Women, Gender, and Politics

N09(a) - Gender, Political Participation, and Governance

Date: Jun 4 | Time: 08:30am to 10:00am | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Azadeh Momeni (University of Toronto)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Candace Johnson (University of Guelph)

Representation of women in political science: Considerations when recruiting women politicians to participate in academic research: Anna Lennox Esselment (University of Waterloo), Jeni Armstrong (Carleton University), Alex Marland (Acadia University)
Abstract: Gaining access to female and racialized elected officials can be much harder than recruiting white males to participate in academic studies. There is higher risk aversion, high demand for subjects’ time, limited upside for them, and suspicion about researchers’ motives and trustworthiness. As a result, the insights, opinions, and lived experiences of women politicians can be further underrepresented in a male-dominated political landscape. What can political scientists do to ensure that women politicians are appropriately represented in interview research? We present the results of an innovative multiphase study of Canadian legislators. In the first phase, we recruited MPs and MPPs with whom we had an existing relationship who agreed to direct their staff to maintain a diary log for one week documenting all interview requests, including from journalists. With reference to those logs, we then interviewed those MPs/MPPs and their staff to understand decisions about whether to accept or deny an interview request. This paper will present those results. In the second phase, we will subsequently interview a sample of remaining MPs/MPPs and political staff to further understand the interview request process, with special attention given to what researchers ought to consider in order to optimize response rates among women politicians.

Democratic Design in Unequal Polities: Sarah Childs (University of Edinburgh), Karen Celis (Vreij Universiteit Brussels)
Abstract: Michael Saward's awarding winning book, Democratic Design (2021), offers much to defenders of democracy, suggesting as it does a starting point from which to democratize our democracies. Democratic (re)design is especially attractive to those sensitive to persistent and pervasive inequalities detrimental to democracy, which have not been ameliorated or overturned despite a formal commitment to political equality, and which are now compounded by anti-equality projects that are also anti-democratic. Speaking both to what we term ‘first-generation feminist designers’, and ‘democratic designers’ – and drawing a distinction between the ‘equality insensitive’ and ‘inequality conscious’ designer - we make the claim in this paper that democratic design ‘made feminist’ must centre the redress of inequality. If older feminist engagement with representation offered a compelling critique (Phillips 1992; Lovenduski 2018), Anne Phillips’ new book Unconditional Equals (2021) challenges us to focus on inequality and injustice. Her instruction to ‘make equality happen’, prompts the (feminist) democratic designer to (i) imagine democracy as it should be and (ii) identify democratic practices and devices that build to that end. In working through this shift, we contend that all democratic designers must be inequality conscious, and thus all democratic design feminist.

Indigenous Women in Politics; A spontaneous tidal wave or a sleeping giant?: Rebecca Major (Yukon University)
Abstract: After the initial term of Justin Trudeau's government focused on reconciliation (2015-2019), there was a significant rise in Indigenous participation in Canadian electoral politics, particularly among Indigenous women. This is significant because Indigenous women face unique challenges resulting from colonization and their intersectional identities. Certain institutional barriers, including legislation that disproportionately affects women, have conveyed the message that Indigenous women are not welcome in certain political spheres. While some may attribute the increase in the number of Indigenous women candidates in the 2019 and 2021 elections to a more inclusive environment prompted by Reconciliation discourse, it is important to recognize the previous efforts made by other Indigenous women in earlier years. This paper highlights the agency of Indigenous women and emphasizes that simplistic explanations disregard their agency and capabilities.

Intersectionality and Representation on Canada’s Status of Women Committee: Elizabeth McCallion (University of Toronto), Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant (Queen's University)
Abstract: The Canadian Parliament’s Standing Committee on the Status of Women (FEWO) studies legislation related to women’s interests in Canada – but which women’s interests do they talk about? Do legislators and committee witnesses essentialize women, or do they recognize the diversity of women’s identities and the heterogeneity of their experiences? This project investigates how parliamentary actors constitute women as a political group in Canada. We perform a content analysis of FEWO transcripts and matrix discussions of women with discussions of other identities, including race, Indigeneity, sexuality, gender identity, religion, and immigration status. In doing so, we examine whether and how legislators and committee witnesses talk about other identities at the same time as they talk about women. We also analyse the dataset by speakers’ sex, race, and partisan or professional affiliation, asking whether they affect speakers’ willingness to talk about diverse groups of women. We then perform a finer-grained qualitative analysis to study the nuances of how parliamentary actors talk about women’s identities. Do they use a gender-first understanding of women as political actors, or a more genuinely intersectional approach? Do they consider only the most privileged women in a group, or consider policy effects for various groups of women? The paper contributes to the literature on women’s representation by asking how women are constituted in the Canadian Parliament. It reveals how political actors understand women as a political group and demonstrates the value of diverse perspectives in policy discussions about women.