IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v82y2001i4p687-700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender, Feminism, and Partisanship among Women's PAC Contributors

Author

Listed:
  • Christine L. Day
  • Charles D. Hadley
  • Megan Duffy Brown

Abstract

Objective. We examine the political attitudes and priorities of contributors to two prominent women's PACs for evidence of a gender gap. Methods. A survey of contributors to EMILY's List and to WISH List shows that contributors to both organizations are overwhelmingly women. However, because EMILY's List is so large, there is a sufficient number of men to compare to the two groups of women using percentages and difference‐of‐means tests. Results. Partisanship is the overriding influence on political priorities and attitudes toward economic and social welfare policy. However, partisanship and gender interact to influence political attitudes in at least two areas. First, EMILY's List men are more supportive of militarism and use of force than are EMILY's List women, but they are less supportive than WISH List women. Second, the women of EMILY's List are more staunchly feminist than either EMILY's List men or WISH List women. Conclusions. We conclude that the source of each group's financial commitment to women's political equality and reproductive rights is different: for EMILY's List women, it is liberal feminism; for WISH List women, it is libertarianism; and for EMILY's List men, it is general egalitarianism.

Suggested Citation

  • Christine L. Day & Charles D. Hadley & Megan Duffy Brown, 2001. "Gender, Feminism, and Partisanship among Women's PAC Contributors," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 82(4), pages 687-700, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:4:p:687-700
    DOI: 10.1111/0038-4941.00053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0038-4941.00053
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0038-4941.00053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:4:p:687-700. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.