It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office

221 Pages·2005·1.51 MB·English

by  Jennifer L. Lawless

P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
This page intentionally left blank
ii
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
ItTakesaCandidate
WhyWomenDon’tRunforOffice
ItTakesaCandidate:WhyWomenDon’tRunforOfficeservesasthe
firstsystematic,nationwideempiricalaccountofthemannerinwhich
genderaffectspoliticalambition.BasedondatafromtheCitizenPoliti-
cal Ambition Study, a national survey we conducted of almost 3,800
“eligiblecandidates,”wefindthatwomen,eveninthehighesttiersof
professional accomplishment, are substantially less likely than men to
demonstrateambitiontoseekelectedoffice.Womenarelesslikelythan
men to be recruited to run for office. They are less likely than men to
thinktheyare“qualified”torunforoffice.Andtheyarelesslikelythan
mentoexpressawillingnesstorunforofficeinthefuture.Thisgender
gap in political ambition persists across generations. Despite cultural
evolution and society’s changing attitudes toward women in politics,
running for public office remains a much less attractive and feasible
endeavorforwomenthanformen.
JenniferL.LawlessreceivedherPh.D.fromStanfordUniversityin2003.
SheiscurrentlyanassistantprofessorofpoliticalscienceatBrownUni-
versity,withacourtesyappointmentattheTaubmanCenterforPublic
Policy. Her teaching and research focus on gender politics, electoral
politics,andpublicopinion.Shehaspublishednumerousarticlesinaca-
demicjournals,suchasAmericanJournalofPoliticalScience,Political
ResearchQuarterly,LegislativeStudiesQuarterly,SocialProblems,and
WomenandPolitics.Sheisalsotheleadauthorofapublicpolicyreport
usedbyEMILY’sList,Emerge,andtheWomen’sCampaignSchoolat
Yale to help promote and recruit women candidates. Dr. Lawless has
becomearecognizedspeakeronthesubjectofwomencandidates,fre-
quentlydiscussingtheseissuesonnationalandlocaltelevisionandradio
outlets.
Richard L. Fox is an associate professor of political science at Union
College.HehasalsotaughtorheldpositionsatRutgersUniversity,Uni-
versityofCalifornia–SantaBarbara,CollegeYearinAthens,California
State University–Fullerton, and the University of Wyoming. He is the
author of Gender Dynamics in Congressional Elections (1997) and
coauthor of Tabloid Justice: The Criminal Justice System in the Age
of Media Frenzy (2001). He is also coeditor of Gender and Elections:
Change and Continuity Through 2004 (2006). He has authored or
coauthoredmorethantwentyarticlesandbookchapters;hisworkhas
appeared in The Journal of Politics, American Journal of Political Sci-
ence,SocialProblems,PoliticalPsychology,PS,PoliticalResearchQuar-
terly,andPublicAdministrationReview.Hehasalsowrittennumerous
op-ed articles, some of which have appeared in the New York Times
andtheWallStreetJournal.
i
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
ii
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
It Takes a Candidate
Why Women Don’t Run for Office
JENNIFER L. LAWLESS
BrownUniversity
RICHARD L. FOX
UnionCollege
iii
cambridge university press
Cambridge,NewYork,Melbourne,Madrid,CapeTown,Singapore,SãoPaulo
Cambridge University Press
TheEdinburghBuilding,Cambridgecb22ru,UK
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyCambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork
www.cambridge.org
Informationo nthi stitle :www.cambri dge.org/9780521857451
© JenniferL.LawlessandRichardL.Fox2005
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexceptionandtotheprovisionof
relevantcollectivelicensingagreements,noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplace
withoutthewrittenpermissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublishedinprintformat 2005
isbn-13 978-0-511-14011-2 eBook(EBL)
isbn-10 0-511-14011-8
eBook(EBL)
isbn-13 978-0-521-85745-1 hardback
isbn-10 0-521-85745-7 hardback
isbn-13 978-0-521-67414-0 paperback
isbn-10 0-521-67414-x paperback
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyofurls
forexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication,anddoesnot
guaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain,accurateorappropriate.
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
Contents
ListofTables page ix
ListofFigures xi
Acknowledgments xiii
1 ElectoralPolitics:StillaMan’sWorld? 1
Representation,Equality,andtheStudyofGender
inElectoralPolitics 4
TraditionalGenderSocializationintheContextofU.S.
Politics:TheCentralArgumentandItsImplications 7
TraditionalFamilyRoleOrientations 8
MasculinizedEthos 9
GenderedPsyche 11
OrganizationoftheBook 13
2 ExplainingWomen’sEmergenceinthePoliticalArena 16
WomenandElectivePolitics:TheNumbers 19
ExistingExplanationsforWomen’sUnderrepresentation 19
SocietalRejectionandCulturalEvolution:The
DiscriminationExplanation 21
InstitutionalInertia:TheIncumbencyExplanation 25
TheCandidateEligibilityPool:ThePipelineExplanation 26
TheMissingPiece:DevelopingaTheoryofGenderand
PoliticalAmbition 28
TheCitizenPoliticalAmbitionStudy 32
3 TheGenderGapinPoliticalAmbition 37
VeryMuchtheSame:Gender,PoliticalParticipation,and
PoliticalInterest 38
v
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
vi Contents
VeryMuchDifferent:GenderandPoliticalAmbition 42
StageOne:ConsideringaCandidacy 43
StageTwo:DecidingtoEntertheFirstRace 47
The“WinnowingEffect” 47
TheGenderGapinElectiveOfficePreferences 48
Conclusion 50
4 Barefoot,Pregnant,andHoldingaLawDegree:Family
DynamicsandRunningforOffice 51
RaisedtoBeaCandidate? 53
EligibleCandidates’FamilyStructuresandRoles 58
Wife,Mother,andCandidate?FamilyRolesas
ImpedimentstoPoliticalAmbition 64
AreTimesChanging?GenerationalDifferencesin
PoliticalAmbition 70
Conclusion 73
5 Gender,Party,andPoliticalRecruitment 75
EligibleCandidates’PoliticalAttitudesandPartisanship 78
WhoGetsAskedtoRunforOffice? 83
PoliticalRecruitmentandConsideringaCandidacy 89
Conclusion 93
6 “I’mJustNotQualified”:GenderedSelf-Perceptionsof
CandidateViability 95
TheImpactofSelf-PerceivedQualificationson
PoliticalAmbition 96
ExplanationsfortheGenderGapinSelf-Perceived
Qualifications 102
TheSexistEnvironment 103
GenderDifferencesinDefiningPoliticalQualifications 109
DifferentYardsticksforGaugingPoliticalQualifications 114
Conclusion 116
7 TakingthePlunge:DecidingtoRunforOffice 118
WhyWouldAnyoneRunforOffice?NegativePerceptions
oftheElectoralEnvironmentandCampaignProcess 120
GenderandtheDecisiontoEnteraRace 127
ASideNoteonPoliticalCultureand“Structural”Factors 136
ProspectiveInterestinRunningforOffice 139
Conclusion 143
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
Contents vii
8 GenderandtheFutureofElectoralPolitics 145
SummarizingtheFindingsandForecasting
Women’sRepresentation 146
RecastingtheStudyofGenderandElections 153
AppendixA: TheCitizenPoliticalAmbitionStudySample
DesignandDataCollection 157
AppendixB: TheSurvey 160
AppendixC: TheInterviewQuestionnaire 171
AppendixD: VariableCoding 176
WorksCited 181
Index 195
P1:IWV/KCX P2:KsF/JtR
0521857457pre CB963B/Lawless 0521857457 September20,2005 5:9
viii