Despite the gains women have made since the advent of second-wave feminism, womenremain less confident than men of their ability to understand politics. Thisgender gap has remained unchanged for decades, yet it has attracted surprisinglylittle scholarly attention in recent years. This article uses data from the 2000American and 2004 Canadian election studies to assess whether differences inwomen's and men's socioeconomic resources help to explainthe gender gap. We also examine whether there are differences in the ways thatsocioeconomic resources affect women's and men'sself-perceived ability to understand politics. We focus particular attention onthe effects of parenthood on women's confidence in theirunderstanding of politics. Finally, we consider the role of feminism and genderrole conceptions.

In the United States, research suggests that men and women candidates are covered differently by the press. However, few studies compare press coverage of candidates cross-nationally. Systematic comparison of newspaper coverage of male and female candidates during election campaigns in Australia, Canada, and the United States may help illuminate the conditions that exacerbate or dampen gender differences in candidate portrayals. Given the sharp focus on candidates in American campaigns and the relatively lower percentage of women in the Congress, we expect to find the greatest disparities in men's and women's press coverage in the United States. Our findings suggest that across these three democracies, candidates are often portrayed in terms of long-standing gender stereotypes. These gender differences have important implications for voters' perceptions of candidates and may shape widely shared attitudes toward women's role in the political arena.

This article integrates the comparative literature on gender quotas with the existing body of research on women's substantive representation. Quota laws, which bring greater numbers of women into parliaments, are frequently assumed to improve women's substantive representation. We use the Argentine case, where a law mandating a 30% gender quota was adopted in 1991, to show that quotas can affect substantive representation in contradictory and unintended ways. To do so, we disaggregate women's substantive representation into two distinct concepts: substantive representation as process, where women change the legislative agenda, and substantive representation as outcome, where female legislators succeed in passing women's rights laws in the Argentine Congress. We argue that quota laws complicate both aspects of substantive representation. Quotas generate mandates for female legislators to represent women's interests, while also reinforcing negative stereotypes about women's capacities as politicians. Our case combines data from bill introduction and legislative success from 1989 to 2007 with data from 54 interviews conducted in 2005 and 2006. We use this evidence to demonstrate that representation depends on the institutional environment, which is itself shaped by quotas. Institutions and norms simultaneously facilitate and obstruct women's substantive representation.

This article examines the writings of women who explicitly embrace wifelysubmission, including those who advocate corporal punishment. Through a closereading of primary sources, the article seeks to illuminate the biblicalliteralist theology that underlies the ideology of wifely submission and toexplain the reasons why many heterosexual women find such an ideology appealing.While many readers might be tempted to dismiss such women as antifeminist, thequestion of desire that their writing raises goes to the heart of a majorchallenge faced by contemporary feminist theory, which since the “sexwars” often remains divided between those who accept whatever womenchoose as feminist and those who stand in judgment of other women'schoices. This article uses the case of wifely submission to examine the problemof desire, the concept of consent, and the benefits and limitations of“choice” discourse within feminist theory. It argues for amiddle-ground approach that respects women as agents in their own lives, whilealso engaging them in reflective conversation about desire and itsramifications.

In recent decades, scholars have documented remarkable changes in women's political representation around the world. At present, however, researchers are ill-equipped to explain these changes in women's representation in politics. In this article, we introduce a broad theoretical framework for reorienting existing explanations of women's formal political representation to account for change over time. We conceptualize stasis and growth in women's political representation as the balance between forces of resistance and forces for change. We also classify forces by timing, distinguishing among those that are continuous, are episodic, and have originated from critical periods. Using data on women in national legislatures from 1945 to 2003, we find that longitudinal forces combine to produce four common trajectories of women's political representation across time. We also discuss how various approaches, including event history analysis, latent growth curve models, and the focused ethnographic revisit, are well suited for modeling the different types of forces that combine to produce these trajectories. Overall, we argue that implementing a longitudinal framework for understanding women's political representation has the power both to alter the way we think about established findings and to suggest new theories for empirical evaluation.

The events of September 11 have clearly changed the way that Americans think about politics and policy and may have changed attitudes about the treatment of America's perceived enemies. At the same time, revelations about American interrogation techniques in the war on terror have forced a national dialogue on human rights during a time of war. Americans do tend to oppose a variety of harsh interrogation techniques, but opposition appears to be conditioned by gender, partisanship, and the context in which an interrogation might take place. We explore how conditions shape attitudes on interrogation techniques in the war on terror, with a particular focus on gender and contextual framing. We analyze data from a unique 2004 national survey of American adults to test several hypotheses. Our results suggest that gender strongly shapes opposition to harsh interrogation techniques, but contextual framing also shapes opposition. Partisanship and contextual framing also mediate the influence of gender on attitudes.

A considerable body of research has analyzed the influence of the women's movement, changes in women's political representation, and policies promoting women's interests in the developing world. However, we know comparatively less about the degree to which the attitudes and behaviors of the mass public mirror these national patterns. This article explores the evolution of gender differences in citizens' political interest, civic engagement, and support for women in politics in the Dominican Republic over 1994–2004, a period important for the country's democratization as well as one of significant changes in gender-related discourse and policies. We find evidence of a shift from a traditional gender gap to a modern gender gap, but the explanations for changes in women's views are distinct from those of men. We find that sociostructural factors, particularly age and education, and cues from political elites have significantly different effects on men versus women. Women's levels of political interest and support for equality in political participation are more fixed in their youth, whereas men's levels evolve through middle age. The evidence also indicates that reducing the gender gap in political interest would significantly narrow gender differences in civic activism. Most notably, men appear to be more easily swayed by elite cues that favor or oppose women's political participation; women's support for equal participation is much less susceptible to reversals in elite support. The consolidation of advances in gender equity thus depends significantly on contextual factors such as elite discourse.

Using an interdisciplinary integration of insights from Black studies, the study of women and gender in politics, and narrative analysis, I examine the politics of representation animating the political career of Condoleezza Rice. I analyze variants of the dominant storyline of “closeness” that frame discussions of her as a political actor, specifically in light of what it reveals about the gender, race, and class dynamics embedded in imaginings of community within contemporary public discourse. I show how the dominant storyline of closeness paradoxically works both to create and undermine the U.S. national narrative of color(difference)-blind integration. My central argument throughout is that Rice signifies the liminality of Blacks in general and Black women in particular and that this liminality is contrary to the triumph of integration she is said to represent.

Gender mainstreaming emerged on the European policy scene in the mid-1990s as aninnovative and controversial policy tool for reducing gender inequalities. TheEuropean Union seeks to propagate the practice of gender mainstreaming bothwithin EU institutions and among member states. Feminist scholars and policyelites have discussed and debated gender mainstreaming widely but have yet toconsider how local feminist activists, who could play a central role indiffusing gender mainstreaming, understand, interpret, and respond to thisagenda. This article examines whether and why local feminist movements in twocities in eastern Germany adopt gender mainstreaming into their advocacyagendas. Consideration of the characteristics of the contexts in which localfeminist movements are embedded clarifies the conditions under which socialmovements rally around new policy paradigms.

Economic, cultural, and political opportunity structures have been separately shown to facilitate and constrain abortion rights. We examine two central and related questions: First, which factors explain liberalization of different types of abortion laws? Second, which factor or set of factors is the most important in explaining abortion laws? The cross-national literature suggests a three-pronged explanation for the existence of abortion rights, including politics, economics, and culture. We parse these out into the structural and empowerment components of each, and posit a theory of rights in which empowerment factors are at least as important, if not more important, for explaining change than structural factors. To test this, we examine the impact of these components on the liberalization of abortion rights globally utilizing a distributed lag model. We find that an empowerment approach explains the liberalization of abortion laws better than a structural approach in terms of politics, but that a structural approach is a better predictor in terms of culture, and that both empowerment and structural factors are important predictors when economic factors are taken into account. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for understanding policy change and human rights on a global scale.

Existing scholarship has shown that the media and interest groups play an important role in the shaping of the public's perception of reality and in establishing the quality of democratic discourse on public policy questions. In turn, interest group actors employ different media and grassroots strategies in hopes of exploiting discursive opportunities that advance their cause. This study explores recent public policy debates over Title IX to illustrate how gender undergirds the discursive framing choices made by interest groups and presented in the media coverage. I find that framing, especially in the media, reinforces enduring cultural aspects of masculinity in sports.

The global warming backlash, the managed care backlash, the Bush backlash, the corporate backlash, the 9/11 backlash, the Obama backlash, the Clinton backlash, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) bill backlash, the antigay backlash, the immigration backlash, the backlashes against globalization, student testing, the social, economic, and political progress of Latinos, African Americans, and Asian Americans, and, central to this “Critical Perspectives,” the backlash against the feminist movement—these were just some of the many politically related backlashes that appeared when I performed a general Google search of the words: “backlash” and “politics” in July of 2008.

Recent scholarship increasingly considers the representation of women in cross-national legislatures, often examining how the characteristics of the countries in a particular region affect the representation of women in these elected bodies. No studies have examined the representation of women on the high courts in a cross-national context. We attempt to fill this void by collecting an original data set of women's participation on high courts in the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2006 to 2007. Using this data, we examine how institutional choices of judicial selection and structural factors within the country affect women's representation. We find that the variation in women's participation on these courts, from 0% on some to 60% on others, is affected by the prestige of the court, the method of selection, and the tradition of and importance placed upon women's participation within the country. Our results suggest that choices made during the design of high courts can influence the representative nature of the institution.

The pipeline theory predicts that women serving in lower levels of political office will leverage political resources and experience gained at those levels to advance to higher office. On the basis of this theory, several prominent scholars have predicted that the election of increasing numbers of women to state legislatures will result in proportionate increases in women's representation in Congress. This study analyzes patterns of congressional advancement among state legislators in five states and finds that female state legislators are less likely to advance to Congress than their male colleagues. There are gender-related differences in the occupational backgrounds and family situations that hinder the advancement of female state legislators to Congress. In addition, female legislators are older and less likely to have a background in the “springboard” professions of business or law. Given these findings, the pipeline theory should be refined to better account for the impact of gender-based differences on congressional advancement.

To understand backlash theoretically, we must first carve out an analytically useful term from the cluster of its common political associations. In colloquial usage, “backlash” denotes politically conservative reactions to progressive (or liberal) social or political change (Faludi 1991 is a classic in this vein). Here, however, we attempt a nonideological definition of backlash embedded in a more neutral approach to its study. In colloquial usage, backlash includes acts of genuine persuasion as well as of power. Here, however, we suggest that it may be analytically helpful to confine its meaning to acts of coercive power. We draw on the sociological literature on social movements and countermovements, as well as the political science literature on power, preferences, and interests. We focus mostly on examples drawn from the United States and relating to feminism and gender. We begin where the process of backlash itself begins, with power and a challenge to the status quo.

Americans came the closest they ever had to nominating a female presidential candidate in 2008, yet the possibility of a woman president in the end remained elusive. However, in recent years a number of other countries have seen women claim the presidency for the first time: in Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Chile, Finland, India, and Liberia. Women have also become chancellor in Germany and prime minister in countries like Moldova, Ukraine, and Mozambique. Since 2000, 27 female leaders have assumed national office as president or prime minister. It has always been difficult to generalize about women heads of state and government because there have been so few of them, but the recent rise in women executives has opened up new possibilities for comparative scholarship (see the longitudinal study by Farida Jalalzai, “Women Rule: Shattering the Executive Glass Ceiling,” in the June 2008 issue of Politics & Gender). Much of the existing literature on the subject has looked, for example, at attitudes toward women in executive position and at the media's focus on women executives' personal characteristics, their emotional state, clothing, domestic abilities, and the way they negotiate their family relations.

Iris Marion Young was a fighter for justice and against oppression. A strong commitment, a commitment there as long as any of us had known her, fueled her writing and her activism. Her feminism was part of that commitment to justice. Her attention and sensitivity to the oppression of others was informed by an acute eye to the ways she herself—and all women—have to face the threats of economic exploitation, social marginalization, powerlessness, cultural hegemony, and systematic violence.

In this article, I evaluate how subnational governments pursue feminist policy outputs. To do so, I examine equality policies in the Spanish regions of Andalusia and Galicia during the 1980s and 1990s. Whereas the national Women's Institute in Spain was the driving force behind equality policies during the 1980s, regional administrations gained autonomy in the early 1980s and developed their own equality policies during the 1990s and 2000s. I ask 1) whether leftist political allies are key to feminist policy outputs, 2) whether regional feminist policy outputs increase over time as subnational institutions develop, and 3) whether feminists in society are able to impact such policies. I conclude that subnational administrations do not always advance feminist policy outputs nor do they work cooperatively with all feminist organizations. Whereas the leftist regional administration of Andalusia has been a leader in feminist policymaking, the conservative Galician administration developed equality policies more slowly, and these policies were controversial among feminists and leftist politicians. I explain how regional women's policy agencies led by the Left and Right have nevertheless promoted women's civil society and policies that respond to women's local identities.