Broadening the Study of Women's Participation

Abstract

This chapter reviews existing research on women's political participation outside electoral politics and traditional forms of participation. Ackelsberg suggests an agenda for future research that includes a focus on: the mobilization of women activists, the changes in consciousness that activism brings, the effectiveness of various strategies employed by activists, and the possible contributions of activism to resolving theoretical dilemmas.

“Far from Ideal:” The Gender Politics of Political Science

“…Building on the research of the 1970s and 1980s, some scholars have continued to expand our understanding of women's political roles and influence across a variety of contexts both inside and outside the United States. Others have raised new questions and moved research in new directions, including recent work that focuses on under-studied subgroups of women, especially women of color (see Cohen 2003); on the significance of constructions of masculinity (e.g., Beckwith 2001); on the importance of new concepts such as gender consciousness and feminist consciousness (e.g., Tolleson Rinehart 1992); on broadening our conception of the "political" by examining grassroots activism or challenging the public/private split (e.g., Ackelsberg 2003); on analyzing state feminism (e.g., Lovenduski 2005); on contesting fundamental theoretical assumptions and political concepts such as "power" (e.g., Hawkesworth 2005); and on challenging conventional epistemological assumptions and approaches (e.g., Phelan 1994).…”

Good Girls Go to the Polling Booth, Bad Boys Go Everywhere

“…It is important to acknowledge, however, that differences between female and male participation patterns and preferences are not just quantitative but also distinctly qualitative. Men, in other words, tend to prefer other forms of participation than women (Ackelsberg 2003;Ferree and Martin 1995;Lowndes 2000). In general, women favor smaller-scale and less conflict-oriented forms of engagement (Eliasoph 1998), with fewer formal institutions and hierarchies (Arnold 1995).…”

Inclusive Gamified Participation: Who are we inviting and who becomes engaged?

“…Data on specific demographic differences in online participation are rather scarce, partly since a differentiation between forms of participation (traditional, digital or through day-to-day activities) is often not considered in evaluations (e.g. [41]).…”

“…On average, both the youngest (M=2.67, SD=1.25) and the oldest group (M=2.69, SD=1.01) were similarly reluctant to believe that this form of participation can make a difference. However, the group that was most active in posting content (39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51) was the one with the lowest external political efficacy. This is unusual, since those who believe they can make a difference in their communities usually tend to be more active than those who do not [31].…”