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. Jones, Jeffrey M. “Gender Gap in 2012 Vote is Largest in Gallup’s History.” Gallup.com (2012) Available online: http://www.gallup.com/poll/158588/gender-gap-2012-vote-largest- gallup-history.aspx
2. Huddy, Leonie, Erin Cassese, and Mary-Kate Lizotte. 2008. “Gender, Public Opinion and Political Reasoning.” In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge.
3. Burns, Nancy and Donald Kinder. 2012. “Categorical Politics: Gender, Race, and Public Opinion.” In, New Directions in Public Opinion, ed. Adam Berinsky. Routledge.
4. Winter, Nicholas J. 2010. “Masculine Republicans and Feminine Democrats: Gender and Americans' Explicit and Implicit Images of the Political Parties.” Political Behavior, 32(4): 587-618.
VIII. April 1 Gender & Public Policy
1. Conway, M. Margaret, David Ahern and Gertrude A. Steuernagel, Third edition. 2005. Women and Public Policy: A Revolution in Progress. CQ Press. “Women and Public Policy” (skim pp 1-6, read pp 6- 17)
2. Perry, Jennifer and David E. Gundersen. 2011. “American Women and the Gender Pay Gap: A Changing Demographic or the Same Old Song.” Advancing Women in Leadership, 31(2011): 153-159.
3. McBride, Dorothy E. 2005. “Gendering Policy Debates: Welfare Reform, Abortion Regulation, and Trafficking.” In Gender and American Politics: Women, Men, and the Political Process, ed. Sue Tolleson-Rinehart and Jyl J. Josephson. M.E. Sharpe.
4. Cantor, Jody. 2013. “Harvard Business School Case Study: Gender Equity.” New York Times.
IX. April 8 Intersection of Gender with Race and Class
1. Hawkesworth, Mary. 2010. “Congressional Enactments of Race-Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced-Gendered Institutions.” In Women, Gender, and Politics: A Reader, ed. Mona Lena Krook and Sarah Childs. Oxford University Press.
2. Weldon, S. Laurel. 2011. When Protest Makes Policy: How Social Movements Represent Disadvantaged Groups. Michigan. “Inclusion, Identity, and Women’s Movements: State Policies on Violence Against Women of Color.”
3. Strolovitch, Dara Z. “Do Interest Groups Represent the Disadvantaged? Advocacy at the Intersection of Race, Class, and Gender.” In Women, Gender, and Politics: A Reader, ed. Mona Lena Krook and Sarah Childs. Oxford University Press.
Recommended (but not required) Reading:
hooks, bell, 1984. Feminist Theory: From Center to Margin. South End Press. “Black Women: Shaping Feminist Theory.”
X. April 15- Passover, No Class
XI. April 22 Sexuality and Politics
1. “Hers to Lose: A Look at Christine Quinn’s Failed Campaign for Mayor.” New York Times Documentary available on Youtube.
2. Haider-Markel, Donald P. 2010. Out and Running: Gay and Lesbian Candidates, Elections, and Policy Representation. Georgetown University Press. Pp. 17-22, additional selections to be determined.
3. Lax, Jeffrey R. and Justin H. Phillips. 2009. “Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness.” American Political Science Review. 103(3): 367-386.
XII. April 29 Gender Politics Across Countries
1. Baldez, Lisa, 2008. “Political Women in Comparative Democracies: A Primer for Americanists.” In Political Women and American Democracy, ed. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith and Lisa Baldez. Cambridge.
2. Krook, Mona Lena. 2009. Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. Oxford University Press. Pages 161-205.
3. Swedish Social Democratic party, Handbook for Women’s Empowerment. Available Online: http://www.socialdemokraterna.se/Webben-for-alla/S-kvinnor/S-kvinnor/In- English1/The-Power-Handbook1/
4. Htun, Mala, and S. Laurel Weldon. 2010. “When Do Governments Promote Women’s Rights? A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Sex Equity Policy.” Perspectives on Politics 8 (1): 207-16.
XIII. May 6- PAPER PRESENTATIONS – will occur during Reading Week
XIV. May 13- Exam week, no class