Back to WS 100 Page
From: SDR@truman.edu, Steven Reschly
Suggestion for a discussion starter:
One of the most significant factors in the 1996 U.S. General Election was
the so-called "Gender Gap." The final gap, in figures I have seen, was 16
points--54% of female voters voted for Clinton and 38% for Dole. The male
vote was about equally divided. It seems this difference, which could be
credited with deciding the election, has not been discussed sufficiently in
the post-election analysis/spin/punditry. Given the extraordinary talent
among subscribers to H-Women, I would like to see further discussion of the
Gender Gap--historically, theoretically, sociologically, and so forth.
And I'll volunteer to throw out some Ceremonial First Questions:
First, some pre-election polls showed a gender gap much larger than 16
points, up to 30 points and beyond. Did the gap close just before the
election, just as Clinton's overall margin saw some shrinkage as well? What
accounts for the size of the gap, whether you view it as larger or smaller
than it might have been?
Second, where are we at in the historical development of gender gap voting
patterns? The first mention of a gap, as I recall, was the 1984
presidential election, Reagan-Bush versus Mondale-Ferraro. Have the origin
and nature of gender differences in voting changed over time? According to
_The Republican War Against Women_ by Tanya Melich, the gender gap dates at
least to Nixon's Southern Strategy in 1968. And, of course, differences in
voting was a main expectation of the woman suffrage movements of the 19th
and 20th centuries.
Third, what happened in congressional and statehouse races? The overall
gender gap of 16 points must not have held up in Congress, given continued
Republican control of the House and Senate. Allowing for regional and local
variation, why did the gender gap not affect Congress as much?
Fourth, what about other nations? Is there a similar gender gap developing?
An Israeli friend told me that a gender gap appeared for the first time in
their recent election of Netanyahu as Prime Minister. Is there a
multinational pattern beginning to appear?
Fifth, what will happen with Republican efforts to close the gender gap in
future elections? I saw an interview with Haley Barbour, Republican
National Committee Chairperson, in which he was asked how the Republican
Party can win women back. His answer was to emphasize the economy (cut
taxes and regulation for women running businesses), crime, and drugs--issues
he said would be of interest to women. Will these approaches work?
Sixth, what does all this have to do with Hillary Clinton, as a lightning
rod for gender anxieties in American culture (phrase used in an American
Studies session last weekend in Kansas City)? How much of the gender gap,
if any, stems from hostility toward her and support for her, as opposed to
arising from issues like abortion, affirmative action, sexual harrassment
and violence, military spending, and so forth?
I would really prefer talking this out over coffee, but perhaps we can
imagine H-Women as a very large coffeehouse for a few moments in order to
conduct some good conversation about The Election. Thanks for kibbitzing,
and enjoy your cappucino.
Steven Reschly
H-Women Editor
Truman State University
November 13, 6 responses
[1]
From: IN%"drturner@mindspring.com" "William B. Turner" 11-NOV-1996 14:51:23.37
It seems to me that another factor to take into account for this question
is, how reliable are the polls? Are those women who contributed to the
larger gap in the polls the ones who, between getting the kids to school,
going to work, picking the kids up, and preparing dinner (the "second
shift") never had time to vote?
William B. Turner
Assistant Professor of History
Middle Tennessee State University
wturner@frank.mtsu.edu
**************************************************************************
[2]
From: IN%"cohen@vassar.edu" 11-NOV-1996 14:56:51.92
One of the first discussions of the importance of the gender gap can be
found in Ethel Klein's, GENDER POLITICS: FROM CONSCIOUSNESS TO MASS
POLITICS Harvard, 1984. Miriam Cohen cohen@vassar.edu
******************************************************************************
[3]
From: IN%"e-pleck@uiuc.edu" "Elizabeth Pleck" 12-NOV-1996 06:33:42.79
Sunday NY Times contains gap figures from l972 to present for national
elections. The common definition of gap is not how men and women vote but
percentage difference between females and males voting Democratic. Thus,
most polls show the gap in the 96 presidential election as 11 points, but
some at l0 points. The Times (and other data) show that the second largest
gap was Reagan in l980.
Actually, Gallup poll data shows that the largest recorded gap in
history was in the l936 election because men were so much more likely to
vote Democratic than women. That gap was not much noticed at the time--not
at all noticed by historians--and occurred at a time when women's voter
registration and turnout was lower.
As Nancy Cott points out, the suffrage movement did not intend or
anticipate a female voting bloc. However, many politicians did anticipate
one, and act on the basis of the assumption that one would develop.
The gap was first noticed by Reagan pollster Richard Wirthlin in l979,
picked up by Abzug after the l980 election, and then "named" by a Washington
Post reporter in l982.
Polling gaps are always wider before an election than at the polls.
******************************************************************************
[4]
From: IN%"keith@planetx.bloomu.edu" "Jeanette Keith" 12-NOV-1996 07:50:21.09
Re: the Gender gap coffee shop. I'll have a latte, no sugar. This
question is fascinating to me. I have no expertise in this area, but
wanted to throw in my two cents. I think part of the problem the GOP has
is that they seem to project an aura of not liking women. Here in our
little town in PA, the Democratic HQ is run by a woman who used to be a
staffer in a battered women's shelter. On election night the storefront
was plastered with GOP stickers and the phone lines were cut. Now, I'm
not saying that the GOP country-club ladies didn't sneak down to do that,
but the whole stunt just seems so frat-boy. Our local conservatives hate
Hillary, and write letters to the paper demanding that she be put back
into the kitchen and under the stove. (No, I am not making this up.)
Remembering that all politics is local, I wonder if similar interactions
may have as much to do with the gender gap as national issues.
Jeanette Keith
Bloomsburg U., PA
***********************************************************************
[5]
From: IN%"laurenil@napanet.net" 12-NOV-1996 14:57:58.49
Reporter Ellen Goodman has some cogent comments on this question in today's
SF Chronicle. She points out that this is the lst time in AMerican history
that men alone would have elected a different candidate (they chose Dole 44
to 43%)
She adds, "just for the record, let me say that women, like men, are
anxious--about the future, the kids, the uncertainties of a changing time."
The reason we haven't seen more discussion in the media, I think, is that
younger women reporters are generally anxious to avoid "womens issues",
just like pre-Second Wave women in the professions, and older women have
been edged out of the media on all levels. Esp. this is evident in the lack
of feminist analysis of the treatment of Hillary Clinton.
Lauren H. Coodley
*****************************************************************
[6]
From: IN%"DERITTERJ1@TIGER.UOFS.EDU" 13-NOV-1996 08:48:03.59
I'm no expert on political behavior (I'm an English professor), but I
suspect that we haven't heard much about the gender gap in the election
post-mortems because the data seem very muddled at this point. Women
voters obviously elected Clinton-Gore both times, and if I were on the
governing board of NARAL or NOW-PAC, I'd start asking for the same White
House access that's granted to UAW and NAACP bigwigs. But beyond that, it's
pretty hard to make any sense of the election in gender terms. Here in
Pennsylvania, Clinton won handily, but the Republicans won three of four
statewide races. Pennsylvania-NOW saw one of its endorsed candidates elected
as state Treasurer, while another was defeated for Attorney General. Just
to complicate things a bit, you should know that the Treasurer-elect (Barbara
Hafer) is a Republican, while the unsuccessful A-G candidate (Joe Kohn) is
a Democrat. Did Hafer win because she had the support of women, or because
she's a Republican? Who knows?
By the way, I think it's a real mistake to assume either a) that the women's
vote can or should always go to Democratic candidates, or even b) that there
is always a candidate available for women to vote for. The Democratic party
in Northeastern Pa. is controlled by Robert Casey, the antiabortion former
gov. who's tried unsuccessfully to speak at the last two Dem. conventions.
His son Bob Jr. was the only Dem. statewide winner this year. A friend of
mine in the legal community here was invited to a local Dem. fundraiser
three or four years ago was told that, although he was invited, his wife was
not, and he described the experience as like stepping into a time machine--
an all-male gathering with lots of cigars, raunchy jokes, and drinking to
excess. This may be one reason why, in our Congressional race this year,
there was no candidate who connected to women voters. Both the Democrat and
the Republican were antichoice, antiwelfare, anti-childcare, and so forth.
Jody DeRitter
University of Scranton
November 13, 2 more
Editor's note:
We have some wonderful responses, such as the following, from U.S. scholars on
this topic. What do those of you outside the United States have to say about a
gender gap in politics? Is the same true in other countries?
KL
**************************************************************************
From: IN%"ecb4d@faraday.clas.virginia.edu" "Eileen Boris" 13-NOV-1996 10:52:04.24
As I'm sipping my tea: I just saw a forum sponsored by Emily's
List on Cspan as I was running my treadmill this morning.
According to Stan Greenberg 2 major factors accounted for the
gap between the gap for Clinton and Republican retention of
Congress. First, the trianglization theory of Morris and
Clinton worked to rehabilitate the Republican Congress so more
traditionally Republican women (married housewives, suburban)
thought Congress accomplished something (welfare 'reform',
health insurance) and swung back to them; the campaign finance
foreign money of the Democrats hurt them and even Dole's late
attacks on Clinton's character, but more the campaign funds.
Also this was an election of continuity rather than change.
Greenberg's group polled in mid October and then repolled right
before the election. Also the non-college educated wage
earning moms some of them went to Republican Congress. They
were late deciders, though overwhelming for Clinton.
I'm sure this will be rebroadcasted--it was live this am from
D.C. So check your Cspan.
Eileen Boris
History, Howard
ecb4d@faraday.clas.virginia.edu
***************************************************************
November 14, 3 responses
[1]
From: IN%"msthomps@juno.com" 13-NOV-1996 22:50:09.73
At least some of the commentary (mostly mass-media) that I've seen on the
gender gap suggests that the real "movement" here is by *men* moving out
of the Democratic Party, rather than women moving toward it..... In any
event, I think it's important to realize that the movement is, to some
extent, in *both* directions. Any scholarly research in this direction?
I'd welcome citations! Best, Peggy
Margaret Susan Thompson
main/preferred e-mail address: msthomps@juno.com
[alternate e-mail address: msthomps@maxwell.syr.edu]
History Dept., 145 Eggers Hall, Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY 13244-1090
(315) 443-2210 (wk-voice), 443-9082 (wk-fax), 445-0637 (home-voice/fax)
************************************************************************
[2]
From: IN%"mneudel@acfsysv.roosevelt.edu" "Marian Neudel" 14-NOV-1996 10:10:41.88
re: gender gap--I suspect strongly that it can be explained almost
entirely in economic terms. That is, it's only paradoxical if we start
off assuming that women should vote consistently with their *family*
income. In fact, they are almost certainly voting consistently with their
*individual* incomes. Typically, the less money *anyone* makes, the more
likely he or she is to vote Democratic. Close the income and the gender
gap will close too. (Republicans, are you listening?)
Re: international manifestations of gender gap--in the '80s, the
international Zionist Congress had a crucial vote on Israeli prime
minister Begin's plans to build settlements on the occupied territories.
The major Zionist organization opposing that policy, which led a very
vocal campaign and forced a very close vote, was Hadassah, the major
Zionist women's organization. A couple of other women's organizations
were also involved.
Marian Neudel
***************************************************************************
[3]
From: IN%"reedwards@vassar.edu" 14-NOV-1996 11:58:52.91
Another two-cents on the election, from someone who studies women and party
politics in the late nineteenth century:
Journalists are clearly struggling to come to terms with women as a voting
bloc. They recognize that women have loyalties of religion, race, economic
interest, family, region, and ideology that intertwine with their gender
identities in complicated ways. For example, some women connect their
pro-life position to their special roles as mothers; others do not. Some
women say they are environmentalists because they are women; others say
gender has nothing to do with it.
What are commentators to make of the interesting fact that 2/3 of
vegetarians in the U.S. today are women? That 89 percent of black women
voted for Clinton, and the gender gap among black voters was much smaller
than among whites? Gender is an indirect influence on many other
concerns, and vice versa. Which raises the question, what exactly are
"women's issues," anyway? To my mind, the availabilty of abortion is a
men's issue, and I know men who vote pro-choice as a matter of self
interest as well as feminist principle.
On another note, I've been angered by the total absence of analysis on the
Green vote. Nader ran ahead of Perot in Manhattan; here in Dutchess Co. NY
he got 3,000 votes. I'm interested to see where this goes in the future,
if anywhere. Parties that fall below a certain threshhold get entirely
ignored, even in many statistical reports on the returns.
Rebecca Edwards
Vassar College
*************
Never has there been a cause so bad that it has not been defended by good
men for good reasons.
--W B Yeats
November 15th, 2 responses
[1]
From: IN%"e-pleck@uiuc.edu" "Elizabeth Pleck" 14-NOV-1996 15:46:36.87
The gender gap in the l996 presidential election appeared in all age
groups (even those over 60), in all education groups, within blacks,
within married couples, within singles.
Edwards asks where are the commentators to note that the gender gap
among black voters was much smaller among whites? The data in the NY Times
shows that 89% of black women voters voted for Clinton. The data in the Times
shows that 78% of black men voters voted for Clinton. That is a gap of 11
points. The gap between white men and white women was 10 points. I agree
that women have loyalties other than gender. However, it is time for
historians to recognize that in this election, the data show a gap between
male and female voting WITHIN every major social variable.
Elizabeth Pleck
*************************************************************************
[2]
From: IN%"cleary@omnifest.uwm.edu" "Catherine B. Cleary" 15-NOV-1996 11:12:19.13
Years ago a friend sent me a quote from Gloria Steinem to the effect that as
men age, they get more conservative; as women age they get more radical. As I
approach 80, I know this is true for me. Does age have anything to do with
the gender gap? Catherine Cleary
From Nov. 18 2 responses
[1]
Just an aside on this discussion. I was really amused to see a New York Times
article in which a NYU woman economics professor was quoted as saying the
gender gap had nothing to do with gender but could be explained as economics -
because women as caretakers of parents understood the threat of changes to
medicare and as mothers feared threats to education. Kind of funny.
Because men have elderly parents and children too - and if the women are
especially sensitive to these issues it would seem to me to be the consequence
of different roles and expectations - and of course that is gender.
Joan Iversen
RD 1, Box 1329
Maryland, NY 12116
Email iversejn@oneonta.edu
[2]
From: "Heather Munro Prescott, Department of History"
In light of the recent discussion on this list of the American gender gap,
here is the take of Clare Short, beleaguered member of the British Labour
Party's Shadow Cabinet, from the November 16 London Times, edited:
American women did not vote for Clinton's looks, but for his
progressive policies, says Clare Short
Women want Blair, but not for his hair
Last Sunday I was quoted as saying that women's historical tendency to
vote more conservatively than men represents a deep political failure
for Labour. This is perfectly true. If women had voted Labour in the
same proportions as men, we would have seen continuous Labour
governments from 1945 to 1979 and Labour would have won in 1992. The
Tories' success with women voters explains their domination of
political power in the postwar period.
It is nonsense to present these results as a bombshell for Labour.
While women's votes have been our historical failure, the polls show a
gradual closing of the gap between men's and women's voting behaviour.
In 1951, 54 per cent of women voted Conservative, compared with 46 per
cent of men. This represented a "gender gap" between men's and women's
voting behaviour of 17 percentage points. By 1992, the gap was six
points. Recent polls suggest that is has narrowed still further.
The recent hysteria in the press over women's voting intent was
initially sparked off by a report from the Fawcett Society which
simply highlighted the historic trends. The report pointed out that
women's votes would be crucial in determining the outcome of the
election.
This shift in voting patterns is of great concern to the
Conservatives. It is women who have kept them in power. As women's
votes shift to Labour, their power base slips away. What is at stake
is an historic shift in voting behaviour that will not just influence
the next election, but the balance of power over the next 50 years.
And international experience suggests that women's votes will shift.
The pattern in other countries is that women's greater involvement in
the labour market is followed, after a lag, by a shift in their votes
to the more progressive parties. This has perhaps been most
graphically illustrated in the United States. In the late 1970s,
America had a gender gap, like that in the UK, which favoured the
Republicans. But gradually, women's votes have shifted to the
Democrats. Last week we saw Bill Clinton elected on women's votes.
This is not because women find Clinton attractive --far from it. It is
because the values of the Democrats are closer to their own.
This is the challenge which faces the Labour Party. If we could
achieve this kind of historic shift in Britain, we might never see
another Conservative government. The polls show that women share our
values on the need for fairness and equality of opportunity, for
strong and safe communities and for financial and personal security.
If their votes would follow, the face of British politics would be
transformed. Current polling suggests that this may be about to
happen. With only months to go until the election, Labour is much more
popular among women than are the Conservatives, and Tony Blair remains
far more popular than John Major with both sexes and all age groups.
Labour is more determined than ever to communicate our message to
women and to demonstrate how a Labour government will improve the
quality of life to build a better future. It is right to emphasise
that women's votes will be a battleground in the campaign. However,
we, unlike the press, recognise that women are serious political
players. Winning their support will be about offering them the vision
and the policies they want, not a fictitious change in hairstyle.
The author is Shadow Minister for Overseas Development.
Back to Women and the Election Page