打印

作者

Erin Tolley

来源

URBAN AFFAIRS REVIEW,Vol.59,Issue4,P.

语言

英文

关键字

作者单位

摘要

Women have ascended to a number of prominent political positions, but politics remains a predominantly male domain (Bjarnegård and Murray 2018; Inter-Parliamentary Union 2021).1 Even so, there is a perception that municipal politics will be more open to women. Women's political style is thought to be more communal and community-minded and therefore better aligned with municipal politics (Bauer 2020b; Briggs 2000), while the issues that local governments address are stereotyped as feminine (Bauer 2020c; Brown, Heighberger and Shocket 1993; Deckman 2007; Holman 2015; Schneider 2014a; but see Hajnal and Trounstine 2010). Municipal office is viewed as less prestigious and desirable (Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2015; Holman 2017); it may thus be less competitive and potentially more hospitable to women. The practice of local politics is also seen as more compatible with women's domestic responsibilities because it is characterized as more part-time, closer to home, and less demanding than politics at other levels (Darcy, Welch and Clark 1994; Thomas and Bittner 2017).Despite municipal government being viewed as more open to women, gender imbalance persists even at this level of office (Archenti and Albaine 2012; Bochel and Bochel 2008; Choi 2019; Eder, Fortin-Rittberger and Kroeber 2015; Holman 2017; Sundström and Stockemer 2015; Tolley 2011). Why the disconnect? It could be that leadership, in general, is stereotyped as masculine (Bauer 2020c; Eagly and Mladinic 1989; Koenig et al. 2011) and, while the premium on masculinity may be highest in national-level politics, all elected positions are viewed as leadership roles and, subsequently, stereotypically male trait and issue competencies are valued, irrespective of level of office (Bauer 2020c; Fowler and Lawless 2009; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a). Consequently, male politicians “are seen as better able to make decisions, work with other politicians, and provide leadership” (Brown, Heighberger and Shocket 1993, 11–12). Meanwhile, women are stereotyped as better suited for council office and constituency service than for more powerful positions (Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2015). These within-level variations suggest that stereotypes are not just dependent on the level of government, but also the type of elected office. Whereas voters might view women candidates and municipal office as congruent, women candidates and the mayor's office are seen as less congruent.Unsurprisingly, more men are mayors than women, and this gender gap in officeholding has persisted over time and across different contexts (Bochel and Bochel 2008; City Mayors 2017; Darcy, Welch and Clark 1994; Federation of Canadian Municipalities 2015; Smith, Reingold and Owens 2012). Thus, while women may be considered well-suited to local office, they are simultaneously seen as less compatible with positions that have the most prominence, power, and prestige. Voters may thus hold conflicting gender stereotypes about the level of government and type of office. Although some municipally-focused studies have looked at stereotypes in mayoral elections (Bird et al. 2016; Cargile and Pringle 2020), most look at council races (Bauer 2020c; Brown, Heighberger and Shocket 1993; Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2020; Higgle et al. 1997; Oliver and Conroy 2018). Our focus on mayoral office-seeking is therefore significant.Specifically, we ask: how do voters assess mayoral candidates in a context of competing stereotypes where the level of office – municipal government – is associated with femininity, but the specific position – the mayoralty – is associated with masculinity? How do voters assess candidates’ suitability for office and issue competence in this context? Do women who seek the mayor's office benefit from a boost because of their perceived suitability for local office, or do they suffer from a backlash because of their perceived lack of leadership competence?Drawing on what is, to our knowledge, the largest ever academic survey of municipal electors, we assess how more than 14,000 respondents across eight large Canadian cities evaluate 32 mayoral candidates. We take advantage of two qualitative questions that ask respondents what they like and dislike about each mayoral candidate. We assess these comments using a gendered lens. By examining assessments of candidates’ traits and issue orientations separately, we demonstrate how voters respond to different dimensions of gendered stereotypes. We find trait and issue stereotypes embedded in voters’ assessments of mayoral candidates in ways that disadvantage women. There is no evidence female candidates benefit from their perceived competence in feminine policy areas and, more worryingly, voters are significantly more likely to dislike female candidates’ traits and issues when compared to those of male candidates. When female candidates attempt to highlight the masculine traits that voters associate with leaders, voters punish them with negative evaluations. In other words, female candidates experience no boost from their presumed issue strength and face backlash when they attempt to conform to masculinized trait stereotypes. Although it is logical to assume political penalties will be lower for women in local politics, politics remains a masculinized space even at the level of government that is perceived as most woman-friendly. As a result, women candidates hoping to enter the political pipeline through the mayor's office must counter precisely the same gendered trait and issue stereotypes that they do at other levels.Gendered Stereotypes as an Explanation for Women's Political Under-RepresentationThere is ample evidence that voters draw on a variety of heuristics, including gender, to simplify vote choice (Cutler 2002; Ditonto 2017; Fiske and Taylor 2013; McDermott 2005, 2009). The literature shows a clear association between power and masculinity, with men stereotyped as the most capable, competent, qualified, and likeable political candidates (Allen and Cutts 2018; Bauer 2020b; Butler and Preece 2016; Conroy 2015; Crowder-Meyer 2013; Ditonto 2017; Goodyear-Grant 2013; Holman and Schneider 2018; Pruysers and Blais 2018; Sanbonmatsu 2002). Nonetheless, much of the research on stereotypes focuses on the national and state levels (Alexander and Andersen 1993; Bauer 2020a; Bauer and Santia 2021; Conroy 2015; Dunaway et al. 2013; Fowler and Lawless 2009; Jamieson 1995; Windett 2014). Studies at the local level are mostly experimental (Bauer 2020c; Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2020; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a) or of a single city (Cargile and Pringle 2020), in part because large-n observational surveys of municipal voters are rare. We therefore know comparatively little about municipal voter attitudes during actual campaigns, much less those about gender. As a result, theoretical insights derived from studies of national politics are frequently imported to local politics, even though the institutional context differs, and the factors affecting women's participation may vary between national and local levels.Gender role theory posits there are socially ingrained and historically rooted views about gender-appropriate roles and behaviour. Expected gender norms affect voters’ assessments of candidates for elected office (Eagly and Karau 2002; Eagly and Mladinic 1989; Koenig et al. 2011). Gender cues may be used to infer candidate quality, issue priorities, or ideological commitments (Bauer 2020c; Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2015; Ditonto 2017; Ditonto, Hamilton and Redlawsk 2014; Holman, Merolla and Zechmeister 2011; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a, 1993b). Whether gender stereotypes affect vote choice is more of an open question, and the answer is dependent on the electoral context and information environment. Gender cues are thought to be particularly important in non-partisan contexts and those where voters have less information overall (Crowder-Meyer, Gadarian and Trounstine 2015, 2020).Research on gender-office congruency suggests women will be disadvantaged by stereotypes that associate masculinity with positions of political leadership (Conroy 2015; Dunaway et al. 2013; Fowler and Lawless 2009; Lawrence and Rose 2009). Most of this research looks at national and state-level contests. In mayoral contests, while there may be congruence between women candidates and the perceived femininity of local politics, there is likely to be incongruence between the mayoralty and women candidates. Although some evidence from local elections in Canada and Denmark suggests voters prefer female candidates over male candidates, the effect appears stronger for council positions than those for mayor (Kjaer and Krook 2019; Lucas et al. 2021), suggesting voters’ attitudes are conditioned by the type of office. We expect voters’ associations between politics, leadership, and masculinity to influence how they assess women candidates for mayor and that this will override any boost women might receive from their association with stereotypic women's issues, communal political styles, and perceived compatibility with local politics.One theoretical contribution this study makes is to clarify how gender cues influence candidate evaluations when voters' gendered stereotypes about level and type of office are in conflict. There is a need to consider gendered stereotypes outside of national politics not just because gender might be more salient in local politics, but also because the decision-making environments differ. Local elections are a low-information context in which there is less media coverage, fewer partisan cues, and less intensive campaigning than in national campaigns (Breux, Couture and Koop 2018; Holman and Lay 2021; McGregor et al. 2017; Tolley and Paquet 2021). As a result, voters have less information about candidates, and stereotypes may exert a stronger influence on vote choice (Higgle et al. 1997; McDermott 1997, 1998).Research on gender stereotypes in politics typically distinguishes between those based on traits and those based on issues (Alexander and Andersen 1993; Bauer 2020a; Bauer and Santia 2021; Brown, Heighberger and Shocket 1993; Dolan 2010; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a, 1993b; Kahn 1996; Sanbonmatsu 2002; Schneider and Bos 2014). Trait stereotypes capture candidates’ perceived qualities, including their leadership abilities, competence, and integrity, while issue stereotypes relate to candidates’ perceived prioritization of certain beliefs or policy areas. Gendered assumptions influence the activation and content of both types of stereotypes, although some recent experimental evidence suggests that voters respond differently (and more negatively) to appeals that emphasize feminine traits than to those that emphasize feminine issues (Bauer 2020a; Cassese and Holman 2018).In the first place, we expect female mayoral candidates to be associated more with traits than with issues. This is in part because media coverage reinforces this distinction, focusing more on who women candidates are and less on what they will do. Dunaway et al. (2013) find women candidates receive more trait coverage than issue coverage, overall, and there is more trait coverage in electoral races with women candidates than those that feature only men. There is also more trait coverage when women seek executive rather than legislative office (Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a). Other research finds that the media's coverage of women politicians is more personalized, including mentions of their physical appearance and other personal attributes (Goodyear-Grant 2013; Trimble et al. 2013). Voters also have fewer concrete views about the characteristics of women politicians than of men in politics (Schneider and Bos 2014), and uncertainty about women politicians’ attributes might be especially significant in a low-information context. Absent other substantive cues, voters might resort to more personalized or surface-level stereotyping about women's appearance, personalities, or seriousness, which is more readily accessible than information about their issue positions (Alexander and Andersen 1993).A second question is whether women candidates will be associated more readily with masculine or feminine traits. Here, the literature is inconsistent. Some analyses of candidate messages and campaign materials find women candidates rely on feminine stereotypes more than masculine ones (Herrnson, Lay and Stokes 2003a; Panagopolous 2004; Schneider 2014b). Other evidence suggests women candidates engage in a “trait-balancing” strategy that highlights both their masculinity and femininity, but partisanship, incumbency, and electoral context condition this approach (Bauer and Santia 2021). Another study of municipal councillors found recruiters prefer masculine candidates to feminine ones, although it is not clear if this preference applies to voters as well (Oliver and Conroy 2018). One reason for the lack of clarity is that “voters hold more complex stereotypic impressions” of female candidates than of male candidates (Bauer and Santia 2021, 3), and whether gender stereotypes affect voters’ assessments of candidates depends on campaign messaging and other factors. However, even if masculinity is preferred, gender role theory suggests women will be associated with feminine attributes more so than men. Therefore, we expect voters’ comments about female candidates to emphasize traits and for these comments to highlight feminine dimensions more than trait comments about male candidates.H1a: Female candidates are more likely to be associated with traits than male candidates.H1b: Comments about female candidates are more likely to contain words and phrases associated with feminine traits than comments about male candidates.We also expect the direction of respondents’ evaluations of mayoral candidates to be gendered. Not only is politics viewed as a male domain, but agentic traits like leadership are intertwined with perceptions of masculinity (Conroy and Green 2020). Voters associate men with assertiveness, strength, and confidence and view them as more qualified, capable, and emotionally suited for politics (Bauer 2020b; Brown, Heighberger and Shocket 1993; Ditonto 2017; Schneider and Bos 2014). Women are thought of in terms of what they lack, including deficiencies in leadership and competence (Schneider and Bos 2014, 261). That is, it is not simply that men are preferred in politics, but rather that the attributes voters associate with men are the same as the attributes they associate with political competency and success (Bauer 2020c). Given the bias toward masculine traits in leadership positions and the association between these and male candidates, we expect voters to react more negatively to female candidates’ traits, in general.H1c: Female candidates are less likely than male candidates to be associated with comments reporting liked traits.Research further suggests that women seeking positions of power violate gender-role expectations and consequently can face a backlash from voters (Eagly and Karau 2002; Koenig et al. 2011; Puwar 2004; Rudman and Glick 2001). For this reason, even in local elections, voters express a preference for female candidates with masculine traits over female candidates with feminine traits, but whether male candidates emphasize masculine versus feminine traits has no effect on voters’ evaluations (Bauer 2020c). Knowing this, women candidates sometimes opt for a campaign strategy that highlights their masculine qualities (Sapiro et al. 2011) because while male candidates are simply assumed to possess the (masculine) qualities necessary to lead, female candidates must prove it (Holman, Merolla and Zechmeister 2016). Indeed, this uncertainty about whether women are fit to lead is one reason voters seek out more information about female candidates’ experience and competence than is the case for male candidates (Ditonto, Hamilton and Redlawsk 2014). The catch, however, is that when women do behave in masculine ways, they face what Bauer and Santia (2021) call a “likability backlash.” That is, women candidates are disciplined for appearing too aggressive, too manly, and not likable enough (Gidengil and Everitt 1999; Jamieson 1995) even if voters demonstrate a preference for stereotypic masculine qualities. These findings complicate our expectations. Although voters generally prefer masculinity in candidates, if they are evaluating feminine traits, they are more likely to be positively disposed to female candidates who demonstrate these.H1d: Female candidates are more likely than male candidates to be associated with comments reporting liked feminine traits.Given research on the connection between women and trait stereotypes outlined above, we expect the opposite for issues, with female candidates associated less often with issues than their male counterparts.H2a: Female candidates are less likely to be associated with issues than male candidates.Just as traits are gendered, so too are issues, and these stereotypes prompt voters to associate female candidates with policy domains that are perceived as feminine, such as healthcare or education, while their male counterparts are linked to masculine areas, including the economy, military, foreign policy, and security (Holman, Merolla and Zechmeister 2011; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993a; Lawless 2004). Much of the literature on gendered issue stereotypes looks at national-level politics. Some caution against the view of local governments as more feminine, since they deal with infrastructure and economic development which voters may perceive as more masculine (Andrew 1991). Despite this, the municipal level is generally conceived of as more consistent with women's policy preferences, since it is viewed as more communal and deals with issues related to parks, public health, and community programming (Gidengil and Vengroff 1997). Therefore, when voters do connect female candidates to issues, we expect this to be gendered and to include a stronger emphasis on feminine issues.H2b: Comments about female candidates are more likely to contain words and phrases associated with feminine issues than comments about male candidates.The literature provides us with even less direction on how voters evaluate female candidates’ issue positions. The stereotype literature tends to focus on traits, and when issue stereotypes are incorporated, it is generally with policies that are under the jurisdiction of national governments. There is some evidence that feminine trait-based stereotypes may be more damaging to women candidates than feminine issue-based stereotypes (Bauer 2020a; Cassese and Holman 2018). However, this research deals with campaign messages and appeals rather than voter assessments. It also assumes a partisan political space where the connection between candidates and issues may be ideological as well as gendered. We therefore draw insights from the literature on traits, reviewed above, and expect that when voters connect female candidates to policy issues, the association will remain negative. Even without clear direction from the literature, we can reasonably posit that voters’ negative stereotypes about female candidates’ competence will affect their assessment of their policy priorities.H2c: Female candidates are less likely than male candidates to be associated with comments reporting liked issue orientations.Finally, to formulate hypotheses about voters’ assessments of candidates’ policy strengths, we extend findings from the issue ownership literature. Research on issue ownership finds voters associate political parties with specific policy areas and consider them most able to address these issues (Tresch, Lefevere and Walgrave 2015; Walgrave, Lefevere and Tresch 2012). Although this literature mostly focuses on parties, some have applied it to women, arguing that voters associate female candidates with stereotypically feminine policy areas, and this association is positive (Herrnson, Lay and Stokes 2003b). Women candidates are viewed not just as caring about feminine policy issues, but also as most capable of dealing with them.H2d: Female candidates are more likely than male candidates to be associated with comments reporting liked feminine issues.