
33.336.3 34.9 38.6
29.2 28.8
38.2
22.8
25.321.2
23.823.7
29.4 20.9
24.3
38.7
23.723.5
26.2
24.924.2
29.8
27.1 28.8
23.6
11.416.9
21.213.0 11.0
16.5 19.4
8.8
19.414.0 11.8
16.711.9 14.9
7.016.7 16.9
11.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 81
Page 81 of 134
Figure 5.4.5 Perception: “Male leaders have a responsibility to represent the interests of men in society at large” (by subgroups)
10.9 7.817.3
7.0 11.0 7.1 4.512.2
6.5 7.9 9.2 6.0 7.8 8.8 5.3 2.1
13.68.4
25.4
15.6
19.2
21.620.3
17.6 22.4
24.3
19.424.6 20.9 23.8 22.8 20.0 28.1
29.215.3 22.5
40.9
42.2
28.8 45.4 42.4
40.041.8
41.9
32.3
41.2 43.836.9
44.041.4
47.445.8
28.8
44.5
16.1
22.117.3
18.9 17.8
22.4 17.9
17.6
29.0
16.7 19.0
22.6
17.620.0
15.8
12.5
32.2
16.8
6.712.3
17.3
7.0 8.512.9 13.4
4.112.9 9.6 7.2 10.7 7.8 9.8
3.510.4 10.2 7.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 82
Page 82 of 134
Figure 5.4.6 Perception: “The more women leaders there are in government and councils, the greater influence they will have on
political priorities and policy” (by subgroups)
5.2 6.515.4
3.2 6.8 4.70.0
8.1 6.5 2.6 5.9 2.4 4.1 5.1 5.30.0
8.5 4.7
19.29.7
13.5
10.8
21.217.6
9.0
15.59.7 18.4 13.1
14.315.5 12.6 15.8
14.6
15.314.7
24.434.4
19.2
33.5
27.128.2
26.9
29.7
32.333.3
25.534.5 24.9 31.6 21.1
25.0
25.4 31.4
40.9 34.432.7
41.134.7
34.1
46.3
37.2
35.534.2
41.8 31.0 44.0 35.8 52.6
43.833.9
38.2
10.414.9 19.2
11.4 10.215.3 17.9
9.516.1 11.4 13.7 17.9
11.4 14.95.3
16.7 16.911.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 83
Page 83 of 134
Figure 5.4.7 Perception: “Male leaders can sufficiently represent the interests of women in politics” (by subgroups)
4.110.4
17.3
5.4 5.9 9.40.0
8.8 6.5 3.58.5 7.1 4.1 7.4 5.3 2.1 5.1 7.9
29.0
37.017.3
33.037.3 31.8
37.329.7 35.5
28.9
33.328.6 33.2
34.4
26.322.9
39.0 31.9
49.2
40.3
42.3
48.1 42.438.8 49.3 48.0 41.9
52.642.5
45.247.7
45.1
43.9 56.3
42.445.0
14.59.1
15.4
11.4 11.916.5
10.4 12.212.9 10.5 15.0
15.513.5 11.2
21.118.8 8.5 13.1
3.1 3.27.7
2.2 2.5 3.5 3.0 1.4 3.2 4.4 0.7 3.6 1.6 1.9 3.5 5.1 2.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 84
Page 84 of 134
Figure 5.4.8 Perception: “Female leaders can sufficiently represent the interests of men in politics” (by subgroups)
5.2 8.415.4
4.9 6.8 5.90.0
9.5 6.5 2.67.8 7.1
2.6 5.6 5.3 2.18.5 5.8
25.9
31.8 17.329.7 29.7
25.9 37.324.3
25.823.7
31.4
21.4 30.630.2
22.822.9
30.528.3
49.7
42.2
44.249.7 43.2
42.4
46.3 50.748.4
54.4
42.5
48.848.2
47.9
43.956.3
44.146.6
16.1 14.317.3
13.017.8
22.4
13.4 14.212.9 15.8 17.6
19.017.1 14.0
26.3
18.8 13.6 16.8
3.1 3.2 5.8 2.7 2.5 3.5 3.0 1.46.5 3.5 0.7 3.6 1.6 2.3 1.8 3.4 2.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 85
Page 85 of 134
Figure 5.4.9 Perception: “Women are 50% of the population and should be as equally represented as men in decision-making positions”
(by subgroups)
5.7 6.5 9.6 4.9 7.6 3.5 1.58.1
3.2 2.6 6.5 4.8 3.6 4.7 7.0 6.3 3.4 4.7
8.3 6.59.6
7.07.6
8.2 11.96.1 12.9
4.4
9.84.8 9.8 9.3 3.5 6.3 11.9 7.3
33.227.3
26.933.0 29.7
25.928.4
36.5 29.036.0
30.1
31.031.1 27.4
42.129.2 25.4 35.1
35.2
29.225.0
33.5 33.141.2 32.8
27.0
25.837.7 29.4
32.133.7
34.9
29.8
33.328.8
33.0
17.6
30.5 28.821.6 22.0 21.2 25.4 22.3
29.019.3
24.2 27.421.8 23.7
17.525.0
30.519.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 86
Page 86 of 134
Figure 5.4.10 Perception: “Women’s presence will increase the political legitimacy of government and councils” (by subgroups)
3.6 6.511.5
3.8 5.1 2.4 0.07.4
3.2 1.8 5.2 3.6 2.6 4.7 3.5 0.0 3.4 4.7
11.4 5.8
7.7
8.610.2
10.6 11.9
7.4 16.18.8
8.57.1 9.8 8.4 12.3
8.38.5 9.9
34.232.5
26.936.2 33.1
31.8 32.834.5 29.0 43.9
27.5 34.5 33.7 33.0 29.8
31.332.2
35.1
36.8
33.1 30.8
36.2 33.9 41.234.3
34.5
25.8
34.2
39.9 33.338.9 35.8
42.1
31.3
37.3
37.2
14.022.1 23.1
15.1 17.8 14.120.9
16.225.8
11.419.0 21.4
15.0 18.112.3
29.2
18.613.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 87
Page 87 of 134
Figure 5.4.11 Perception: “Women should be represented in decision making because this right is enshrined in laws” (by subgroups)
3.1 5.2 7.72.7 5.9
1.2 0.06.8 3.2 1.8 3.9 2.4 2.1 3.3 5.3 2.1 1.7 3.7
3.13.9
3.82.7
4.23.5 3.0
4.13.2 6.1 2.0 6.0 2.6 3.3
5.3
0.08.5 3.1
22.827.9 21.2
25.4
28.0
23.5 23.9
27.029.0 27.2
24.2 22.6 25.9 25.624.6
27.1
25.425.7
42.5
40.942.3 42.2
39.050.6
40.3
37.835.5
42.143.1 44.0 43.0 42.3
42.1
31.3
42.4 44.5
28.522.1 25.0 27.0 22.9 21.2
32.824.3
29.022.8 26.8 25.0 26.4 25.6 22.8
39.6
22.0 23.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 88
Page 88 of 134
Figure 5.4.12 Perception: “Women bring different views, perspectives and talents to politics” (by subgroups)
2.6 5.8 9.63.2 4.2 1.2 0.0
6.8 3.2 1.8 3.9 1.2 2.6 3.3 3.5 0.0 3.4 3.74.7 0.6
0.0
1.65.9
2.40.0
5.46.5
2.63.3
2.4 2.6 2.8 3.5 6.35.1 2.1
29.522.7
30.8
25.9
28.0
24.7 32.8
23.6 32.3
31.621.6 32.1
23.827.9 24.6 27.1
28.825.7
43.5
42.2
30.845.4
42.4
44.740.3
43.9 32.3 48.2
41.835.7 48.2 38.6
54.4
33.3
42.446.1
19.728.6 28.8
23.819.5
27.1 26.920.3
25.815.8
29.4 28.622.8
27.4
14.0
33.3
20.3 22.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 89
Page 89 of 134
Figure 5.4.13 Perception: “The empowerment of women will lead to the development of society at large” (by subgroups)
3.6 6.511.5
3.8 5.11.2 1.5
8.1 6.52.6 4.6 3.6 2.1 4.2 5.3
0.06.8 4.2
5.2 1.30.0
0.5
9.3
2.4 0.0
4.73.2
2.63.3
0.0 4.1 2.8 1.84.2
3.42.6
33.2
24.0 19.2 30.8
32.2
22.431.3
32.445.2
36.022.2 29.8
28.5 28.436.8
31.3 22.0 31.9
42.5
40.338.5
44.9
35.6
48.2
44.8
38.5
32.3
41.2
45.846.4 44.0 41.9
43.9
45.844.1
41.4
15.5
27.9 30.8
20.0 17.825.9 22.4
16.2 12.917.5
24.2 20.2 21.2 22.8
12.318.8
23.719.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Marital status and children* Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 90
Page 90 of 134
Figure 5.4.14 Perception: “Including more women will increase the electoral appeal of political parties or groupings” (by subgroups)
5.2 5.29.6
4.3 5.9 2.4 0.08.8 6.5
1.85.9 4.8 2.1 4.7 5.3
0.05.1 5.2
8.83.9
1.94.9
11.0
3.5 4.5
7.46.5
5.35.9
2.4 6.2 4.212.3
8.35.1 5.2
33.2 39.626.9
38.4
38.1
34.1 38.8
35.8 45.2
36.834.6
35.7 35.8 34.9
40.4
22.9
40.7 38.7
38.929.2
34.6
36.230.5
41.2 32.8
33.8 19.441.2 34.6
36.938.9 35.8
33.3
43.8
30.5 35.1
14.022.1
26.9
16.2 14.418.8
23.914.2
22.614.9
19.0 20.2 17.1 20.5
8.8
25.018.6 15.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 91
Page 91 of 134
Figure 5.5.2 Has gender helped or hurt men’s or women’s political careers? (by subgroups)
12.819.9 20.8
14.6 14.7 15.319.4
14.222.6
14.0 15.722.6
11.415.8 14.0
20.827.1
11.0
2.8
8.5 10.4
6.41.8
11.8 4.5
2.7
6.5
5.36.5
4.8
5.7
7.03.5
4.2
10.2
5.2
84.4
71.6 68.8
78.983.5
72.9 76.183.1
71.0
80.7 77.872.6
82.977.2
82.575.0
62.7
83.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children* Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Helped my political career Hurt my political career Made no difference
Page 92
Page 92 of 134
Figure 5.5.4 Perception: “Traditional attitudes (e.g. ‘women are to take care of the family while men are to work outside’)” (by subgroups)
43.046.8
41.746.2
41.349.4
55.2
38.5
19.4
48.2 49.041.7
48.2 46.0
35.1 37.5
49.2 46.6
2.81.4
6.31.2
2.8
0.0
1.5
2.7
3.2
1.8 1.3
0.0
1.62.3
1.8 0.0
1.72.1
26.3 24.833.3
25.7
21.1
32.9 17.9
27.0
29.0
27.2 25.5
32.124.9 26.5
29.8 29.2
32.2
24.1
27.9 27.018.8
26.934.9
17.625.4
31.8
48.4
22.8 24.2 26.2 25.4 25.133.3 33.3
16.9
27.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children * Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 93
Page 93 of 134
Figure 5.5.5 Perception: “Domestic responsibilities” (by subgroup)
63.1 62.458.3 60.8 64.2 67.1 67.2
60.151.6
62.368.0
60.768.9
64.2 63.2
72.964.4 61.8
2.8 2.86.3 1.2
4.6 1.2 3.0
2.7
6.5
3.50.7
3.6
1.02.3 5.3
4.2
3.41.6
21.817.7
25.022.2
13.822.4 16.4
22.325.8
20.220.3
25.018.7
20.921.1
10.420.3
23.0
12.317.0
10.415.8 17.4
9.413.4 14.9 16.1 14.0 11.1 10.7 11.4 12.6 10.5 12.5 11.9 13.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 94
Page 94 of 134
Figure 5.5.6 Perception: “Lack of confidence” (by subgroups)
10.615.6 16.7
11.7 11.9 15.3 14.910.8
19.411.4 13.1
17.910.4
14.95.3 8.3
20.312.0
3.93.5 4.2
4.7 2.82.4 4.5
3.4
6.5
3.5 2.6
3.6
2.1
3.7
3.54.2
5.1
2.6
62.6 53.2 50.0 56.7 62.463.5
52.2 60.8
51.6
58.862.1 52.4 66.8 57.2
70.2 60.4
57.6
60.2
22.927.7 29.2 26.9
22.918.8
28.4 25.0 22.6 26.322.2 26.2
20.7 24.2 21.127.1
16.925.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 95
Page 95 of 134
Figure 5.5.7 Perception: “Lack of experience” (by subgroups)
7.811.3 8.3 8.2 11.0 11.8 10.4 8.1
12.9 9.6 9.215.5
7.3 10.25.3 4.2
20.3
7.9
3.91.4 6.3
2.91.8 1.2 1.5 3.4
3.23.5 1.3
1.2
2.12.8
1.8 2.1
3.4
2.1
65.457.4 52.1 61.4
64.2 67.162.7 60.8 51.6 60.5 67.3 56.0 69.9 62.3 71.9
62.5
57.6
64.9
22.929.8 33.3
27.522.9 20.0
25.4 27.732.3
26.322.2
27.420.7
24.721.1
31.3
18.625.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 96
Page 96 of 134
Figure 5.5.8 Perception: “Lack of support from political parties and organisations” (by subgroups)
7.312.1 14.6
6.411.0 14.1
9.0 8.116.1
8.8 9.817.9
7.3 10.7 7.02.1
13.6 11.03.9
1.4
6.3
2.32.8
1.23.0 2.7
3.2
3.5 1.3
1.2
2.12.3
1.82.1
5.11.6
63.7 56.7
54.2
60.8
60.664.7
56.7 60.8 45.2 57.966.7
56.066.3 61.4
64.9
62.5
61.0
60.7
25.129.8
25.030.4
25.720.0
31.3 28.435.5
29.822.2 25.0 24.4 25.6 26.3
33.3
20.326.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 97
Page 97 of 134
Figure 5.5.9 Perception: “Lack of support from family” (by subgroups)
24.6 27.020.8
26.3 24.8 25.931.3
25.0
16.1
28.1 28.1 28.6 28.0 28.4 28.1 27.132.2
25.1
2.8 0.76.3
1.2 1.8 0.0
1.5
2.0
3.2
2.6 0.0 1.2 0.5 1.9 1.8 2.1
1.7
1.0
56.448.2 47.9
51.5 55.0 57.650.7
52.0
48.4
48.258.2
50.057.5 51.2
57.956.3 47.5
54.5
16.2
24.1 25.021.1 18.3 16.5 16.4
20.9
32.3
21.113.7
20.214.0
18.612.3 14.6
18.6 19.4
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level * Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 98
Page 98 of 134
Figure 5.5.10 Perception: “Lack of social network and connections” (by subgroups)
9.5 10.6 10.4 9.9 9.24.7
11.9 12.8 16.17.9 11.1 9.5 10.9 10.2
14.0 12.56.8
11.0
1.72.8 4.2
1.2 3.7
2.4
1.5 1.4
3.2
1.81.3
1.2 1.0 1.91.8
0.03.4
1.6
68.7 61.7 60.4 64.367.0
75.3 59.764.2
48.4 64.9
71.2
63.1
71.067.0
64.9
62.572.9 65.4
20.124.8 25.0 24.6
20.2 17.6
26.921.6
32.325.4
16.3
26.2
17.120.9 19.3
25.016.9
22.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 99
Page 99 of 134
Figure 5.5.11 Perception: “Double standards between genders to prove themselves” (by subgroups)
30.2
39.733.3 31.6
36.7 37.6 38.831.1
22.6
36.0 36.6 36.9 35.2 34.0 31.6 33.3
49.2
30.9
3.9
1.48.3
1.2
3.7 2.4 1.5
2.7
3.2
2.6 2.0 1.2 2.1 2.3 3.5 2.1
3.4
2.1
40.2
37.6 37.5
40.9
34.940.0 35.8
41.248.4
40.4 37.3 41.739.4 41.9
35.1 31.3
33.9
43.5
25.721.3 20.8
26.3 24.820.0
23.9 25.0 25.821.1 24.2
20.2 23.3 21.929.8 33.3
13.6
23.6
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Men Women 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Obstacle for women Obstacle for men Obstacles for both Not an obstacle for either men or women
Page 100
Page 100 of 134
Figure 5.5.13 Perception: “Traditional attitudes” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
95.588.7 87.5
93.6 93.689.4
95.5 92.6 93.5 93.9 90.8 88.194.8 92.6 91.2 91.7 91.5 93.2
4.511.3 12.5
6.4 6.410.6
4.5 7.4 6.5 6.1 9.2 11.95.2 7.4 8.8 8.3 8.5 6.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 101
Page 101 of 134
Figure 5.5.14 Perception: “Domestic responsibilities” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
96.185.8 83.3
93.0 93.689.4 92.5 91.9 93.5 93.9
88.9 86.993.8 92.6
87.793.8
83.1
93.7
3.914.2 16.7
7.0 6.410.6 7.5 8.1 6.5 6.1
11.1 13.16.2 7.4
12.36.3
16.9
6.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 102
Page 102 of 134
Figure 5.5.15 Perception: “Lack of confidence” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
93.9 91.5 89.694.2 92.7 92.9 89.6
93.987.1
96.590.8 90.5 94.3 92.1 91.2
83.393.2 95.3
6.1 8.5 10.45.8 7.3 7.1 10.4
6.112.9
3.59.2 9.5 5.7 7.9 8.8
16.76.8 4.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 103
Page 103 of 134
Figure 5.5.16 Perception: “Lack of experience” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
91.6 89.4 87.592.4 89.9 89.4 86.6
92.6 90.3 93.088.2 90.5 90.7 89.3 91.2
83.389.8 92.7
8.4 10.6 12.57.6 10.1 10.6 13.4
7.4 9.7 7.011.8 9.5 9.3 10.7 8.8
16.710.2 7.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 104
Page 104 of 134
Figure 5.5.17 Perception: “Lack of support from political parties and organisations” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
91.1 90.8 91.7 93.687.2 90.6 92.5 89.9 93.5 94.7
86.9 90.5 91.2 90.7 89.583.3
89.8 93.2
8.9 9.2 8.3 6.412.8 9.4 7.5 10.1 6.5 5.3
13.1 9.5 8.8 9.3 10.516.7
10.2 6.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 105
Page 105 of 134
Figure 5.5.18 Perception: “Lack of support from family” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
92.7 92.2 93.8 94.789.0
94.1 92.5 91.2 90.395.6
90.2 94.0 92.2 93.586.0 87.5
94.9 93.2
7.3 7.8 6.3 5.311.0
5.9 7.5 8.8 9.74.4
9.8 6.0 7.8 6.514.0 12.5
5.1 6.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 106
Page 106 of 134
Figure 5.5.19 Perception: “Lack of social network and connections” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
87.7 90.883.3
91.8 88.1 90.6 89.6 87.893.5 93.9
84.3 88.1 89.6 88.4 89.583.3
89.8 90.6
12.3 9.216.7
8.2 11.9 9.4 10.4 12.26.5 6.1
15.7 11.9 10.4 11.6 10.516.7
10.2 9.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level* Income Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 107
Page 107 of 134
Figure 5.5.20 Perception: “Double standards between genders to prove themselves” for respondents themselves (by subgroups)
96.688.7 89.6 93.0 95.4
89.495.5 93.9 96.8 96.5
89.5 90.594.8 93.0 91.2 87.5
94.9 94.2
3.411.3 10.4 7.0 4.6
10.64.5 6.1 3.2 3.5
10.5 9.55.2 7.0 8.8 12.5
5.1 5.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Not an obstacle for oneself Obstacle for oneself
Page 108
Page 108 of 134
Figure 5.5.22 Perception: “Mentoring and experience sharing” (by subgroups)
69.8
49.6 45.8
60.265.1
55.3 58.266.9 67.7 66.7
56.952.4
68.460.5
64.9 66.7
52.5
63.4
30.2
50.4 54.2
39.834.9
44.7 41.833.1 32.3 33.3
43.147.6
31.639.5
35.1 33.3
47.5
36.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 109
Page 109 of 134
Figure 5.5.23 Perception: “Provide training to those with potential” (by subgroups)
75.4
63.1 64.670.2 67.9 70.6
79.1
68.277.4
71.1 71.266.7
76.771.6 75.4
68.8 71.2 72.8
24.6
36.9 35.429.8 32.1 29.4
20.9
31.822.6
28.9 28.833.3
23.328.4 24.6
31.3 28.8 27.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 110
Page 110 of 134
Figure 5.5.24 Perception: “Improve promotion pipelines” (by subgroups)
53.6
41.8 43.8 47.4 49.5 52.9 56.7
44.6
58.1
43.953.6
41.7
54.950.2 49.1 52.1
45.851.3
46.4
58.2 56.3 52.6 50.5 47.1 43.3
55.4
41.9
56.146.4
58.3
45.149.8 50.9 47.9
54.248.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 111
Page 111 of 134
Figure 5.5.25 Perception: “Implement family-friendly policies” (by subgroups)
48.6 48.9
60.4
47.4 44.0
54.1 55.245.9
51.6 48.252.3
58.350.3 48.8 50.9
45.8
61.0
48.7
51.4 51.1
39.6
52.6 56.0
45.9 44.854.1
48.4 51.847.7
41.749.7 51.2 49.1
54.2
39.0
51.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 112
Page 112 of 134
Figure 5.5.26 Perception: “Provide chances for me to lean in for opportunities” (by subgroups)
59.8
39.7 43.850.9 51.4 48.2
56.751.4
61.3
46.554.2
47.656.0 53.5 54.4 58.3 55.9
49.2
40.2
60.356.3
49.1 48.6 51.843.3
48.638.7
53.545.8
52.444.0 46.5 45.6 41.7 44.1
50.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 113
Page 113 of 134
Figure 5.5.27 Perception: “Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of gender equality” (by subgroups)
35.831.2
35.431.0
35.842.4
29.9 33.141.9
34.2 34.6 38.133.7 33.5 36.8
31.3
47.5
32.5
64.268.8
64.669.0
64.257.6
70.1 66.958.1
65.8 65.4 61.966.3 66.5 63.2
68.8
52.5
67.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 114
Page 114 of 134
Figure 5.5.28 Perception: “Require the nomination/candidacy lists to have a certain number of seats based on genders” (by subgroups)
11.2 14.220.8
13.56.4
15.3 14.910.1 9.7 10.5
15.0 17.910.9 14.4
5.312.5
18.611.0
88.8 85.879.2
86.593.6
84.7 85.189.9 90.3 89.5
85.0 82.189.1 85.6
94.787.5
81.489.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 115
Page 115 of 134
Figure 5.5.29 Perception: “Reserve a certain number of seats at the leadership and managerial levels based on genders” (by subgroups)
11.2 12.1 12.5 12.39.2
16.511.9
8.8 6.5 8.815.0 15.5
9.814.9
3.58.3
16.911.0
88.8 87.9 87.5 87.790.8
83.588.1
91.2 93.5 91.285.0 84.5
90.285.1
96.591.7
83.189.0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position* Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 116
Page 116 of 134
Figure 5.5.30 Perception: “None of the above” (by subgroups)
5.613.5
6.310.5 10.1 8.2 7.5 8.8
0.07.9 10.5 11.9
5.29.3
3.58.3 8.5 7.9
94.486.5
93.889.5 89.9 91.8 92.5 91.2
100.092.1 89.5 88.1
94.890.7
96.591.7 91.5 92.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Support Do not support
Page 117
Page 117 of 134
Figure 5.6.2 Should we increase the proportion of women in political leadership positions? (by subgroups)
41.5
62.0
47.843.4
59.8 58.8
43.3 46.6 48.443.9
53.659.5
45.151.2
40.4 43.8
64.4
46.1
58.5
38.0
52.256.6
40.2 41.2
56.7 53.4 51.656.1
46.440.5
54.948.8
59.6 56.3
35.6
53.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age* Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency*
YES NO
Page 118
Page 118 of 134
Figure 5.6.5 Perception: “Make more female role models and mentors available” (by subgroups)
52.0
64.358.7
54.7 57.867.1
56.750.7
54.8 57.0 57.563.1
56.060.9
43.9
62.5 62.753.9
41.5
31.032.6 40.9 35.3
29.4
38.841.2
41.9 39.534.6
34.5
38.334.0
47.4
31.3 28.841.9
6.4 4.78.7
4.4 6.9 3.5 4.5 8.13.2 3.5
7.82.4 5.7 5.1 8.8 6.3 8.5
4.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 119
Page 119 of 134
Figure 5.6.6 Perception: “Provide training for potential female leaders” (by subgroups)
56.1
69.860.9 60.4 61.8
70.6
59.7 57.4
71.0
57.963.4 66.7
61.1 63.756.1 56.3
64.4 62.8
38.0
25.6
28.337.1
30.4
27.1
35.834.5
25.8
36.830.7
29.834.2 31.6
35.139.6 27.1 33.0
5.8 4.710.9
2.57.8
2.4 4.5 8.13.2 5.3 5.9 3.6 4.7 4.7
8.84.2
8.54.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 120
Page 120 of 134
Figure 5.6.7 Perception: “Implement family-friendly policies” (by subgroups)
73.169.8 71.7 72.3
66.771.8 73.1
68.964.5
68.474.5 77.4
69.4 72.168.4
77.1 76.3
68.1
22.824.8 19.6
25.8
25.522.4
25.4
25.0 32.3 27.220.3
20.2
25.923.7
24.6
18.816.9
28.3
4.1 5.48.7
1.97.8 5.9
1.56.1 3.2 4.4 5.2 2.4 4.7 4.2 7.0 4.2 6.8
3.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 121
Page 121 of 134
Figure 5.6.8 Perception: “Encourage women to lean in for opportunities” (by subgroups)
67.3 68.2 67.462.9
71.6 72.9
61.265.5 67.7 69.3
65.472.6
66.3 69.3
59.6
72.9 72.963.9
29.8 28.726.1 36.5 22.5
24.7
37.3 29.732.3 28.1
30.725.0
31.1 28.8
33.3
25.0 22.034.0
2.9 3.1 6.50.6
5.9 2.4 1.5 4.70.0 2.6 3.9 2.4 2.6 1.9
7.02.1 5.1 2.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age* Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 122
Page 122 of 134
Figure 5.6.9 Perception: “Improve gender awareness and talk openly about the issue of gender equality” (by subgroups)
52.056.6
65.2
47.256.9
64.7
47.8 48.641.9
50.957.5 56.0 52.3
56.3
42.1
52.1
66.1
49.7
43.3 37.226.1
48.437.3
30.6
47.8 44.6 58.144.7 35.3 41.7
41.539.5
45.6
41.7
27.1
46.1
4.7 6.2 8.74.4 5.9 4.7 4.5 6.8
0.04.4 7.2
2.46.2 4.2
12.36.3 6.8 4.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position* Political tendency
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 123
Page 123 of 134
Figure 5.6.10 Perception: “Require the nomination/candidacy list to have a certain number of women” (by subgroups)
15.2
30.2 30.4
20.8 17.6
31.8
20.914.2
22.6 19.3 21.628.6
16.625.1
8.8
20.825.4
19.4
27.5
41.937.0
34.034.3
36.5
37.3
31.1
51.6
33.3 30.7
38.1
31.1
35.8
22.8
16.7
40.7
36.6
57.3
27.932.6
45.3 48.0
31.8
41.8
54.7
25.8
47.4 47.7
33.3
52.3
39.1
68.462.5
33.9
44.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children* Education level Income* Political position* Political tendency*
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 124
Page 124 of 134
Figure 5.6.11 Perception: “Reserve a certain number of seats for women in the Legislative Council, District Councils, and Government
units” (by subgroups)
12.9
28.7 30.4
17.0 17.628.2
19.412.8
22.616.7 19.6
29.8
13.022.3
5.3
16.725.4
17.3
29.2
41.130.4
35.8 36.3
35.3
35.8
33.8
54.8
32.532.0
36.9
32.6
35.8
28.1
18.8
37.3
38.2
57.9
30.239.1
47.2 46.136.5
44.853.4
22.6
50.9 48.4
33.3
54.4
41.9
66.7 64.6
37.344.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children* Education level Income* Political position* Political tendency*
Support Neither support nor against Do not support
Page 125
Page 125 of 134
Figure 5.6.13 What should be the percentage allotted to women? (by subgroups)
6.410.9 8.7 7.5 8.8 8.2 10.4
6.19.7
6.1 8.5 9.5 7.3 9.33.5
12.5 11.95.2
6.4
16.3
10.9 10.7 10.8 12.9 10.4
8.8
12.9
11.4 9.811.9
8.811.2
7.0
0.0
13.6
12.6
12.3
19.4
17.4 17.0 11.8
17.6 17.9
13.5
12.915.8 16.3
17.9
14.0
15.8
12.312.5
15.3
16.2
74.9
53.5
63.0 64.868.6
61.2 61.2
71.664.5 66.7 65.4
60.7
69.963.7
77.2 75.0
59.366.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
50% or above 40 - 49% Below 40% Do not agree
Page 126
Page 126 of 134
Figure 5.6.14 Perception: “Quotas are a necessary measure” (by subgroups)
22.8
12.4 15.2 17.6 20.612.9
16.422.3
6.514.0
23.5
9.5
21.2 18.6 21.125.0
15.3 16.8
37.4
27.126.1
35.2 31.4
29.4
32.8
35.1
22.6
34.2
34.6
27.4
37.8
30.2
43.9
45.8
25.4
32.5
27.5
33.3 32.6
33.3
26.5
31.8
31.3
29.1
51.6
34.2
22.9
38.1
25.9
30.2
26.3 14.6
35.6
33.0
8.2
17.1 17.4
7.515.7
20.0 9.0
8.812.9 11.4 12.4
14.3
10.9
12.6
8.8
12.5
13.6
11.5
4.110.1 8.7 6.3 5.9 5.9
10.44.7 6.5 6.1 6.5
10.74.1
8.42.1
10.26.3
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 127
Page 127 of 134
Figure 5.6.15 Perception: “Quotas should only be implemented on a temporary basis” (by subgroups)
10.56.2 6.5 8.2 10.8
7.1 4.511.5
3.28.8 9.2
4.88.8 8.8 10.5 8.3 6.8 8.4
15.8
12.4 10.9
16.4 11.812.9 17.9
12.8
9.7
15.8 13.715.5
14.0 13.515.8
14.6 16.9 13.1
48.5
51.9 56.549.7
50.0 54.1 47.850.0
67.7
52.6
45.847.6
52.848.4
56.1
43.8
54.251.8
21.124.0 15.2
23.322.5 21.2 26.9 20.9
19.4
17.526.8
25.0
21.824.2
15.8
29.2
18.622.0
4.1 5.410.9
2.5 4.9 4.7 3.0 4.70.0
5.3 4.6 7.12.6 5.1
1.8 4.2 3.4 4.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 128
Page 128 of 134
Figure 5.6.16 Perception: “Voluntary quotas adopted by political parties are preferable to quotas legislated by governments and councils”
(by subgroups)
10.5 7.8 6.5 9.4 10.85.9 4.5
12.8
3.29.6 9.2
4.89.3 8.4
14.08.3 10.2 7.9
15.2
10.9 13.013.8 12.7
17.616.4
9.5
9.7
13.2 14.4
14.3
13.5 13.5
15.8
12.513.6
13.6
38.6
40.332.6
42.1 40.2
31.843.3 43.2
51.637.7 39.2
39.339.9 40.0
36.8
37.535.6 42.4
28.133.3
37.0
28.3 28.437.6
29.9 26.422.6 30.7
32.0
32.131.1 31.6
28.1
35.4 32.228.8
7.6 7.810.9
6.3 7.8 7.1 6.0 8.112.9
8.85.2
9.56.2 6.5 5.3 6.3 8.5 7.3
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 129
Page 129 of 134
Figure 5.6.17 Perception: “Quotas that are legislated must be accompanied by enforcement provisions” (by subgroups)
34.5
14.0
28.3 25.2 25.520.0
23.930.4
16.1
27.2 26.822.6
28.0 25.1
36.843.8
23.7 21.5
29.8
27.9
19.629.6 30.4
30.628.4
27.7
35.5
29.826.8
28.6
30.1
27.4
29.8
31.3
28.828.3
20.5
32.6
30.4
28.322.5
24.725.4
27.0
29.0
28.1
23.523.8
25.4
25.6
21.1
12.5
23.7 30.4
11.7
19.415.2
12.617.6 22.4 16.4
10.1
9.7
10.519.6
19.0
14.0
16.7
10.5 10.4
20.3 14.7
3.5 6.2 6.5 4.4 3.9 2.46.0 4.7
9.74.4 3.3 6.0
2.6 5.11.8 2.1 3.4 5.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 130
Page 130 of 134
Figure 5.6.18 Perception: “Quotas are useful but not sufficient and must be accompanied by other measures, such as awareness
programmes” (by subgroups)
7.6 6.2 8.7 6.3 7.83.5 3.0
10.8
0.04.4
9.83.6
7.3 7.0 8.84.2 5.1 7.3
9.9
3.1 0.0 6.3
10.8
4.7 6.0
8.8
6.5
7.9
6.5
1.2
9.36.0
12.3
12.53.4
6.8
48.0
45.7 45.7
51.643.1
40.0
52.2
49.3
48.4
49.145.8
41.7
50.3
47.4
42.1
35.445.8
51.3
25.1
29.526.1
25.2 28.4
35.3
28.4
21.6
29.0
27.2 26.8
33.3
25.9
26.5
29.8
37.5 30.5
23.6
9.415.5
19.6
10.7 9.816.5
10.4 9.516.1
11.4 11.1
20.2
7.313.0
7.010.4
15.311.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income* Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 131
Page 131 of 134
Figure 5.6.19 Perception: “Quotas are not useful and lead to tokenism for women” (by subgroups)
4.1 2.36.5
1.35.9
2.4 4.5 3.40.0 0.9
5.2 3.6 2.1 2.87.0
0.05.1 2.6
9.918.6
17.4
13.810.8 17.6 13.4
11.5
9.711.4
16.3 21.4
11.413.5
12.3
12.5
27.1
9.9
45.0
45.0
47.8
48.441.2
41.252.2
45.351.6
52.639.2
40.5
46.647.0 42.1
50.0
30.5
49.7
26.919.4
17.4
21.428.4
27.116.4
24.325.8
22.823.5
21.425.9 20.9
29.8
16.7
30.523.0
14.0 14.710.9
15.1 13.7 11.8 13.4 15.5 12.9 12.315.7 13.1 14.0 15.8
8.8
20.8
6.814.7
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 132
Page 132 of 134
Figure 5.6.20 Perception: “Quotas are not necessary; women should be elected on merit” (by subgroups)
4.1 3.16.5
1.36.9
2.4 3.0 4.7 3.2 1.8 4.6 3.6 2.6 2.88.8
2.16.8
2.1
2.9 7.86.5
4.4
4.98.2 6.0 2.7
0.0 4.46.5 10.7
3.1 5.6
3.5
4.2
11.9
3.1
16.4
30.219.6
27.019.6 21.2 26.9
21.6 32.3 27.2 17.0
22.6
20.722.8 14.0
10.4
23.7
25.7
31.6
30.2
26.132.1
29.432.9
29.9
29.7
41.9
28.9
30.1
26.2
33.2
32.1
26.3
29.2
25.4
33.0
45.0
28.7
41.335.2
39.235.3 34.3
41.2
22.6
37.741.8
36.940.4
36.7
47.454.2
32.236.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency*
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 133
Page 133 of 134
Figure 5.6.21 Perception: “Quotas are discriminatory” (by subgroups)
5.82.3 4.3 1.3
9.8
1.24.5 6.1
0.04.4 4.6 3.6 3.6 3.3
8.82.1 3.4 4.2
7.0 13.213.0
10.7
5.915.3 9.0 6.8
3.2
12.3 9.216.7
7.311.2
7.014.6
16.9
6.3
26.3
38.0 32.6
34.6 28.4
36.5
28.4 29.741.9
32.5
28.1
31.0
30.130.2 28.1
14.6
30.5
36.1
39.8
31.832.6
34.6 39.2
31.8
41.8 37.2
45.232.5
38.6
34.5
39.437.2 38.6
47.9
33.935.1
21.114.7 17.4 18.9 16.7 15.3 16.4
20.3
9.7
18.4 19.614.3
19.7 18.1 17.520.8
15.3 18.3
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Page 134
Page 134 of 134
Figure 5.6.22 Perception: “Leaders who gain their mandate through reserved seats, political party quotas or appointments are viewed
differently from other leaders” (by subgroups)
2.9 1.6 2.2 1.34.9
0.0 3.0 3.40.0 0.9 3.3
0.0 2.1 1.95.3
0.0 1.7 2.12.3 7.0 4.3 5.0
2.95.9 3.0 4.1
0.04.4
5.2
3.65.2 5.1
1.8
4.28.5
3.1
36.8
48.847.8
40.344.1 47.1
35.8
41.961.3
44.7 35.9
53.6
36.342.3
36.8
29.2
39.0 46.6
40.9
28.728.3
36.5
36.3 34.1
41.8
34.5
35.5
31.6 39.9
31.0
39.4
36.7
36.852.1
37.3 31.9
17.014.0
17.4 17.011.8 12.9
16.4 16.2
3.2
18.4 15.711.9
17.1 14.019.3
14.6 13.6 16.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Male Female 15-34 35-54 55+ Nevermarried
Marriedw/children
Marriedw/o
children
Tertiarynon-
degreeor
below
Bachelordegree
Postgrad <$50,000 ≥$50,000 Grassroots Top Pro-estab
Non-estab
Moderate
Gender* Age Marital status and children Education level Income Political position Political tendency
Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree