2. structure and Function of u.s government
|
The structure and function of modern western governments was not designed with women in mind. Monarchies had accepted the possible necessity of female rule, but democracies were not designed for women as citizens, let alone governors. Yet, those same structures allowed for change and across systems, women have found paths to elected office. Some democracies make that easier than others.
|
De Gouges delivering her Déclaration des droits de la femme et de la citoyenne to Queen Marie-Antoinette. (Print, Desrais, Paris, 1790 (BNF), Public Domain
Comparison of Structures
Monarchies held a limited, but clear path for female leadership. Women around the world found themselves as world leaders. Empress Zu in China led outright, across Eurasia so did Queen Brunhild. Some women came to power through inheritance from their fathers. Others as Queen regents to their sons. A queen regent is someone who rules until the male heir comes of age. Maria Theresa is a strong example of a woman who ran an empire in the Enlightenment period and inherited the throne from her father, who expressly created provisions before he died to ensure she would get the throne.
Female monarchs may appear to be a sign of feminism, but they often weren’t. While incremental progress for women peasants occurred during the long scope of history, women’s status did not dramatically change simply because a woman was monarch. Deep structural challenges existed. One of the early ways female rulers helped women peasants during the early modern period was through the creation of girls schools and insisting on the education of first noble, then lower class women. Catherine the Great of Russia is a good example of an Enlightened ruler who worked to improve the status of other women.
Women leaders also actively held other women back. A few centuries later as the international women’s suffrage movement was taking off, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom famously opposed extending the vote to women. She famously said, “We women are not made for governing; and, if we were good women, we must dislike those masculine occupations; but there are times which force one to take interest in them… and I do of course, intensely” (Arianne Chernock).
When democracies emerged in the late 18th century, women’s chances at political leadership plummeted. While democracies were thought of as these great avenues for representing the voice of the people, that voice was decidedly and intentionally male. When Jefferson declared that “All men are created equal,” he meant it and made no effort to include women in that vision. When his contemporary across the ocean, Olympe de Gouge, paraphrased his ideas in her Declaration of the Rights of Woman she wrote, “Woman is born free and remains equal to man in rights” (Olympe de Gouge). During the reign of terror, they executed her by the guillotine for being too radical. So much for democracies representing the people!
In the earliest democracies, women were denied citizenship, the right to vote, the right to juries of their peers (women), and so many other staples of a democratic system. Although much of that has changed in a legal sense today, economic barriers facing women related to.
There is a clear correlation between the level of female representation in politics and the type of electoral system that political system uses. Countries with lower female representation often have mixed or majority systems. In the majority system, the oldest globally, the candidate with the most votes wins. While this does create a stable system of democracy, a clear criticism is that it creates unfairness, gives a large majority to a party with a usually minor national victory, and excludes minority perspectives. There are two types of majority systems: Simple Majority (where the candidate with the most votes wins) and Absolute Majority (combining votes until a candidate gets more than half, used in France). Plurality systems give seats to the candidate who wins the most votes, even if they do not have the majority. These systems are used in Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States. In these systems women too struggle due to challenges of access and sexism at the polls.
By contrast, Belgium in 1889 created a system of Proportional Representation which allocated seats based on electoral strength, preventing a single force from dominating. Globally, a consistent pattern emerges in the distribution of female parliamentarians. Among the five countries with 30% or more women in their single or lower house (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands), three employ a proportional electoral system, while the remaining two utilize a mixed electoral system. Notice that none use a majoritarian system. Whereas, in the case of the eight countries with 29-25% female Members of Parliament in their lower or single house (New Zealand, Seychelles, Austria, Germany, Iceland, Argentina, Mozambique, and South Africa), all use either proportional or mixed electoral systems, with none adhering to a majoritarian system. Almost 90% of nations lacking female parliamentarians utilize a majority system.
The head of government and their job description varies by democracy. Some use a Prime Minister, while others like the United States, use a President. In Parliamentary systems, the Prime Minister is elected by the Legislature. While less democratic, these systems actually allow for more women to rise to the top because their peers who know them and their quality of work get to elect them to the highest office. In Presidential systems, the president is elected by the people, which may be seen as more democratic, but this actually presents barriers to getting women elected, notably sexism on the campaign trail.
Monarchies held a limited, but clear path for female leadership. Women around the world found themselves as world leaders. Empress Zu in China led outright, across Eurasia so did Queen Brunhild. Some women came to power through inheritance from their fathers. Others as Queen regents to their sons. A queen regent is someone who rules until the male heir comes of age. Maria Theresa is a strong example of a woman who ran an empire in the Enlightenment period and inherited the throne from her father, who expressly created provisions before he died to ensure she would get the throne.
Female monarchs may appear to be a sign of feminism, but they often weren’t. While incremental progress for women peasants occurred during the long scope of history, women’s status did not dramatically change simply because a woman was monarch. Deep structural challenges existed. One of the early ways female rulers helped women peasants during the early modern period was through the creation of girls schools and insisting on the education of first noble, then lower class women. Catherine the Great of Russia is a good example of an Enlightened ruler who worked to improve the status of other women.
Women leaders also actively held other women back. A few centuries later as the international women’s suffrage movement was taking off, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom famously opposed extending the vote to women. She famously said, “We women are not made for governing; and, if we were good women, we must dislike those masculine occupations; but there are times which force one to take interest in them… and I do of course, intensely” (Arianne Chernock).
When democracies emerged in the late 18th century, women’s chances at political leadership plummeted. While democracies were thought of as these great avenues for representing the voice of the people, that voice was decidedly and intentionally male. When Jefferson declared that “All men are created equal,” he meant it and made no effort to include women in that vision. When his contemporary across the ocean, Olympe de Gouge, paraphrased his ideas in her Declaration of the Rights of Woman she wrote, “Woman is born free and remains equal to man in rights” (Olympe de Gouge). During the reign of terror, they executed her by the guillotine for being too radical. So much for democracies representing the people!
In the earliest democracies, women were denied citizenship, the right to vote, the right to juries of their peers (women), and so many other staples of a democratic system. Although much of that has changed in a legal sense today, economic barriers facing women related to.
There is a clear correlation between the level of female representation in politics and the type of electoral system that political system uses. Countries with lower female representation often have mixed or majority systems. In the majority system, the oldest globally, the candidate with the most votes wins. While this does create a stable system of democracy, a clear criticism is that it creates unfairness, gives a large majority to a party with a usually minor national victory, and excludes minority perspectives. There are two types of majority systems: Simple Majority (where the candidate with the most votes wins) and Absolute Majority (combining votes until a candidate gets more than half, used in France). Plurality systems give seats to the candidate who wins the most votes, even if they do not have the majority. These systems are used in Canada, Great Britain, India, and the United States. In these systems women too struggle due to challenges of access and sexism at the polls.
By contrast, Belgium in 1889 created a system of Proportional Representation which allocated seats based on electoral strength, preventing a single force from dominating. Globally, a consistent pattern emerges in the distribution of female parliamentarians. Among the five countries with 30% or more women in their single or lower house (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands), three employ a proportional electoral system, while the remaining two utilize a mixed electoral system. Notice that none use a majoritarian system. Whereas, in the case of the eight countries with 29-25% female Members of Parliament in their lower or single house (New Zealand, Seychelles, Austria, Germany, Iceland, Argentina, Mozambique, and South Africa), all use either proportional or mixed electoral systems, with none adhering to a majoritarian system. Almost 90% of nations lacking female parliamentarians utilize a majority system.
The head of government and their job description varies by democracy. Some use a Prime Minister, while others like the United States, use a President. In Parliamentary systems, the Prime Minister is elected by the Legislature. While less democratic, these systems actually allow for more women to rise to the top because their peers who know them and their quality of work get to elect them to the highest office. In Presidential systems, the president is elected by the people, which may be seen as more democratic, but this actually presents barriers to getting women elected, notably sexism on the campaign trail.
Candidate Elizabeth Warren running for the 2020 Democratic Party nomination for president, Public Domain.
Challenges Facing Female Politicians
What happens when they do run? Women candidates encounter barriers to office at every stage of the political process in ways that men do not. Women candidates require recruitment and encouragement but are less likely than men to receive it. In the US system, on average, women win elected office at similar rates as men, but fewer women choose to run for office. The lack of supportive policies for working families like subsidized child care, paid maternity and caregiving leaves, among others discourage some women from running for office.
People are more willing to elect women candidates, but sexism by proxy keeps women from being elected. A longitudinal study by the Gallup Poll spanning sixty-five years indicated a shift in Americans' perspective on whether they would vote for a well-qualified woman for president. In 1937, only 33 percent responded affirmatively, while by 1999, 92 percent expressed a positive stance. Despite this optimistic trend influenced by feminism, a 2019 poll found that among those who claimed they would vote for a woman, 33 percent believed their neighbor would not. This phenomenon, known as "sexism by proxy," involves individuals altering their voting behavior based on perceived electability rooted in outdated sexist standards that they may not personally endorse. It serves as a potential strategy to mask sexism and create an unseen barrier for women in politics.
Despite the growing, even record-setting involvement of women in U.S. politics, a majority of political positions at both state and federal levels are still held by men. As of 2021, only 25% of Senators, 29% of the Representatives, only 12 of 50 Governors, and only 32% of state-level legislators are women. This is alarming because women are more than half the US population!
Progress slowed in recent decades. In 1979, women held only 3 percent of seats in the U.S. Congress, 10 percent in state legislatures, and 11 percent in statewide elective executive offices. The percentage of seats in the U.S. Congress held by women has increased sixfold, and the percentage in state legislatures and statewide elective executive offices has more than doubled. However, from 2009 to 2015, women's representation in Congress grew only slightly, from 16.8 percent to 19.4 percent. During the same period, their representation in statewide elective executive offices barely changed (from 22.6 percent to 24.6 percent), and their representation in state legislatures decreased from 24.3 percent to 24.2 percent.
What happens when they do run? Women candidates encounter barriers to office at every stage of the political process in ways that men do not. Women candidates require recruitment and encouragement but are less likely than men to receive it. In the US system, on average, women win elected office at similar rates as men, but fewer women choose to run for office. The lack of supportive policies for working families like subsidized child care, paid maternity and caregiving leaves, among others discourage some women from running for office.
People are more willing to elect women candidates, but sexism by proxy keeps women from being elected. A longitudinal study by the Gallup Poll spanning sixty-five years indicated a shift in Americans' perspective on whether they would vote for a well-qualified woman for president. In 1937, only 33 percent responded affirmatively, while by 1999, 92 percent expressed a positive stance. Despite this optimistic trend influenced by feminism, a 2019 poll found that among those who claimed they would vote for a woman, 33 percent believed their neighbor would not. This phenomenon, known as "sexism by proxy," involves individuals altering their voting behavior based on perceived electability rooted in outdated sexist standards that they may not personally endorse. It serves as a potential strategy to mask sexism and create an unseen barrier for women in politics.
Despite the growing, even record-setting involvement of women in U.S. politics, a majority of political positions at both state and federal levels are still held by men. As of 2021, only 25% of Senators, 29% of the Representatives, only 12 of 50 Governors, and only 32% of state-level legislators are women. This is alarming because women are more than half the US population!
Progress slowed in recent decades. In 1979, women held only 3 percent of seats in the U.S. Congress, 10 percent in state legislatures, and 11 percent in statewide elective executive offices. The percentage of seats in the U.S. Congress held by women has increased sixfold, and the percentage in state legislatures and statewide elective executive offices has more than doubled. However, from 2009 to 2015, women's representation in Congress grew only slightly, from 16.8 percent to 19.4 percent. During the same period, their representation in statewide elective executive offices barely changed (from 22.6 percent to 24.6 percent), and their representation in state legislatures decreased from 24.3 percent to 24.2 percent.
Kamala Harris, First Female Vice President of the United States, Public Domain.
Status of Women in the US Democracy
The political status of women in the US is at an interesting juncture 100 years after winning the right to vote. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research tracks the “Status of Women in the States,” and uses data to raise awareness, improve policies, and promote women’s equality. They concluded that, “women continue to be underrepresented in governments across the nation and face barriers that often make it difficult for them to exercise political power and assume leadership positions in the public sphere” (The Status of Women in the States).
They created the Political Participation Composite Index, which uses four different data points to measure women’s status: voter registration, voter turnout, representation in elected office, and women’s institutional resources. In the US, not a single state received a grade of “A” on their index score. The highest ranking state was New Hampshire, with a score of B+-- the only state to receive that score. New Hampshire is set apart because it was in the top one-third for women’s voter registration and turnout. Additionally, in 2012, the state made history by having all women in the top executive offices: Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Senator Kelly Ayote, Representative Ann McLane Kuster, Representative Carol Shea-Porter, and Governor Maggie Hassan. New Hampshire and it’s neighboring New England states are the exception, not the norm. Most states did poorly on the Political Participation Composite Index, with southern states in particular falling far behind: Arkansas, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia scored an F!
Do we need more women candidates? Emily’s List thinks so. This organization works to endorse and elect “Democratic Pro-Choice Women.” Which matters more for women-friendly policy? The evidence is blurry. On the one hand, men and women in general see the status of women differently. According to studies by PEW Research Center, while men and women agree that sexual harassment, differing legal status, different social pressures, and a lack of women in power are problems that hold women back, the margin by which they agree differs greatly by gender. Most women overwhelmingly agree to those, with over 70 percent of respondents agreeing, while most men only agree at just over the 50 percent margin. If men and women don’t agree on the challenges facing women, how can women expect male politicians to pass policies that align with their needs?
Research has demonstrated the significance of women in politics for the well-being of women and families. Using data from the Institute of Women’s Policy Research, political scientist Jessica Saracino illustrated that "Women legislators in the United States are more likely than their male counterparts to include legislation concerning women, children, and families among their top priorities... [and] are more successful in their efforts to pass these bills into law." Her findings suggested a "strong relationship between the status of women and the number of women legislators in that state." Saracino's work was supported by others, including Amy Caiazza, whose research revealed that while left-leaning politicians were more inclined to support bills related to women’s rights, gender was a more influential predictor of that position. Caiazza also observed that high levels of women’s voter turnout resulted in increased attention to women’s issues across genders. Thus, efforts at the state level to elevate women’s status contribute to greater representation, creating a cyclical effect that produces more tangible outcomes for women. But her growing research shows that party affiliation can matter more though. The Democratic Party tends to champion legislation favorable to women at higher rates than Republicans– and this perhaps more than the candidate’s gender.
The political status of women in the US is at an interesting juncture 100 years after winning the right to vote. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research tracks the “Status of Women in the States,” and uses data to raise awareness, improve policies, and promote women’s equality. They concluded that, “women continue to be underrepresented in governments across the nation and face barriers that often make it difficult for them to exercise political power and assume leadership positions in the public sphere” (The Status of Women in the States).
They created the Political Participation Composite Index, which uses four different data points to measure women’s status: voter registration, voter turnout, representation in elected office, and women’s institutional resources. In the US, not a single state received a grade of “A” on their index score. The highest ranking state was New Hampshire, with a score of B+-- the only state to receive that score. New Hampshire is set apart because it was in the top one-third for women’s voter registration and turnout. Additionally, in 2012, the state made history by having all women in the top executive offices: Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Senator Kelly Ayote, Representative Ann McLane Kuster, Representative Carol Shea-Porter, and Governor Maggie Hassan. New Hampshire and it’s neighboring New England states are the exception, not the norm. Most states did poorly on the Political Participation Composite Index, with southern states in particular falling far behind: Arkansas, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia scored an F!
Do we need more women candidates? Emily’s List thinks so. This organization works to endorse and elect “Democratic Pro-Choice Women.” Which matters more for women-friendly policy? The evidence is blurry. On the one hand, men and women in general see the status of women differently. According to studies by PEW Research Center, while men and women agree that sexual harassment, differing legal status, different social pressures, and a lack of women in power are problems that hold women back, the margin by which they agree differs greatly by gender. Most women overwhelmingly agree to those, with over 70 percent of respondents agreeing, while most men only agree at just over the 50 percent margin. If men and women don’t agree on the challenges facing women, how can women expect male politicians to pass policies that align with their needs?
Research has demonstrated the significance of women in politics for the well-being of women and families. Using data from the Institute of Women’s Policy Research, political scientist Jessica Saracino illustrated that "Women legislators in the United States are more likely than their male counterparts to include legislation concerning women, children, and families among their top priorities... [and] are more successful in their efforts to pass these bills into law." Her findings suggested a "strong relationship between the status of women and the number of women legislators in that state." Saracino's work was supported by others, including Amy Caiazza, whose research revealed that while left-leaning politicians were more inclined to support bills related to women’s rights, gender was a more influential predictor of that position. Caiazza also observed that high levels of women’s voter turnout resulted in increased attention to women’s issues across genders. Thus, efforts at the state level to elevate women’s status contribute to greater representation, creating a cyclical effect that produces more tangible outcomes for women. But her growing research shows that party affiliation can matter more though. The Democratic Party tends to champion legislation favorable to women at higher rates than Republicans– and this perhaps more than the candidate’s gender.
Draw your own conclusions
|
Learn how to teach with inquiry.
Many of these lesson plans were sponsored in part by the Library of Congress Teaching with Primary Sources Eastern Region Program, coordinated by Waynesburg University, the History and Social Studies Education Faculty at Plymouth State University, and the Patrons of the Remedial Herstory Project. |
|
Lesson Plans from Other Organizations
- The National Women's History Museum has lesson plans on women's history.
- The Guilder Lehrman Institute for American History has lesson plans on women's history.
- The NY Historical Society has articles and classroom activities for teaching women's history.
- Unladylike 2020, in partnership with PBS, has primary sources to explore with students and outstanding videos on women from the Progressive era.
- The Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media has produced recommendations for teaching women's history with primary sources and provided a collection of sources for world history. Check them out!
- The Stanford History Education Group has a number of lesson plans about women in US History.
Period Specific Lesson Plans from Other Organizations
- C3 Teachers: This inquiry leads students through an investigation of the LGBTQ+ movement, primarily driven by the history of the movement through various accounts and perspectives. The compelling question—What makes a movement successful?—does not address whether or not the movement was successful, but instead assesses the components of a movement and whether the movement is in a period of growth or has already peaked. Although the focus of this inquiry is on the LGBTQ+ movement, parallels can be drawn to other social movements in history with respect to organization, activism, and overall execution, including the Civil Rights Movement or the women’s suffrage and rights movements. Specifically, this inquiry looks at four different aspects that can potentially shape a movement in its foundation as well as its rise, namely public reaction, government leaders and policies, Supreme Court cases, and personal experiences. Throughout the inquiry, students will examine each individual aspect independently, evaluating the merits, strengths, and significance of each provided source in the “Movement Analysis Organization Chart,” but the summative task will require a compilation and synthesis of the sources in this investigation in order to form an argument to address the compelling question.
- Voices of Democracy: In the speech Clinton positioned the United States as the moral authority in monitoring and enforcing sanctions for global human trafficking, while at the same time reiterating the importance of international cooperation and partnerships.
- Clio: In 1972, feminists in Washington, D.C. founded the nation’s first rape crisis center. Other centers were soon established across the country. In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The act was created in response to the nation-wide, grassroots work of activists concerned with domestic violence, sexual assault, date rape, and stalking. This lesson introduces students to the history of efforts to stop violence against women.
- National Women’s History Museum: How has the Supreme Court shaped the lives of American women between 1908-2005? Students will analyze one of four Supreme Court cases that relate to the constitutional rights of women decided between 1908-2005. Students will become mini-experts on one Supreme Court cases and they will be exposed to the content, themes, and questions from the other three cases via peer to peer instruction of their classmates. The goal of this lesson is to introduce students to a broad range of Supreme Court cases that have impacted American women and to have them develop a working knowledge and expertise of at least one case by using primary sources such as the case ruling and secondary sources that will help students to understand the context.
- National History Day: Patsy Takemoto Mink (1927-2002) was born in Hawaii. She studied in Pennsylvania and Nebraska before moving back to Hawaii to earn her undergraduate degree and eventually received her J.D. from the University of Chicago in 1951. She moved back to Hawaii with her husband, John Francis Mink, and founded the Oahu Young Democrats in 1954. In the 1950s, Mink served as both a member of the territorial house of representatives and Hawaii Senate. After Hawaii achieved statehood in 1959, Mink unsuccessfully ran for the U.S. House of Representatives. Mink campaigned for the second representative seat in 1964 and won, making her the first woman of color and first Asian American woman to be elected to Congress. Mink is best known for her support of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society legislation, as well as her advocacy for women’s issues and equal rights. Mink worked tirelessly to earn support for the critical Title IX Amendment from her comprehensive education bill called Women’s Education Equity Act. Mink took a break from Congress after an unsuccessful bid for the Senate, but returned to Congress in 1990 and served until her death in September 2002.
- C3 Teachers: This twelfth grade annotated inquiry leads students through an investigation of a hotly debated issue in the United States: the gender wage gap. The compelling question “What should we do about the gender wage gap?” asks students to grapple not only with how to quantify and interpret the gap but also to consider ways of addressing the problem. Throughout the inquiry, students consider the degree to which economic inequality reflects social, political, or economic injustices or whether it simply reflects individual choices and the role the government should play in decreasing income inequality. Although this inquiry is rooted in a question about economics, no social issue is fully understood without examining a range of economic, historical, geographic, and political concepts in order to craft a full-bodied, evidence-based argument. This inquiry looks at the complexity of the gender wage gap issue through all four social studies disciplines. Students examine the structural factors that influence women’s choices as well as historical (e.g., Equal Pay Act of 1963) and pending (e.g., Paycheck Fairness Act) legislative efforts. Ultimately, students must find a way to measure the gender wage gap, determine if it is an issue worth addressing, and, if so, how to best address it, including private and public sector solutions.
Institute for Women's Policy Research
For accurate, well researched information on how women impact and are impacted by policy, the Institute for Women's Policy Research should be a first stop. Their website states:
"We win economic equity for all women and eliminate barriers to their full participation in society. As a leading national think tank, we build evidence to shape policies that grow women’s power and influence, close inequality gaps, and improve the economic well-being of families... The Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that engages in research and dissemination to shape public policy and improve the lives and opportunities of women from diverse backgrounds. As a nonpartisan organization, the independence of our research is essential to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and quality. IWPR seeks to ensure these standards through internal and external peer review processes. In most cases, reports receive one to two external reviews; some shorter products receive external review as well. All publications are reviewed by in-house researchers not involved in their production."
Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers
For women's politics by the numbers and strong data, the Center for American Women and Politics is a go to resource. Their website states:
"The Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP), a unit of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, is nationally recognized as the leading source of scholarly research and current data about women’s political participation in the United States. Its mission is to promote greater knowledge and understanding about the role of women in American politics, enhance women's influence in public life, and expand the diversity of women in politics and government.
CAWP’s education and outreach programs translate research findings into action, addressing women’s under-representation in political leadership with effective, intersectional, and imaginative programs serving a variety of audiences. As the world has watched Americans considering female candidates for the nation's highest offices, CAWP’s five decades of analyzing and interpreting women’s participation in American politics have provided a foundation and context for the discussion."
Archives of Women's Political Communication at Iowa State University
For a sea of political speeches delivered by women, look no further than the archives at Iowa State. Their website states:
"The Archives of Women's Political Communication was launched in 2007 by the Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University. The goal of the archives is to showcase and preserve women’s political discourse and promote lifelong learning of women in political leadership throughout the world.
The archives is designed to serve as a resource for faculty teaching courses and conducting research in political science, speech communication, journalism, women's studies, sociology, history and other fields. It also serves as a resource for students and members of the public interested in women's political communication. An internal review board helps oversee and review the collection of speeches."
For accurate, well researched information on how women impact and are impacted by policy, the Institute for Women's Policy Research should be a first stop. Their website states:
"We win economic equity for all women and eliminate barriers to their full participation in society. As a leading national think tank, we build evidence to shape policies that grow women’s power and influence, close inequality gaps, and improve the economic well-being of families... The Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that engages in research and dissemination to shape public policy and improve the lives and opportunities of women from diverse backgrounds. As a nonpartisan organization, the independence of our research is essential to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and quality. IWPR seeks to ensure these standards through internal and external peer review processes. In most cases, reports receive one to two external reviews; some shorter products receive external review as well. All publications are reviewed by in-house researchers not involved in their production."
Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers
For women's politics by the numbers and strong data, the Center for American Women and Politics is a go to resource. Their website states:
"The Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP), a unit of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, is nationally recognized as the leading source of scholarly research and current data about women’s political participation in the United States. Its mission is to promote greater knowledge and understanding about the role of women in American politics, enhance women's influence in public life, and expand the diversity of women in politics and government.
CAWP’s education and outreach programs translate research findings into action, addressing women’s under-representation in political leadership with effective, intersectional, and imaginative programs serving a variety of audiences. As the world has watched Americans considering female candidates for the nation's highest offices, CAWP’s five decades of analyzing and interpreting women’s participation in American politics have provided a foundation and context for the discussion."
Archives of Women's Political Communication at Iowa State University
For a sea of political speeches delivered by women, look no further than the archives at Iowa State. Their website states:
"The Archives of Women's Political Communication was launched in 2007 by the Carrie Chapman Catt Center for Women and Politics at Iowa State University. The goal of the archives is to showcase and preserve women’s political discourse and promote lifelong learning of women in political leadership throughout the world.
The archives is designed to serve as a resource for faculty teaching courses and conducting research in political science, speech communication, journalism, women's studies, sociology, history and other fields. It also serves as a resource for students and members of the public interested in women's political communication. An internal review board helps oversee and review the collection of speeches."
Remedial Herstory Editors. "2. STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION OF U.S GOVERNMENT." The Remedial Herstory Project. January 1, 2024. www.remedialherstory.com.
|
Consulting TeamKelsie Brook Eckert, Project Director
Coordinator of Social Studies Ed. at Plymouth State University Dr. Jason Charette Associate Professor of Practice in Political Science at Plymouth State University Dr. Laura Tilghman Associate Professor and Program Coordinator for Anthropology and Sociology at Plymouth State University |
Nonfiction's on Government
Women and Politics is a comprehensive examination of women's use of politics in pursuit of gender equality. How can demands for gender equality be reconciled with sex differences?
|
Caroline Criado Perez investigates this shocking root cause of gender inequality in Invisible Women. Criado Perez unearths a dangerous pattern in data and its consequences on women’s lives.
|
Women and Politics in a Global World is the only text that offers a cross-national and comparative examination of the impact of women on politics--and the impact of politics on women.
|
Hillary Rodham Clinton reveals what she was thinking and feeling during one of the most controversial and unpredictable presidential elections in history.
|
When Women Win delivers stories of some of the toughest political contests of the past three decades, including the historic victory of Barbara Mikulski as the first Democratic woman elected to the Senate in her own right and Elizabeth Warren’s dramatic Senate win. When Women Win is both a page-turning political drama and an important look at the effects of women’s engagement in politics.
|
In Women in Politics, author and healthcare leader Mary Chung Hayashi offers a riveting exploration of the strides made by women in government. This essential, contemporary analysis bridges the gap between past and present, blending Mary's personal journey as an Asian American immigrant and former California State Assembly member with the inspiring stories of trailblazing women in political leadership.
|
How to teach with Films:
Remember, teachers want the student to be the historian. What do historians do when they watch films?
- Before they watch, ask students to research the director and producers. These are the source of the information. How will their background and experience likely bias this film?
- Also, ask students to consider the context the film was created in. The film may be about history, but it was made recently. What was going on the year the film was made that could bias the film? In particular, how do you think the gains of feminism will impact the portrayal of the female characters?
- As they watch, ask students to research the historical accuracy of the film. What do online sources say about what the film gets right or wrong?
- Afterward, ask students to describe how the female characters were portrayed and what lessons they got from the film.
- Then, ask students to evaluate this film as a learning tool. Was it helpful to better understand this topic? Did the historical inaccuracies make it unhelpful? Make it clear any informed opinion is valid.
|
Zero Dark Thirty (2012)
A chronicle of the decade-long hunt for al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden after the September 2001 attacks, and his death at the hands of the Navy S.E.A.L.s Team 6 in May 2011. IMDB In Her Hands (2022)
At 26, Zarifa Ghafari became one of Afghanistan's first female mayors and the youngest to ever hold the position. Filmed over two turbulent years, the film documents her personal battle for survival as her country unravels. IMDB |
|
Bibliography
“A Century After Women Gained the Right to Vote Majority of Americans See Work to do on Gender Equality.” PEW Research Center. July 7, 2020. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/07/07/a-century-after-women-gained-the-right-to-vote-majority-of-americans-see-work-to-do-on-gender-equality/.
Caiazza, Amy. “Does Women's Representation in Elected Office Lead to Women-Friendly Policy? Analysis of State-Level Data.” Women & Politics, 26:1, 37, DOI: 10.1300/J014v26n01_03.
Center for American Women and Politics Editors. “Women in Elective Office 2023.” Center for American Women and Politics. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University-New Brunswick. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/current-numbers/women-elective-office-2023.
Chernock, Arianne. “Conclusion: Queen Victoria versus the Suffragettes: The Politics of Queenship in Edwardian Britain.” Chapter in The Right to Rule and the Rights of Women: Queen Victoria and the Women's Movement, 193–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi:10.1017/9781108652384.007.
Directorate-General for Research. “DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS ON FEMALE POLITICAL REPRESENTATION, 2. Electoral Systems” European Parliament. WOMEN'S RIGHTS SERIES. March 1997. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/workingpapers/femm/w10/2_en.htm
Geiger, A.W. and Kim Parker. “For Women’s History Month, a look at gender gains – and gaps – in the U.S.” PEW Research Center. March 15, 2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/15/for-womens-history-month-a-look-at-gender-gains-and-gaps-in-the-u-s/.
McGrath, Mary. “Opinion: Are Americans ready for a female president? Yes. In fact they might prefer one.” LA Times. November 24, 2019. http://www/latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-11-24/elect-woman-president-warren.
Meyler, Bernadette. “The Majoritarian Difficulty: A RESPONSE TO The Administrative Agon: A Democratic Theory for a Conflictual Regulatory State, Daniel E. Walters, 31 OCT 2022.” Yale Law Journal. 31 OCT 2022. VOL 132. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/the-majoritarian-difficulty.
Newport, Frank, David Moore, and Lydia Saad. “Long-Term Gallup Poll Trends: A Portrait of American Public Opinion Through the Century.” December 20, 1999. http://news.gallup.com/poll/3400/longterm-gallup-poll-trends-portrait-american-public-opinion.aspx.
UN Women Editors. “Visualizing the data: Women’s representation in society.” UN Women. February 2020. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/multimedia/2020/2/infographic-visualizing-the-data-womens-representation.
Saracino, Jessica. “The Effect of Socioeconomic Status on the Number of Women in State Legislatures.” Public Purpose: An Interdixciplinary Journal American University’s Graduate School of Public Affairs, Vol. 6. Issue 1 (Spring 2008). https://www.american.edu/spa/publicpurpose/upload/the-effect-of-socioeconomic-status-on-the-number-of-women-in-state-legislatures.pdf.
Caiazza, Amy. “Does Women's Representation in Elected Office Lead to Women-Friendly Policy? Analysis of State-Level Data.” Women & Politics, 26:1, 37, DOI: 10.1300/J014v26n01_03.
Center for American Women and Politics Editors. “Women in Elective Office 2023.” Center for American Women and Politics. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University-New Brunswick. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/current-numbers/women-elective-office-2023.
Chernock, Arianne. “Conclusion: Queen Victoria versus the Suffragettes: The Politics of Queenship in Edwardian Britain.” Chapter in The Right to Rule and the Rights of Women: Queen Victoria and the Women's Movement, 193–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi:10.1017/9781108652384.007.
Directorate-General for Research. “DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS ON FEMALE POLITICAL REPRESENTATION, 2. Electoral Systems” European Parliament. WOMEN'S RIGHTS SERIES. March 1997. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/workingpapers/femm/w10/2_en.htm
Geiger, A.W. and Kim Parker. “For Women’s History Month, a look at gender gains – and gaps – in the U.S.” PEW Research Center. March 15, 2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/15/for-womens-history-month-a-look-at-gender-gains-and-gaps-in-the-u-s/.
McGrath, Mary. “Opinion: Are Americans ready for a female president? Yes. In fact they might prefer one.” LA Times. November 24, 2019. http://www/latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-11-24/elect-woman-president-warren.
Meyler, Bernadette. “The Majoritarian Difficulty: A RESPONSE TO The Administrative Agon: A Democratic Theory for a Conflictual Regulatory State, Daniel E. Walters, 31 OCT 2022.” Yale Law Journal. 31 OCT 2022. VOL 132. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/the-majoritarian-difficulty.
Newport, Frank, David Moore, and Lydia Saad. “Long-Term Gallup Poll Trends: A Portrait of American Public Opinion Through the Century.” December 20, 1999. http://news.gallup.com/poll/3400/longterm-gallup-poll-trends-portrait-american-public-opinion.aspx.
UN Women Editors. “Visualizing the data: Women’s representation in society.” UN Women. February 2020. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/multimedia/2020/2/infographic-visualizing-the-data-womens-representation.
Saracino, Jessica. “The Effect of Socioeconomic Status on the Number of Women in State Legislatures.” Public Purpose: An Interdixciplinary Journal American University’s Graduate School of Public Affairs, Vol. 6. Issue 1 (Spring 2008). https://www.american.edu/spa/publicpurpose/upload/the-effect-of-socioeconomic-status-on-the-number-of-women-in-state-legislatures.pdf.