Are women politically under-represented?

I consider myself as a cultural feminist. Not a liberal one who would say that all rights between men and women have to be equal. In my mind that would not work. Maybe I actually do not want it to work, since I am too egoistic and would like to keep the rights customized to my gender plus have more. However, I would not want anyone telling me that because certain women's rights exist, I am obligated to use them. I would want to have the freedom to choose if I want to work, be politically active, or stay home and spend time in my kitchen.
I love it when women get elected as presidents or leaders of nations, since it shows the world that the nation voting for them did not "mind" their gender, but cared about what they had to say and what they wanted to achieve during their time in the office. Sure enough I might not agree with some of those women who are leaders now, but in my opinion it shows a great achievement and the fact that the fight our grandmothers fought was worth it. Since they might have not had the opportunity to vote or get elected, but our generation has all those rights in many countries.
Jane Kramer's article was very interesting to me, not only because she wrote about France- a country I truly love- but also since a very close friend of mine, who happens to be French was telling me about the problems French women have encountered. I have to admit that I did not believe her. How was it possible for a country where wonderful couturiers worked, where the best patisseries were produced and where the statement "Tousjour l'amour" existed, be so backwards when it came to gender rights? I always thought that French women knew about their husbands' little affairs and thought the same way they thought about the late President Mitterrand " Monsieur le president comprend quelque chose de l'amour" (Mister president understands Love.).
But they seem to be suffering in their own way, which is indicated by the divorce numbers. It was interesting to read that Parite is not neutral, but it is enforcing political parties to be represented fifty per cent by women, is an inequality of its own. On the other hand it becomes questionable to me why the new French generation is not interested in what their "mothers", the old activists had fought for. Maybe it is because those women were trying to hard to accomplish everything at the same time, and the new generation is tired of being like "two-sided candles"? The example of the psychologist who runs home to prepare a three course lunch for her husband is the best to show that in a way, French women like to be mothers and wives in the traditional way, but on the other hand they are obligated to use all the rights, which were given to them. Darren Rosenblums' article states the same situation for Brazilian women, who, no matter what kind of out-of-the home-work they have, are expected to cook dinner. That group of French women who like to work in politics, like Francoise de Panafieu, notices how intimidated men get by a women's presence in a "man's job."
Another question, which came to my mind while reading about the under-representation of women in the French government is as follows: assuming that half of France's population are men, and the other half women, it would be logical to think that women would support each other and vote for politicians of their own gender. Why does that not happen? Is it because they not trust each other, or maybe because they are so used of seeing men doing the political work, that they do not really care? Historically speaking it were women who supported the French revolution, and as in one of the first articles we read, who were standing behind the role-taking men of putting the monarchy aside. Compared to the rest of Europe women in France at the present time are "secretaries and mistresses." Parite is not seen as giving women the option to become what they want, but as the article indicates "make sure that as many incompetent women are in the political program as incompetent men."
As Darren Rosenblum states in his article, CEDAW alone is not enough to reach equality and parity without the help of the signing nations. As long as they are not ready to accept and to adapt CEDAW rules in their society and think that the rules are not compatible with their cultural norms, the rules stand "in the air".In conclusion I would say that women should have the right to pursue any career they want to and that no law should take away from this right. However, imposing a women's representation is not the solution. Moreover, enforcement would be another barrier. The representation should follow naturally when society feels ready to accept women as more than mistresses and secretaries. And maybe at a time when a man feels that the time has come for him to prepare dinner for his wife for a change.