No abstract

We examine which Americans were likely to believe that American society has grown “too soft and feminine,” a concept we have characterized as gendered nationalism, and how such gendered nationalist attitudes influenced voting behavior in the 2016 presidential race. Our analysis shows that party, gender, education, and class shaped attitudes about gendered nationalism: Republicans, men, and members of the working class were more likely to support gendered nationalist views. We identify a strong, significant relationship between gendered nationalist attitudes and the probability of voting for Donald Trump, even after controlling for partisanship, ideology, race, religion, and other factors. Moreover, gender differences in candidate support were largely driven by gender differences in beliefs that the United States has grown too soft and feminine. Our research adds to the growing scholarly evidence indicating that gendered beliefs are likely to have a bigger impact on American political behavior than a voter's gender alone.

Objective. To examine the impact of religion on attitudes about three controversial education policies: creationism, school prayer, and vouchers. Methods. Using a unique, national survey of school board candidates that I undertook in 1998, I use regression analysis to examine which factors, especially religion, explain support for these three policies. Results. This study finds that conservative Christians are more likely to support such policies than mainline Protestants. Additionally, church attendance appears to have an amplifying effect on evangelicals with respect to support for these issues. By contract, those candidates with non-Judeo-Christian religious identifications have much lower levels of support for creationism and school prayer. However, conservative political ideology remains the strongest predictor of support for creationism, prayer in school, and vouchers. Conclusion. Religious beliefs, sometimes enhanced by church attendance, can have a powerful, direct effect on attitudes about creationism, school prayer, and vouchers among school board candidates. Demonstrating such a link becomes important when considering that school board members play a large role in shaping local education policy.The American public routinely claims that one of its top priorities is education. The public schools in this nation have no shortage of critics, chief among them Christian Right leaders, whose activism in education politics demonstrates that public education is an arena in which church-state issues are often contested. Further, many parents-not just conservative Christians-are calling for the government to help them pay for tuition at private, religious institutions through vouchers and tax credits. Despite the salience of education to both Christian Right activists and the public more generally, few studies have looked at the impact of religious beliefs and behavior on education attitudes. This article examines the impact of religion on three education issues that have drawn recent media attention: school prayer, creationism, and vouchers. Data for this study are drawn from a unique, national survey of school board candidates. In recent years, school

Proponents of the political pipeline theory argue that when more women fill the ranks of locally elected positions, the number of qualified female candidates will increase and more women will eventually be elected statewide and nationally. Given that women are elected at the school board level at higher rates than any other political office, do women run for school board in hopes of using it as a stepping stone for a larger career in politics? This article analyzes whether there are gender differences among school board members with respect to the reasons they run for office. Men are more likely than women to be motivated to run to shape education policy and for religious or moral reasons. However, relatively few school board members run with the express purpose of gaining political experience, regardless of gender.

In this article, we explore the nexus of gender, religious leadership, and attitudes toward homosexuality and gay rights. Homosexuality has become a frontline issue in American politics, as illustrated most recently by gay marriage battles in the courts and state legislatures as well as state referenda campaigns designed to define marriage legally as the union of a man and a woman. Using survey data from a national random sample of 3,208 clergy who serve in six mainline Protestant denominations, we analyze the extent to which gender operates as a significant predictor of public speech on gay rights issues. Ordinal logistic regression allows us to demonstrate that women clergy are substantially more likely than their male counterparts to speak publicly on gay rights, as well as to model more generally the factors that compel clergy to take action to address this controversial issue in public.There is a significant gender divide in American public opinion regarding homosexuality that mirrors and even extends the broader political gender gap in the United States. Since the 1980s, women have emerged as more liberal than men on a range of political issues -most typically issues pertaining to social welfare concerns (Kaufmann 2004;Kaufmann and