N07 - Gender and Political Leadership
Date: Jun 2 | Time: 03:15pm to 04:45pm | Location:
Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant (Queen's University)
Theresa May and Nancy Pelosi as Legislative Leaders Fulfilling Stark's Criteria: Why the Party Challenges?: Melissa Haussman (Carleton University), Karen Kedrowski (Iowa State University)
Abstract: In December 2018, British Prime Minister Theresa May and US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi faced high-profile leadership challenges from their party caucuses. These challenges came after both leaders successfully completed difficult tasks their parties had set. Pelosi led the Democrats to their largest House seat share since 1974 in November 2018, regaining majority status. In 2017, Theresa May led the governing Conservatives to their highest vote share since 1992, and then worked to fulfill the terms of the 2016 Brexit vote. After the challenges, May and Pelosi had to agree to limit their own terms as leaders until 2022. In March 2019, May offered her immediate resignation if Parliament would approve the third Brexit vote. After that vote failed, she announced on May 24 that she would step down on June 7.
Quinn (2019) cites Stark’s 1996 criteria of “acceptability” (party unification), “electability” and “governing competence” as reasons for choosing party leaders. Quinn finds the combination different for parties in and out of government. Feminist political scientists O’Brien and Beckwith posit that opposition parties choose female leaders as “fresh faces.” Pelosi and May were first elected to opposition parties as members and Pelosi also as a leader.
May and Pelosi scored highly on Stark’s criteria, but had their leadership questioned by their party caucuses. Pelosi’s opposition came from the “Problem Solvers’ Caucus’” and some newly-elected Democrats. May’s downfall came from the “European Research Group” in the
Perceptions of Political Leadership in Canadian Political Parties: Brenda O'Neill (University of Calgary)
Abstract: The paper focusses on the gendered nature of perceptions of leadership among party selectorates in Canada. Research in social psychology suggests that women’s decreased ability to access positions of power is due to a lack of fit between beliefs regarding the skills and qualities required for leadership and stereotypes related to women’s possession of those skills and qualities (Eagly and Karau 2002). The role of leader is perceived to largely require the skills and qualities traditionally ascribed to men, or as has been described, “think leader, think male” (Keonig et al. 2011). The role congruity theory of prejudice suggests that because of the perceived lack of fit, women will be subjected to subtle prejudice and discrimination (Eagly and Karau, 2002). The proposed paper outlines the first findings of a new research project designed to capture existing perceptions of political leadership – and to identify the degree of gender stereotyping within them – among those who select political party leaders. Within the Canadian system, achieving higher office occurs through political parties; the role of premier or prime minister is normally occupied by the leader of the political party holding a majority of seats in the legislature. As such, the selectorate of importance are party members and individuals holding party executive offices. The first step in this project is to conduct interviews with members of party executives to develop a richer understanding of how party elite perceive the concept of political leadership in concrete terms, the results of which will be the focus of the paper.
Égalité, compétence et représentativité. Argumenter la parité femmes-hommes dans les conseils des ministres provinciaux et fédéraux canadiens: Carol-Ann Rouillard (Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières), Mireille Lalancette (Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières)
Abstract: L’enjeu de la sous-représentation politique des femmes occupe une place grandissante dans l’espace médiatique canadien depuis quelques années. Si peu de partis politiques se sont dotés de quotas de candidatures (Tremblay 2015) les premiers ministres sont de plus en plus nombreux à confier plus de place aux femmes au sein des gouvernements en choisissant de nommer des conseils des ministres paritaires.
Les recherches en science politique ont cherché à dresser un portrait des stratégies de féminisation des parlements, des différents types de quotas (législatifs, sièges réservés, et quotas de partis – voir entre autres Dahlerup 2008 et Krook 2009) ainsi que des arguments pour et contre ces quotas. Un aspect demeure peu étudié : celui de la féminisation des conseils des ministres, lieu de pouvoir au sein des assemblées législatives.
Différentes questions émergent de ce constat. En quoi les débats autour de la parité au sein des cabinets diffèrent-ils des débats au sujet des autres types de quotas? Comment le contexte canadien (citoyenneté multiculturelle, division du mouvement féministe anglophone et francophone) influence-t-il les positions défendues par les personnes qui interviennent dans le débat?
L’étude repose sur l’analyse argumentative du discours (Amossy 2012) journalistique suivant l’annonce de cinq conseils des ministres paritaires au Canada et dans ses provinces. Une attention spécifique est accordée aux éléments suivants : 1) les arguments pour et contre les quotas; 2) les avantages invoqués pour justifier une plus grande présence des femmes; 3) la place occupée par l’enjeu de la représentativité femmes-hommes parmi d’autres critères identitaires.