立法行政关系中的危机与性别

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics & Gender Pub Date : 2023-01-12 DOI:10.1017/S1743923X2200040X
C. Kroeber, S. Dingler
{"title":"立法行政关系中的危机与性别","authors":"C. Kroeber, S. Dingler","doi":"10.1017/S1743923X2200040X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The interaction of the legislative and executive is gendered in nature. Gender shapes what actors in these two institutions demand from each other. This pattern is visible, for instance, in the distinct policy priorities of women and men in parliament (e.g., Allen and Childs 2019; Bäck and Debus 2019; Lowande, Ritchie, and Lauterbach 2019) and in the ways that women engage and oversee related government initiatives. At the same time, gender influences the strengths and weaknesses that actors in the legislature and executive ascribe to each other and, hence, their mutual assessment. Members of parliament (MPs) and party gatekeepers, for instance, tend to favor men for the most influential and well-resourced portfolios, since they believe that masculine traits are necessary or suitable to succeed in governmental positions, and membership in men-dominated political networks remains an important route to qualify for ministerial office (see, e.g., Annesley, Beckwith, and Franceschet 2019; Krook and O’Brien 2012). Change in these dynamics is scarce or occurs only gradually, meaning that the ways in which executive-legislative interactions are gendered are usually stable.","PeriodicalId":47464,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Gender","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Crisis and Gender in Legislative-Executive Relations\",\"authors\":\"C. Kroeber, S. Dingler\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1743923X2200040X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The interaction of the legislative and executive is gendered in nature. Gender shapes what actors in these two institutions demand from each other. This pattern is visible, for instance, in the distinct policy priorities of women and men in parliament (e.g., Allen and Childs 2019; Bäck and Debus 2019; Lowande, Ritchie, and Lauterbach 2019) and in the ways that women engage and oversee related government initiatives. At the same time, gender influences the strengths and weaknesses that actors in the legislature and executive ascribe to each other and, hence, their mutual assessment. Members of parliament (MPs) and party gatekeepers, for instance, tend to favor men for the most influential and well-resourced portfolios, since they believe that masculine traits are necessary or suitable to succeed in governmental positions, and membership in men-dominated political networks remains an important route to qualify for ministerial office (see, e.g., Annesley, Beckwith, and Franceschet 2019; Krook and O’Brien 2012). Change in these dynamics is scarce or occurs only gradually, meaning that the ways in which executive-legislative interactions are gendered are usually stable.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics & Gender\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics & Gender\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X2200040X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Gender","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X2200040X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

立法和行政的互动本质上是性别化的。性别决定了这两个机构中的行动者对彼此的要求。例如,这种模式在议会中女性和男性的不同政策优先事项中显而易见(例如,Allen和Childs 2019;Bäck和Debus 2019;Lowande、Ritchie和Lauterbach 2019),以及女性参与和监督相关政府举措的方式。与此同时,性别影响着立法机构和行政机构行为者相互赋予的优势和劣势,从而影响着他们的相互评估。例如,国会议员和政党看门人倾向于青睐男性担任最有影响力和资源最充足的职位,因为他们认为男性特质是成功担任政府职位所必需或合适的,加入男性主导的政治网络仍然是获得部长职位资格的重要途径(例如,见Annesley、Beckwith和Franceschet 2019;Krook和O'Brien,2012年)。这些动态的变化很少或只是逐渐发生,这意味着行政立法互动的性别化方式通常是稳定的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Crisis and Gender in Legislative-Executive Relations
The interaction of the legislative and executive is gendered in nature. Gender shapes what actors in these two institutions demand from each other. This pattern is visible, for instance, in the distinct policy priorities of women and men in parliament (e.g., Allen and Childs 2019; Bäck and Debus 2019; Lowande, Ritchie, and Lauterbach 2019) and in the ways that women engage and oversee related government initiatives. At the same time, gender influences the strengths and weaknesses that actors in the legislature and executive ascribe to each other and, hence, their mutual assessment. Members of parliament (MPs) and party gatekeepers, for instance, tend to favor men for the most influential and well-resourced portfolios, since they believe that masculine traits are necessary or suitable to succeed in governmental positions, and membership in men-dominated political networks remains an important route to qualify for ministerial office (see, e.g., Annesley, Beckwith, and Franceschet 2019; Krook and O’Brien 2012). Change in these dynamics is scarce or occurs only gradually, meaning that the ways in which executive-legislative interactions are gendered are usually stable.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Politics & Gender
Politics & Gender Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: Politics & Gender is an agenda-setting journal that publishes the highest quality scholarship on gender and politics and on women and politics. It aims to represent the full range of questions, issues, and approaches on gender and women across the major subfields of political science, including comparative politics, international relations, political theory, and U.S. politics. The Editor welcomes studies that address fundamental questions in politics and political science from the perspective of gender difference, as well as those that interrogate and challenge standard analytical categories and conventional methodologies.Members of the Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association receive the journal as a benefit of membership.
期刊最新文献
All the President’s Women? Female Leaders, Family Ties, and Gendered Cabinet Appointments Worldwide Intensifying Gender Inequality: Why Belgian Female Students (Sometimes) Gain Less Internal Political Efficacy from Citizenship Education Than Male Students Ticking Two Boxes, Fighting Two Battles: Intersectional Experiences of Ethnic Minority Women Councillors in UK Local Government Do Women Politicians Know More about Women’s Policy Preferences? Evidence from Canada Backlash after Quotas: Moral Panic as a Soft Repression Tactic against Women Politicians
×
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