Many democracies are widely perceived to be suffering a serious crisis of representation, participation and legitimacy. As part of this 'crisis', the male domination of democracy -both in terms of its institutions and who participates -has been identified as problematic, even emblematic, of a more generalized democratic crisis. Increasing the participation of women is advocated as one solution. Using examples drawn from both long-standing and newer democracies (parliamentary and presidential), particularly from Europe and Latin America, this article explores the gender dynamics of the 'crisis of democracy'. The 'crisis' has two gendered aspects. First, and paradoxically, although democracy still privileges predominantly white, elite, heterosexual, men, more women now participate in democratic institutions, leading to claims that the 'male monopoly' has ended (Dahlerup and Leyenaar 2013). Second, the 'crisis of democracy' may provide opportunities to further enhance women's participation, as the demands of those favouring greater gender equality and those looking for solutions to the 'crisis' appear to coincide.Many democracies have been undergoing significant changes in the last few decades and are widely perceived to be suffering a serious crisis of representation, participation and legitimacy. As evidence that something has gone badly wrong with democracy, The Economist (2014) claims that first, democracy has not proved as easy to 'transplant' as expected (as shown by the experience of Iraq and recently democratized countries such as South Africa) and second, the dysfunctional elements of long-standing democracies such as gridlock in the US, disillusionment in the EU together with the impact of globalization, the power of the banks and international financial institutions (IFIs) have led to voter disengagement and lack of trust in politicians, in combination with important changes in party and party systems. Academics argue that many of these trends are visible