Photo of US-China delegation criticized over absence of women: masculine, militarized and exclusionary'

"By the time Donald Trump and Xi Jinping met at Beijing's Great Hall of the People on Thursday, the bilateral had featured all the expected pomp and pageantry: a meticulously choreographed display of Chinese soldiers, children waving American and Chinese flags, and rows of senior officials and the US's top business executives. Conspicuously absent at the table, however, were women from either delegation—a stark visual that quickly drew criticism from observers who saw it as an unmistakable display of patriarchal power."

"We have somehow gravitated back to this idea that what matters is your network and not your capabilities—and that matters [in terms of] whether or not you get a seat at the table. She added: It's just inexplicable how you end up with a single gender table, given the many talented women around the world."

"Comparing Thursday's images to bilateral meetings during Barack Obama's presidency, Kazem said: We've gone backward. Obama-era US-China summits included women at the table. Now neither superpower thinks women belong in the room where great power politics happens. This isn't just American failure—it's a bilateral signal that women's voices don't matter in shaping the global order."

"A painting of the end of meritocracy: A meeting of the two largest economies and not one woman at the table."

A US-China meeting in Beijing featured ceremonial displays and senior officials, but no women were visible at the table. The absence drew public criticism as a visual symbol of patriarchal power and exclusion from high-level decision-making. Gita Gopinath said the situation reflects a return to valuing networks over capabilities and determining access by whether someone gets a seat at the table. She called it inexplicable that a single-gender table occurred despite many talented women worldwide. Halima Kazem compared the images to earlier US-China summits during Barack Obama’s presidency, saying inclusion had gone backward. She framed the pattern as a bilateral signal that women’s voices do not matter in shaping the global order.

Read at www.theguardian.com