Women of Color Political Elites in the US: An Introduction, Personal Reflections, and a Call for Scholarly Engagement

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Women Politics & Policy Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/1554477X.2022.2004844
Nadia Elizabeth Brown, C. J. Clark, A. Mahoney
{"title":"Women of Color Political Elites in the US: An Introduction, Personal Reflections, and a Call for Scholarly Engagement","authors":"Nadia Elizabeth Brown, C. J. Clark, A. Mahoney","doi":"10.1080/1554477X.2022.2004844","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"More women of color were sworn in to the 117th U.S. Congress than ever before. For instance, Cori Bush became the first Black woman elected from the state of Missouri, accomplishing this feat by taking down William Clay, whose family served in that seat for decades. Cori Bush’s victory, along with those of other women of color, is simultaneously something to celebrate and investigate. How can it be that in 2021, women of color elected officials are still achieving firsts? How have scholars assessed, theorized, and studied these women who are novel players in American government? Political Science, as a discipline, is merely decades out from viewing women of color via a single-axis lens of either race or gender. Thusly, scholars are still grappling with how to examine women of color by their own merits. This special issue seeks to do just that. The essays in this volume are chiefly concerned with studying the multiplicity of women of color political elites as distinct actors in American democracy. As guest co-editors of two issues on the subject, we wanted to curate a set of essays from both established and burgeoning thought leaders and empiricists on the complexities of seeking elected office and governing as women of color. Political scientists have long recognized that women of color experience politics in a manner distinct from White women and men of color. Scholars such as Ange-Marie Hancock (2007) and Wendy Smooth (2006) have convincingly argued for the theoretical benefits of intersectionality research. In 2006, Smooth authored a piece in which she argued that intersectionality was “a mess worth making” and growing numbers followed suit by making a mess of traditional approaches to studying politics. For instance, Becki Scola wrote one of the first research articles with empirical data to show that the factors that account for the presence of women in state legislatures are really predictors of whether White women serve (Scola 2008). In 2014, Nadia Brown published the first book on Black women state lawmakers, and in the process introduced a novel framework, representational identity theory, for understanding these understudied actors. Just a year before, Christina Bejarano published a book arguing that Latina candidates are not doubly disadvantaged, but instead benefit from their racial and gender identities. In 2020, Reingold, Haynie, and Widner empirically demonstrated that when multiple identities are considered we learn something about politics that we otherwise would have missed. This is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list of research on the subject. We simply cite these studies as examples of a larger discourse of how scholars have begun to study women of color political elites. From an even bigger picture perspective, let’s consider the creation of new journals centered on identity. Politics, Groups, and Identities was launched in 2013, and it is an outlet that has consistently published work on women of color and intersectionality research as well. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics was launched in 2016 and has also been an outlet for such work. The creation of such outlets, those committed to studying identity politics and racial and ethnic politics, have been instrumental in publishing work on women of color political elites. These newer journals joined other more established journals such as the Journal of Women, Politics, and Policy and Politics and Gender which published scholarship on women’s politics that were often intersectional in nature.","PeriodicalId":46116,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Women Politics & Policy","volume":"43 1","pages":"1 - 7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Women Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2022.2004844","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

More women of color were sworn in to the 117th U.S. Congress than ever before. For instance, Cori Bush became the first Black woman elected from the state of Missouri, accomplishing this feat by taking down William Clay, whose family served in that seat for decades. Cori Bush’s victory, along with those of other women of color, is simultaneously something to celebrate and investigate. How can it be that in 2021, women of color elected officials are still achieving firsts? How have scholars assessed, theorized, and studied these women who are novel players in American government? Political Science, as a discipline, is merely decades out from viewing women of color via a single-axis lens of either race or gender. Thusly, scholars are still grappling with how to examine women of color by their own merits. This special issue seeks to do just that. The essays in this volume are chiefly concerned with studying the multiplicity of women of color political elites as distinct actors in American democracy. As guest co-editors of two issues on the subject, we wanted to curate a set of essays from both established and burgeoning thought leaders and empiricists on the complexities of seeking elected office and governing as women of color. Political scientists have long recognized that women of color experience politics in a manner distinct from White women and men of color. Scholars such as Ange-Marie Hancock (2007) and Wendy Smooth (2006) have convincingly argued for the theoretical benefits of intersectionality research. In 2006, Smooth authored a piece in which she argued that intersectionality was “a mess worth making” and growing numbers followed suit by making a mess of traditional approaches to studying politics. For instance, Becki Scola wrote one of the first research articles with empirical data to show that the factors that account for the presence of women in state legislatures are really predictors of whether White women serve (Scola 2008). In 2014, Nadia Brown published the first book on Black women state lawmakers, and in the process introduced a novel framework, representational identity theory, for understanding these understudied actors. Just a year before, Christina Bejarano published a book arguing that Latina candidates are not doubly disadvantaged, but instead benefit from their racial and gender identities. In 2020, Reingold, Haynie, and Widner empirically demonstrated that when multiple identities are considered we learn something about politics that we otherwise would have missed. This is not an exhaustive or comprehensive list of research on the subject. We simply cite these studies as examples of a larger discourse of how scholars have begun to study women of color political elites. From an even bigger picture perspective, let’s consider the creation of new journals centered on identity. Politics, Groups, and Identities was launched in 2013, and it is an outlet that has consistently published work on women of color and intersectionality research as well. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics was launched in 2016 and has also been an outlet for such work. The creation of such outlets, those committed to studying identity politics and racial and ethnic politics, have been instrumental in publishing work on women of color political elites. These newer journals joined other more established journals such as the Journal of Women, Politics, and Policy and Politics and Gender which published scholarship on women’s politics that were often intersectional in nature.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国有色人种女性政治精英:导论、个人反思和学术参与呼吁
宣誓就职第117届美国国会的有色人种女性比以往任何时候都多。例如,科妮·布什(Cori Bush)成为密苏里州第一位当选的黑人女性,她击败了威廉·克莱(William Clay),完成了这一壮举,后者的家族在密苏里州担任了几十年的议员。科妮·布什(Cori Bush)的胜利,以及其他有色人种女性的胜利,既值得庆祝,也值得研究。为什么到了2021年,有色人种女性当选官员仍然是第一名?学者们是如何评估、理论化和研究这些在美国政府中扮演新角色的女性的?政治学作为一门学科,仅仅用种族或性别的单轴视角来看待有色人种女性才几十年。因此,学者们仍在努力研究如何根据有色人种女性自身的优点来审视她们。本期特刊试图做到这一点。本卷中的文章主要关注于研究有色人种女性政治精英作为美国民主中独特角色的多样性。作为该主题两期杂志的客座联合编辑,我们想整理一组文章,这些文章既有成熟的,也有新兴的思想领袖,也有经验主义者,他们都是关于有色人种女性竞选公职和执政的复杂性的。政治学家早就认识到,有色人种女性经历政治的方式与白人女性和有色人种男性截然不同。Ange-Marie Hancock(2007)和Wendy Smooth(2006)等学者令人信服地论证了交叉性研究在理论上的好处。2006年,Smooth写了一篇文章,她认为交叉性是“值得制造的混乱”,越来越多的人效仿,把传统的政治研究方法弄得一团糟。例如,贝基·斯科拉(Becki Scola)写了一篇最早的研究文章,用经验数据表明,导致州立法机构中女性人数增加的因素实际上是白人女性是否任职的预测因素(斯科拉2008)。2014年,纳迪亚·布朗(Nadia Brown)出版了第一本关于黑人女性州议员的书,并在此过程中引入了一个新的框架,即代表性身份理论,用于理解这些未被充分研究的演员。就在一年前,克里斯蒂娜·贝贾拉诺(Christina Bejarano)出版了一本书,认为拉丁裔候选人并非处于双重劣势,而是受益于他们的种族和性别身份。2020年,Reingold、Haynie和Widner通过经验证明,当我们考虑多重身份时,我们会学到一些我们可能会错过的政治知识。这不是关于这个主题的详尽或全面的研究清单。我们只是把这些研究作为一个更大的讨论的例子,来说明学者们是如何开始研究有色人种女性政治精英的。从更大的角度来看,让我们考虑以身份为中心的新期刊的创建。《政治、群体与身份》杂志成立于2013年,它一直在发表关于有色人种女性和交叉性研究的文章。《种族、民族与政治杂志》于2016年创刊,也是此类研究的一个渠道。这些致力于研究身份政治和种族与民族政治的媒体的创立,对出版有关有色人种女性政治精英的作品起到了重要作用。这些较新的期刊加入了其他更成熟的期刊,如《妇女、政治与政策》和《政治与性别》,这些期刊发表了关于妇女政治的学术研究,这些研究在本质上往往是交叉的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Journal of Women, Politics & Policy explores women and their roles in the political process as well as key policy issues that impact women''s lives. Articles cover a range of tops about political processes from voters to leaders in interest groups and political parties, and office holders in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government (including the increasingly relevant international bodies such as the European Union and World Trade Organization). They also examine the impact of public policies on women''s lives in areas such as tax and budget issues, poverty reduction and income security, education and employment, care giving, and health and human rights — including violence, safety, and reproductive rights — among many others. This multidisciplinary, international journal presents the work of social scientists — including political scientists, sociologists, economists, and public policy specialists — who study the world through a gendered lens and uncover how gender functions in the political and policy arenas. Throughout, the journal places a special emphasis on the intersection of gender, race/ethnicity, class, and other dimensions of women''s experiences.
期刊最新文献
Gendered Ambivalence: The Structure of Attitudes About Female Candidates Bringing the Ts and (N)Bs to the Table: Estimating Intersectional Candidate Gender Identity and Sexuality Effects on Vote Choice Who is Afraid of More Women in Politics, and Why? An Analysis of Public Opinion in 28 European Countries Feminists, Nationalist, Combatants, Activists. A Conversation with Vjosa Musliu on the Multi-Faceted Role of Women in Kosovo Invisibility or Inclusion? Ethnic Parties, Ethnic Seats, and Gender Quotas and the Representation of Minoritized Women
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1