DOCSLIB.ORG

Gender & American Politics Professor Tali Mendelberg, 215 Robertson

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gender & American Politics Professor Tali Mendelberg, 215 Robertson POL 422: Undergraduate Seminar in American Politics: Gender & American Politics Professor Tali Mendelberg, 215 Robertson Hall [email protected] Spring 2014 This course examines the intersection of gender and politics in the United States. The course will cover the following topics: gender in society; media, politics, and gendered expectations and stereotypes; women’s social movements of the left—and the right; gender, political engagement and political participation; gender, voice choice and party identification; the gender gap in running for office; gender, political representation and policy-making; the effects of public policy on gender; the political intersection of gender with race, class, and sexual orientation; and gender and politics across countries. This class will include a significant experiential component in which students will have the opportunity to propose, conduct and report upon their own research on the intersection of gender and politics. Requirements Grades are based on the following: 30%: Class participation should be early, often, and thoughtful. Your comments should demonstrate a detailed knowledge of the readings. Each student will be responsible for leading class discussion on a given date. 20%: Weekly Response Papers. Post a double-spaced, two-page paper that provides a summary of and a critical reaction to a significant aspect of the weekly required readings. Concisely address a major point of the reading and engage with it – what seems right about it, and why? What is missing or neglected and why does that matter? The paper must be posted on the Blackboard discussion board at least 2 hours before class. These papers are not graded for content; they are for your use in writing the final paper and participating in discussion. If you post 10 papers, you will receive an A, 9 papers A-, 8 papers B+, 7 papers B, 6 papers B-, 5 papers C, 4 papers D, 3 papers or less F. 40%: Final Paper. The research paper reports on the research from the class project. This paper will build in incremental stages starting with a brief proposal, through an annotated bibliography and detailed outline, then a draft, culminating in the finished paper. This project will consist of observing and interviewing local school board members. The broad outline of the project, and the logistics, will be defined and handled for you, but you will engage in original data collection and have some input into the methodology and research design. Some aspects of the project are cooperative – the class will have discussions and make some collective decisions on the research design and execution, and each of you will analyze all the data collected by the class. Each student will write up his or her own paper as individual work. Due Dean’s Date. 10%: Final Paper Presentation. You will present the results of your research paper to the class. Presentations should be in PowerPoint and should explain the research question and present your research findings. Required Books to Purchase (other readings are on Blackboard ereserve) Brooks, Deborah Jordan. 2013. He Runs, She Runs: Why Gender Stereotypes Do Not Harm Women Candidates. Princeton University Press. Luker, Kristin. 1984. Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. University of California Press. Wolbrecht, Christina, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. 2008. Political Women and American Democracy. Cambridge University Press. Readings by Week: I. February 4 Introduction: The history and concepts of gendered politics 1. SKIM Conway, M. Margaret; David W. Ahern; and Gertrude A. Steuernagel. 1997. Women and Political Participation: Cultural Change in the Political Arena. CQ Press. “Women, Culture and Political Participation.” 2. Rhode, Deborah L. 1997. Speaking of Sex: the Denial of Gender Inequality. Harvard University Press. “The Ideology and Biology of Gender Difference.” 3. Pratto, Felicia and Angela Walker. 2004. “The Bases of Gendered Power” In The Psychology of Gender, ed. Alice H. Eagly, Anne E. Beall and Robert J. Sternberg. Guilford Press. II. February 10 Gender Roles and Stereotypes 1. SKIM Sandberg, Sheryl. 2013. Lean In. Knopf. Chapters 1 and 2. 2. SKIM Shieman, Scott, Markus Shafer and Mitchell McIvor. 2013. “When Leaning In Doesn’t Pay Off.” New York Times. Available online: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/opinion/sunday/when-leaning- in-doesnt-pay-off.html 3. Babcock, Linda and Sara Laschever. 2003. Women Don’t Ask: Negotiations and the Gender Divide. Introduction (pp 1-16), and Ch. 3, “Nice Girls Don’t Ask” 4. SKIM Report of the Steering Committee on Undergraduate Women’s Leadership. Princeton University. Executive Summary, and Chapters I – IV 5. Watch film “Miss Representation” To watch this film, go to the Blackboard page for this course. Click “Video Reserves” on the left hand menu. You must be on the campus network to view this video Recommended (but not required) Reading: Slaughter, Anne- Marie. 2012. “Why Women Still Can’t Have it All.” The Atlantic Monthly. Available online: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why- women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/ Hirschmann, Nancy J. 2010. “Mothers Who Care Too Much: What feminists get wrong about family, work, and equality.” Boston Review. (Also read the responses from other writers) III. February 18 Women’s Social Movements on the Left and Right 1. McGlen, Nancy, et al. 2005. Women, Politics, and American Society. Longman. “Women’s Movements in America.” pp.13-15. 2. Weldon, S. Laurel. 2011. When Protest Makes Policy: How Social Movements Represent Disadvantaged Groups. Michigan. “Introduction: Movements, Marginalization and Representation.” 3. Watch the PBS Documentary “One Woman, One Vote” or the fiction film “Iron- Jawed Angels.” Both are available on Youtube One Woman, One Vote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwEWTsJcJgQ Iron-Jawed Angels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiZRUoqWKB0&list=PLS1djMOZZ2kxx b8KD7NmIq_7_RiyjgA8S 4. Memorial to Congress from the American Woman Suffrage Association: http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/woman-suffrage/awsa-memorial.html 5. The Petition to the U.S. Senate from the Woman Voters Anti-Suffrage Party of New York: http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/woman-suffrage/ny-petition.html 6. The 19th Amendment: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/amendment_19/images/amend ment_19.gif 7. Luker, Kristin, 1984. Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. University of California Press. Read: Chapter 1, SKIM: p. 108-125 (Beginning with “Social Sources of Abortion Activism” to the end of chapter 5), Read Chapters 7 and 8. 8. Shields, John A. “The Politics of Motherhood Revisited.” Contemporary Sociology 41 (1) 43:48. 9. Binder, Amy J. and Kate Wood. 2012. Becoming Right: How Campuses Shape Young Conservatives. Princeton. “Conservative Femininity.” Recommended (but not required) Reading: Luker, Kristin, 1984. Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. University of California Press. Chapters 6 and 9. IV. February 25 Gender, Political Engagement and Political Participation 1. Karpowitz, Christopher F, and Tali Mendelberg. 2014. The Silent Sex: Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions. Ch. 2 “The Sources of Gender Gap in Political Participation”, Ch. 3 “Why Women Don’t Speak” pages 74-98. 2. Burns, et. al. 2001. The Private Roots of Public Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chapter 13. 3. SKIM Campbell, David E. and Christina Wolbrecht. 2006. “See Jane Run: Women Politicians as Role Models for Adolescents.” Journal of Politics, 68(2). V. March 4 Gender, Political Representation and Policy Making 1. Reingold, Beth. 2008. “Women as Officeholders: Linking Descriptive and Substantive Representation.” In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge. 2. Appelbaum, Binyamin and Annie Lowrey. 2013. “In Tug of War Over New Fed Leader, Some Gender Undertones.” New York Times. 3. Steinhauer, Jennifer. 2013. “Once Few, Women Hold More Power in Senate.” New York Times. 4. Karpowitz, Christopher F, and Tali Mendelberg. 2014. The Silent Sex: Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions. READ: Ch. 3 “Why Women Don’t Speak” pp. 98- 132 and Ch. 10 “Gender Inequality on School Boards.” SKIM: Read the introduction and conclusion and look at the figures of the following: Ch 5, Ch. 7 “Does Descriptive Representation Facilitate Women’s Distinctive Voice?”, Ch. 8 “Unpacking the Black Box of Interaction, and Ch. 9 “When Women Speak, Groups Listen—Sometimes.” Recommended (but not required) Reading: Mattei, Laura, 1998. “Gender and Power in American Legislative Discourse.” Journal of Politics, 60(2): 440-461. [NOTE: THIS IS USEFUL FOR YOUR PAPER ON SCHOOL BOARDS] Koch, Michael T. and Sarah A. Fulton. 2011. “In Defense of Women: Gender, Office Holding, and National Security Policy in Established Democracies.” Journal of Politics, 73(1): 1-16. Dafoe, Allan and Devin Caughey. 2013. “Honor and War: Southern US Presidents and The Effects of Concern for Reputation.” VI. March 11 Gender Gap in Running for Office 1. Dolan, Kathleen. 2008. “Women as Candidates in American Politics: The Continuing Impact of Sex and Gender.” (Read only pp. 113-115, section on ambition; pp 117- 119, section on ‘campaigning’; pp 119-123, ‘media coverage’ and ‘structural’). In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge. 2. Brooks, Deborah Jordan. 2013. He Runs, She Runs: Why Gender Stereotypes Do Not Harm Women Candidates. Princeton. Chapters 1-4, skim results in remaining chapters (see the table summaries), Read Chapters 8 and 9. 3. SKIM Lawless, Jennifer L. and Richard L. Fox. 2013. “Girls Just Wanna Not Run: The Gender Gap in Young Americans’ Political Ambition.” Women and Politics Institute, American University. Recommended (but not required) Reading: Kanthak, Kristin and Jonathan Woon. 2013. “Women Don’t Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry.” Working paper. Pearson, Kathryn and Eric McGhee. 2013. “What it Takes to Win: Questioning ‘Gender Neutral’ Outcomes in U.S. House Elections.” Politics and Gender, 9(4): 439-462. March 18- Spring Recess, No Class VII. March 25 Gender, Vote Choice, and Party Identification: Is There a Women’s Vote? 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gender Quotas, Norms, and Politics
    Politics & Gender, 2 (2006), 101–128. Printed in the U.S.A. CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER AND POLITICS Gender Quotas II In the previous issue, scholars Jane Mansbridge, Mark P. Jones, and Miki Caul Kittilson addressed a series of questions about gender quota laws. Are quotas a good idea? Should more countries adopt them? Should the United States consider them? In this issue, three additional scholars weigh in. Lisa Baldez considers the pros and cons of gender quota laws on the basis of research she has done on the adoption and implementation of a gender quota law in Mexico. Mona Lena Krook maintains that the adoption of gender quota laws often reveals the deep-rooted nature of gender discrim- ination in existing processes of candidate recruitment. Finally, Medha Nani- vadekar reflects on the lessons that can be drawn about gender quota laws from the example of the reserved seats for women in India, a measure that “created 1 million slots for women.” The Pros and Cons of Gender Quota Laws: What Happens When You Kick Men Out and Let Women In? Lisa Baldez, Dartmouth College Gender Quotas, Norms, and Politics Mona Lena Krook, Washington University in St. Louis Are Quotas a Good Idea? The Indian Experience with Reserved Seats for Women Medha Nanivadekar, Shivaji University Published by Cambridge University Press 1743-923X/06 $12.00 for The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association. © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association. DOI: 10.1017/S1743923X06061010 101 102 Politics & Gender 2(1) 2006 The Pros and Cons of Gender Quota Laws: What Happens When You Kick Men Out and Let Women In? Lisa Baldez, Dartmouth College What country currently boasts the highest percentage of women in par- liamentary office? If you ask most people, they will guess one of the Nordic countries: Sweden, Norway, Finland, or Denmark.
    [Show full text]
  • Women's Movements and Democratic Transition in Chile, Brazil, East
    The City University of New York !"#$%&'()"*$#$%+'(,%-(.$#"/0,+1/(20,%'1+1"%(1%(3415$6(70,8156(9,'+(:$0#,%;6(,%-(<"5,%- =>+4"0?'@A(B1',(7,5-$8 C">0/$A(3"#D,0,+1*$(<"51+1/'6(E"5F(GH6(I"F(G(?=D0F6(JKKG@6(DDF(JHGLJMJ <>N51'4$-(N;A(Ph.D. Program in Political Science of the City University of New York C+,N5$(OPBA(http://www.jstor.org/stable/4150176 . =//$''$-A(KQRKSRJKQQ(QSAGK Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=phd. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Women's Numbers Elevate Women's
    Why Women’s Numbers Elevate Women’s Influence, and When They Don’t: Rules, Norms and Authority in Political Discussion Christopher F. Karpowitz, Tali Mendelberg, and Lauren Mattioli Abstract: Critical mass theory argues that women’s numbers are a major cause of women’s status and authority in a group. Applications of the theory to political settings have yielded mixed support for the theory. We unpack one mechanism that can explain when, why and how numbers aid women. That mechanism is the norm of communication during group discussion. Our focus is on how women build or lose authority while they interact with men. We argue that numbers – and group procedures – shape norms that advance or hinder women’s authority. Women’s authority in turn affects the group’s decision about economic redistribution – the higher women’s authority, the higher the group’s generosity to the poor. We suggest that future work further explore how rules and norms affect women’s status in a group by equalizing their participation and influence, with the ultimate goal being equal gender authority. Keywords: gender, norms, groups, deliberation, critical mass, decision rule, majority, unanimity, gender composition, authority, influence Introduction Political psychology naturally locates the individual at the heart of politics, and so it is no wonder that it investigates gender as a feature of the individual. Venerable questions in that tradition include: how a woman thinks about politics (Burns and Kinder 2012; Burns et al. 2001; Huddy et. al 2008; Sapiro 2003), votes (Dolan 1998; Kaufmann 2006; Kaufmann and Petrocik 1999; Mueller 1988; Steffensmeier, et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment?
    Dartmouth College Dartmouth Digital Commons Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty Faculty Work 1-2006 Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment? Lisa Baldez Dartmouth College Lee Epstein Washington University Andrew D. Martin Washington University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa Part of the American Politics Commons Dartmouth Digital Commons Citation Baldez, Lisa; Epstein, Lee; and Martin, Andrew D., "Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment?" (2006). Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty. 1765. https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa/1765 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Work at Dartmouth Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty by an authorized administrator of Dartmouth Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment? Lisa Baldez, Lee Epstein, and Andrew D. Martin ABSTRACT For over 3 decades, those engaged in the battle over the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), along with many scholarly commentators, have argued that ratification of the amendment will lead U.S. courts (1) to elevate the standard of law they now use to adjudicate claims of sex discrimination, which, in turn, could lead them (2) to find in favor of parties claiming a denial of their rights. We investigate both possibilities via an examination of constitutional sex discrimination litigation in the 50 states—over a third of which have adopted ERAs. Employing methods especially developed for this investigation, we find no direct effect of the ERA on case outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and the American Political Process Winter 2018
    Department of Political Science POSC259: Women and the American Political Process Winter 2018 Contact Information Course Instructor: Professor Jennifer Merolla Office: Watkins Hall 2222 Phone: 951-827-4612 E-mail: [email protected] Office hours: Mondays, 11:30 to 1:00, or by appointment Course Schedule Semester: Winter 2018 Meeting day, time: Fridays, 10:10-1:00 Course Location: Watkins 2145 Course Description This course is a general introduction to the field of women and politics. We will examine the ways in which gender enters and shapes politics, primarily in the U.S. context. We begin by defining and conceptualizing gender and considering women’s group consciousness and how that shapes activism. We then look more closely at women as citizens with respect to their voting behavior and mass opinions. The next part of the course deals with women as candidates, exploring various barriers to female candidates, as well as opportunities. The final section of the course considers gender and representation in government and policymaking. The class format is a seminar, and thus is largely based on class discussion. Background Preparations (Prerequisites) There are no prerequisites for this course. Student Learning Outcomes: By the end of this course, students will be able to: 1. Understand the major strands of research in women and politics. 2. Critically assess the academic literature on women and politics. 3. Integrate the academic literature on women and politics. 4. Develop an original research paper/project in women and politics. 5. Refine communication skills in seminar participation and assignments. 6. Improve writing skills in course assignments.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Women and American Democracy Edited by Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88623-9 - Political Women and American Democracy Edited by Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez Frontmatter More information Political Women and American Democracy What do we know about women, politics, and democracy in the United States? The past thirty years have witnessed a dramatic increase in women’s participation in American politics and an explosion of research on women, and the transforma- tions effected by them, during the same period. Political Women and American Democracy provides a critical synthesis of scholarly research by leading experts in the field. The collected chapters examine women as citizens, voters, partici- pants, movement activists, partisans, candidates, and legislators. They provide frameworks for understanding and organizing existing scholarship; focus on the- oretical, methodological, and empirical debates; and map out productive direc- tions for future research. As the only book to focus specifically on women and gender in U.S. politics, Political Women and American Democracy will be an invaluable resource for scholars and students studying and conducting women and politics research. Christina Wolbrecht is Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and Director of the Program in American Democracy at the University of Notre Dame. Her book The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change (2000) was recipient of the 2001 Leon Epstein Outstanding Book Award from the American Political Science Association (Political Organizations and Parties Section). She has published articles in many journals, including the American Journal of Political Science and the Journal of Politics. Karen Beckwith is Flora Stone Mather Professor of Political Science at Case Western Reserve University.
    [Show full text]
  • Christina Wolbrecht
    Christina Wolbrecht Department of Political Science • 2060 Jenkins Nanovic Halls University of Notre Dame • Notre Dame IN 46556 Phone: 574-631-3836 • Office: 2050 Jenkins Nanovic Halls E-mail: [email protected] • Web: christinawolbrecht.com APPOINTMENTS University of Notre Dame Professor of Political Science, 2017-present Director, Rooney Center for the Study of American Democracy, 2015-present Mr. and Mrs. C. Robert Hanley Director of the Notre Dame Washington, D.C. Program, 2015-present Associate Professor of Political Science, 2002-2017 Packey J. Dee II Assistant Professor of Political Science, 1999-2002 Assistant Professor of Political Science, 1997-1999 EDUCATION Washington University in St. Louis Ph.D., Political Science, 1997 M.A., Political Science, 1994 Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, WA B.A., Political Science, 1992 RESEARCH Books Christina Wolbrecht and J. Kevin Corder. 2020. A Century of Votes for Women: American Elections Since Suffrage. New York: Cambridge University Press. J. Kevin Corder and Christina Wolbrecht. 2016. Counting Women’s Ballots: Female Voters from Suffrage through the New Deal. New York: Cambridge University Press. Victoria Schuck Award for the best book on women and politics, American Political Science Association, 2017 Christina Wolbrecht. 2000. The Politics of Women’s Rights: Parties, Positions, and Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Leon Epstein Outstanding Book Award, Political Organizations and Parties Section, American Political Science Association, 2001 Edited Books Marjorie Hershey (editor), Barry Burden (associate editor), and Christina Wolbrecht (associate editor). 2014. CQ Guide to U.S. Political Parties. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith, and Lisa Baldez (editors). 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts Under Constraints: Judges, Generals, and Presidents in Argentina Gretchen Helmke Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 0521820596 - Courts under Constraints: Judges, Generals, and Presidents in Argentina Gretchen Helmke Frontmatter More information Courts under Constraints This study offers a new theoretical framework for understanding how institu- tional instability affects judicial behavior under dictatorship and democracy. In contrast to conventional wisdom,the central findings of the book challenge the longstanding assumption that only independent judges rule against the gov- ernment of the day. Set in the context of Argentina,the study brings together qualitative case studies and statistical analyses with spatial and game theoretic models to explore the conditions under which courts rule against the govern- ment. In addition to shedding new light on the dynamics of court-executive relations in Argentina,the study provides general lessons about institutions, instability,and the rule of law. In the process,the study builds a new set of con- nections among diverse bodies of scholarship,including U.S. judicial politics, comparative institutional analysis,positive political theory,and Latin American politics. Gretchen Helmke is an assistant professor in Political Science at the University of Rochester. Her research on comparative institutions and Latin American pol- itics appears in several leading journals,including the American Political Science Review, Comparative Politics,and Desarollo Econ´omico. Her research has received grants from the National Science Foundation and the Social Science Research Council. She has been a visiting
    [Show full text]
  • Baldez Cv October 2018
    LISA BALDEZ Departments of Government and Latin American, Latino and Caribbean Studies Dartmouth College 6108 Silsby Hall / Hanover NH 03755 603.646.0762 / 603.646.2152 [email protected] EDUCATION 1997 Ph.D., University of California, San Diego, Political Science 1992 M.A., University of California, San Diego, Political Science 1986 B.A., Princeton University, cum laude in Politics and Latin American Studies ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS Dartmouth College Cheheyl Professor and Director, Dartmouth Center for the Advancement of Learning (DCAL), 2015-2018 Professor, Government and Latin American, Latino and Caribbean Studies, 2014- Associate Professor, Government and Latin American, Latino and Caribbean Studies 2003-2014 Harvard University Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Government, Spring 2003 Washington University Harbison Faculty Fellow, 1999-2002 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, 1997-2003 Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, May 2003 Harvard University Visiting Scholar, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Summer 1999 University of Rochester Adjunct Professor, Department of Political Science, Spring 1997 Research Associate, Department of Political Science, 1994-1997 Rochester Institute of Technology Adjunct Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, Spring 1997 University of California, San Diego Teaching Assistant, Department of Political Science, 1989-1993 BOOKS Defying Convention: US Resistance to the UN Treaty on Women’s Rights, Cambridge University Press, 2014. Winner of 2015 Victoria Schuck Award for Best Book on Women in Politics, American Political Science Association and 2015 Award for Best book on human rights, American Political Science Association. Political Women and American Democracy: Critical Perspectives on Women and Politics Research, Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez, eds.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE KAREN BECKWITH Flora Stone Mather
    CURRICULUM VITAE KAREN BECKWITH Flora Stone Mather Professor Department of Political Science Phone: (216) 368-4129 Case Western Reserve University Fax: (216) 368-4681 223 Mather House Email: [email protected] 11201 Euclid Avenue http://politicalscience.case.edu/faculty/karen-beckwith/ Cleveland, Ohio U. S. A. 44106-7109 EDUCATION: Ph.D. Political Science, Syracuse University, May, 1982. Examination Fields: U.S. Politics (with honors), Comparative Politics. Dissertation: Patterns of Mass Political Participation among American Women, 1952-1976. M.A. Political Science, Syracuse University, 1977. B.A. Political Science, Honors Program, University of Kentucky, 1972. RESEARCH AND TEACHING INTERESTS Comparative Women, Gender and Politics (Western Europe and the United States) Comparative Political Movements Political Parties and Elections (Western Europe and the United States) Electoral Systems and Representation PUBLICATIONS BOOKS Cabinets, Ministers, and Gender, with Claire Annesley, University of Sussex, and Susan Franceschet, University of Calgary. Oxford University Press, forthcoming 2019. Political Women and American Democracy: Critical Perspectives on Women and Politics Research, eds. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Women’s Movements Facing the Reconfigured State, eds. Lee Ann Banaszak, Karen Beckwith and Dieter Rucht. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. American Women and Political Participation: The Impacts of Work, Generation and Feminism (Westport, Conn.: The Greenwood Press, 1986). Karen Beckwith 2 ARTICLES IN REFEREED JOURNALS “What Do Women Symbolize? Symbolic Representation and Cabinet Appointments,” with Susan Franceschet and Claire Annesley, Politics, Groups, and Identities, 5 (3), 2017; http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/zDJcSrrNHAdJeIsMPDDP/full. “Before Prime Minister: Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, and Gendered Leadership Contests,” Politics & Gender, 11 (4), December 2015: 718–745.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Are Gender Quota Laws Adopted by Men? the Role of Inter-And Intra-Party Competition∗
    Why Are Gender Quota Laws Adopted by Men? The Role of Inter-and Intra-Party Competition∗ Ana Catalano Weeksy Abstract In nearly every case of quota law adoption, the support of party elites is critical. But this raises a puzzle: what can motivate predominantly male elites to put these policies in place? This article uses a comparison of two sets of matched pair countries { similar on background characteristics except for quota adoption { to explore the motivations and role of male party elites in quota reform. The cases of Belgium and Austria, and Portugal and Italy highlight two key explanations. First, quota laws are likely to be supported and passed by parties threatened by a new, more progressive competitor on the left, as a way of claiming women voters back from the encroaching party (inter-party competition). Second, quotas can be employed as a mechanism for party elites to gain power over candidate selection within their own parties, in the face of entrenched local party monopolies (intra-party competition). Gender quota laws are the electoral reform of our generation, and they have now been adopted in over 50 countries (Weeks 2016; Hughes 2017). Quota laws require all political parties to include a minimum percentage of women on their candidate lists.1 While we are seeing more and more states adopt quotas, they remain contentious for two main reasons. First, quotas seem to run counter to the rational self-interest of the political ruling class { ∗I thank Lisa Baldez, Jennifer Hochschild, Nahomi Ichino, Torben Iversen, Diana O'Brien, Dawn Teele, participants at the Empirical Study of Gender Research Network (EGEN) workshop at UPenn, and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on earlier versions of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE KAREN BECKWITH Flora Stone Mather
    CURRICULUM VITAE KAREN BECKWITH Flora Stone Mather Professor Department of Political Science Phone: (216) 368-4129 Case Western Reserve University Fax: (216) 368-4681 223 Mather House Email: [email protected] 11201 Euclid Avenue http://politicalscience.case.edu/faculty/karen-beckwith/ Cleveland, Ohio U. S. A. 44106-7109 EDUCATION: Ph.D. Political Science, Syracuse University, May, 1982. Examination Fields: U.S. Politics (with honors), Comparative Politics. Dissertation: Patterns of Mass Political Participation among American Women, 1952-1976. M.A. Political Science, Syracuse University, 1977. B.A. Political Science, Honors Program, University of Kentucky, 1972. RESEARCH AND TEACHING INTERESTS Comparative Women, Gender and Politics (Western Europe and the United States) Comparative Political Movements Political Parties and Elections (Western Europe and the United States) Electoral Systems and Representation PUBLICATIONS BOOKS Cabinets, Ministers, and Gender, with Claire Annesley and Susan Franceschet. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. Political Women and American Democracy: Critical Perspectives on Women and Politics Research, eds. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Women’s Movements Facing the Reconfigured State, eds. Lee Ann Banaszak, Karen Beckwith and Dieter Rucht. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. American Women and Political Participation: The Impacts of Work, Generation and Feminism (Westport, Conn.: The Greenwood Press, 1986). Karen Beckwith 2 ARTICLES IN REFEREED JOURNALS “What Do Women Symbolize? Symbolic Representation and Cabinet Appointments,” with Susan Franceschet and Claire Annesley, Politics, Groups, and Identities, 5 (3), 2017; http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/zDJcSrrNHAdJeIsMPDDP/full. “Before Prime Minister: Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, and Gendered Leadership Contests,” Politics & Gender, 11 (4), December 2015: 718–745.
    [Show full text]