Week Thirteen - Gender
To what extent have women achieved political, economic and social
equality in the United States?
What political power do women exercise in contemporary America?
What is the “gender gap” in US politics and what is its significance?
What are the political implications and consequences of #MeToo?
What is the significance of the Vice President of the United States
being a woman? What difference has the increased number of
women in political office made to US politics?
What is the relationship between gender, class, race and ethnicity in
the United States?
Reading
Tolleson-Rinehart & Josephson: ‘Gender and American Politics: Women, Men and the
Political Process’. Chapter 1: ‘Introduction – Gender, Sex and American Political Life’.
Political Behaviour:
- Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter present empirical evidence of the differences
of men and women’s political knowledge (understanding of the institutions,
processes and actors of politics). They argue that political action is driven by political
knowledge, and women have less knowledge of politics, meaning they take less
political action. They argue that this is a result of structural inequalities between
men and women (women’s long-time exclusion from national politics, differences
between men and women’s working lives). This ‘knowledge gap’ is less prevalent in
issues with a direct relevance to women, such as health care policies, reproductive
rights etc. Carpini and Keeter also found that the more politically knowledgeable
men tend to be conservate, whereas politically knowledgeable women tend to be
liberal.
- M. Margaret Conway found that women were less likely to vote than men during
the first six decades after gaining the franchise. However, since 1980, women have
been just as likely as men to vote, but less likely than men to give money/ campaign
in political events. Conway concludes that one of the strongest explanations for
women’s lower levels of political participation is generational differences in patterns
of participation. Once she divided voters into ‘four birth cohorts’, Conway found
that men are advantaged in voting by minor amounts, but the differences are huge
in terms of campaign contributions and activities. Conway concluded that gender
roles are the cause of this (women having less money in wages, and less time due to
unpaid domestic labour, to participate to the extent as men).
- Pam Fiber and Richard Fox found that the US Congress – 86% male – is one of the
least gender diverse democratic legislative bodies in the world. Whilst today women
are just as likely to win open-seat elections as men, both male and female
, Week Thirteen - Gender
candidates still face ‘an electorate, a press corps, and a political establishment that
often rely on masculine and feminine stereotypes to asses candidates’. Essentially,
the experiences of male and female candidates continue to differ. Fiber and Fox have
also found significant regional disparities. It is clear that in the West, women’s
electoral success has increased, but elsewhere it hasn’t. Furthermore, when
campaigning, male candidates raise about $100,000 more than their female
counterparts (analysed 1980-1990 and 1992-2000). They also found that male and
female candidates raise more money when their opponent is a woman, compared to
when their opponent is a man.
- Eric Plutzer argues that debate about public policy in the US is normally motivated
by an underlying evaluation of the capacity of citizens to make their own decisions
on matters which may be of public concern. Concern regarding a woman’s ability to
make informed moral judgements is the backdrop to many public policy debates,
such as reproductive rights.
Public Policy:
- Jane Leatherman uses the construct of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ and the rhetorical
and policy initiatives used to ‘feminise’ foreign policy strategies that emphasises
consensus building and multilateralism, to explore the Bush strategic doctrine
behind the invasion of Iraq. According to Leatherman, ‘hegemonic masculinity’ (a
doctrine used by many nations during war-time) has the long-term costs of the lives
of soldiers and non-combatants who find themselves in conflict’s path. Leatherman
argues that the international community has started to re-evaluate this approach.
Eg: in 2000, the UN engaged in the first systematic examination of the effects war
has on women and girls. This culminated in Resolution 1325 which affirmed women
as victim’s of war’s cruelties, particularly rape, but as agents who must also been
seen as genuine actors in war and the making of peace.
- Dorothy E. McBride uncovered the role of gender in debates in three core policy
areas: welfare reform, abortion and trafficking. According to McBride, feminists
want to ‘place their policy concerns higher on the government’s agenda and to
influence the way that policy debates are framed on issues related to gender’
[Tolleson-Rinehart & Josephson]. McBride, in terms of welfare reform, focussed on
the process which led to the 1966 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) which ended the Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC) and replaced it with a new program focused on time-limited
benefits and work requirements. Feminists tried really hard to shape the outcome
here, but the passage of PRWORA was a total defeat for feminism. In relation to
abortion, McBride analysed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act 1995. This debate
represented a shift in abortion politics from a focus on a woman’s private right, to a
focus on abortion procedures themselves. Bill Clinton vetoed this Act, but it was later
passed by Bush. Yay. McBride finally analysed the issue of trafficking of women and
girls and how it was brought to the forefront by feminist groups and the President’s
Interagency Council on Women which helped to pass the Traffic in Person
Protection Act 2000. McBride’s concluding argument showed that ‘all three policy
arenas show both the complexity of the interaction of feminist advocates with
To what extent have women achieved political, economic and social
equality in the United States?
What political power do women exercise in contemporary America?
What is the “gender gap” in US politics and what is its significance?
What are the political implications and consequences of #MeToo?
What is the significance of the Vice President of the United States
being a woman? What difference has the increased number of
women in political office made to US politics?
What is the relationship between gender, class, race and ethnicity in
the United States?
Reading
Tolleson-Rinehart & Josephson: ‘Gender and American Politics: Women, Men and the
Political Process’. Chapter 1: ‘Introduction – Gender, Sex and American Political Life’.
Political Behaviour:
- Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter present empirical evidence of the differences
of men and women’s political knowledge (understanding of the institutions,
processes and actors of politics). They argue that political action is driven by political
knowledge, and women have less knowledge of politics, meaning they take less
political action. They argue that this is a result of structural inequalities between
men and women (women’s long-time exclusion from national politics, differences
between men and women’s working lives). This ‘knowledge gap’ is less prevalent in
issues with a direct relevance to women, such as health care policies, reproductive
rights etc. Carpini and Keeter also found that the more politically knowledgeable
men tend to be conservate, whereas politically knowledgeable women tend to be
liberal.
- M. Margaret Conway found that women were less likely to vote than men during
the first six decades after gaining the franchise. However, since 1980, women have
been just as likely as men to vote, but less likely than men to give money/ campaign
in political events. Conway concludes that one of the strongest explanations for
women’s lower levels of political participation is generational differences in patterns
of participation. Once she divided voters into ‘four birth cohorts’, Conway found
that men are advantaged in voting by minor amounts, but the differences are huge
in terms of campaign contributions and activities. Conway concluded that gender
roles are the cause of this (women having less money in wages, and less time due to
unpaid domestic labour, to participate to the extent as men).
- Pam Fiber and Richard Fox found that the US Congress – 86% male – is one of the
least gender diverse democratic legislative bodies in the world. Whilst today women
are just as likely to win open-seat elections as men, both male and female
, Week Thirteen - Gender
candidates still face ‘an electorate, a press corps, and a political establishment that
often rely on masculine and feminine stereotypes to asses candidates’. Essentially,
the experiences of male and female candidates continue to differ. Fiber and Fox have
also found significant regional disparities. It is clear that in the West, women’s
electoral success has increased, but elsewhere it hasn’t. Furthermore, when
campaigning, male candidates raise about $100,000 more than their female
counterparts (analysed 1980-1990 and 1992-2000). They also found that male and
female candidates raise more money when their opponent is a woman, compared to
when their opponent is a man.
- Eric Plutzer argues that debate about public policy in the US is normally motivated
by an underlying evaluation of the capacity of citizens to make their own decisions
on matters which may be of public concern. Concern regarding a woman’s ability to
make informed moral judgements is the backdrop to many public policy debates,
such as reproductive rights.
Public Policy:
- Jane Leatherman uses the construct of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ and the rhetorical
and policy initiatives used to ‘feminise’ foreign policy strategies that emphasises
consensus building and multilateralism, to explore the Bush strategic doctrine
behind the invasion of Iraq. According to Leatherman, ‘hegemonic masculinity’ (a
doctrine used by many nations during war-time) has the long-term costs of the lives
of soldiers and non-combatants who find themselves in conflict’s path. Leatherman
argues that the international community has started to re-evaluate this approach.
Eg: in 2000, the UN engaged in the first systematic examination of the effects war
has on women and girls. This culminated in Resolution 1325 which affirmed women
as victim’s of war’s cruelties, particularly rape, but as agents who must also been
seen as genuine actors in war and the making of peace.
- Dorothy E. McBride uncovered the role of gender in debates in three core policy
areas: welfare reform, abortion and trafficking. According to McBride, feminists
want to ‘place their policy concerns higher on the government’s agenda and to
influence the way that policy debates are framed on issues related to gender’
[Tolleson-Rinehart & Josephson]. McBride, in terms of welfare reform, focussed on
the process which led to the 1966 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) which ended the Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC) and replaced it with a new program focused on time-limited
benefits and work requirements. Feminists tried really hard to shape the outcome
here, but the passage of PRWORA was a total defeat for feminism. In relation to
abortion, McBride analysed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act 1995. This debate
represented a shift in abortion politics from a focus on a woman’s private right, to a
focus on abortion procedures themselves. Bill Clinton vetoed this Act, but it was later
passed by Bush. Yay. McBride finally analysed the issue of trafficking of women and
girls and how it was brought to the forefront by feminist groups and the President’s
Interagency Council on Women which helped to pass the Traffic in Person
Protection Act 2000. McBride’s concluding argument showed that ‘all three policy
arenas show both the complexity of the interaction of feminist advocates with
