One Hundred Years of Instability: Sex, Law, and Transgender Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 494-497
Author(s):  
Anne Caldwell

Five years before the famous Seneca Falls Meeting in which a gathering of women demanded suffrage, Levi Suydam already had encountered the problem that sex posed for suffrage. Suydam, a 23-year-old man who supported the Whigs, petitioned to vote in 1843. The opposing party challenged his petition “on the grounds that ‘he was more a female than a male, and that, in his physical organization, he partook of both sexes’” (Reis 2009, 34). Because the Whigs won by one vote, Suydam’s status was central to the election outcome. After several medical exams in which different doctors reached different conclusions about Suydam’s true sex, Suydam was determined to be “more female than male” (Reis 2009, 35). Suydam’s case presents an important corollary to a more famous case of voting “fraud” after Susan B. Anthony voted in the 1872 presidential election. The 1873 trial and conviction of Anthony was straightforward: as a woman, she could not vote. Suydam posed a greater challenge to political order insofar as neither law nor medicine could pin down Suydam’s sex within a framework of binary sex. The Nineteenth Amendment, which prohibited the denial of the vote “on account of sex,” might have rendered the uncertainty of sex politically and legally moot. It did not.

2021 ◽  
pp. 136843022199008
Author(s):  
Ethan Zell ◽  
Christopher A. Stockus ◽  
Michael J. Bernstein

This research examined how people explain major outcomes of political consequence (e.g., economic growth, rising inequality). We argue that people attribute positive outcomes more and negative outcomes less to their own political party than to an opposing party. We conducted two studies, one before the 2016 U.S. presidential election ( N = 244) and another before the 2020 election ( N = 249 registered voters), that examined attributions across a wide array of outcomes. As predicted, a robust partisan attribution bias emerged in both studies. Although the bias was largely equivalent among Democrats and Republicans, it was magnified among those with more extreme political ideology. Further, the bias predicted unique variance in voting intentions and significantly mediated the link between political ideology and voting. In sum, these data suggest that partisan allegiances systemically bias attributions in a group-favoring direction. We discuss implications of these findings for emerging research on political social cognition.


2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-84
Author(s):  
Glen Smith

This study examines whether broadcast news reduces negativity toward political leaders by exposing partisans to opposing viewpoints. For analysis, both exposure to broadcast news and variation in media content are used to predict changes in feelings toward the candidates during the 2008 presidential election. The results suggest that increased exposure to broadcast news increased partisans’ favorability toward the out-party candidate. In addition, increased coverage of the candidates was followed by increased favorability among members of the opposing party. These results demonstrate the benefits of exposure to two-sided communications flows for the reduction of animosity between the political parties. Moreover, these results suggest that public negativity toward political leaders might be even worse if not for the large amount of overlap between the audiences for partisan and mainstream news outlets.


Author(s):  
Jacqueline Castledine

This chapter discusses how Americans debated regarding women's right to vote, even before the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. By the presidential election of 1936, most agreed that women had failed to organize in numbers large enough to provide them with an effective voice in the political system. However, World War II would create opportunities for women's political activism. As men joined the service, women replaced them not only in the industrial workplace but also in political organizing. Americans concerned with dramatic shifts in gender roles then engaged in a concerted effort to remasculinize U.S. culture after the war. In need of strategies to lessen their apparent threat to American masculinity, Progressive women, led by Women for Wallace chair Elinor Gimbel, introduced various tactics to calm fears about the supposed dangers of leftist women.


2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (10) ◽  
pp. 1606-1630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen M. Doherty ◽  
David E. Lewis ◽  
Scott Limbocker

Career executives often occupy administrative positions that determine the pace and content of policy, such as those responsible for developing regulations. Yet, presidential administrations need control over these positions to achieve policy aims. This article considers the extent to which new presidential administrations marginalize career executives in key regulatory positions by transferring responsibilities to another individual and whether the mere expectation of political conflict with a new administration drives career regulators from their positions. Using unique new data on 866 career regulators that led major rulemaking efforts between 1995 and 2013, we demonstrate that turnover among career executives in key regulatory positions increases following a party change in the White House. Turnover also increases during a presidential election year, but this effect is conditioned by bureaucrats’ expectations of the election outcome. Finally, career executives are more likely to depart in response to favorable labor market conditions. Given our findings that turnover in regulatory responsibilities is driven both by presidential marginalization and strategic exit by bureaucrats, we conclude with implications for presidential efforts to control the administrative state.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205630511982613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Macafee ◽  
Bryan McLaughlin ◽  
Nathian Shae Rodriguez

The 2016 US Presidential Election provided an opportunity to examine how political candidates’ use of social media can affect voting intentions. This study considers how political candidates can use social media to increase potential supporters’ perceptions that they will win the election, providing them extra motivation to go out and vote. Results from a two-wave survey provide evidence that following the in-group candidate (Trump or Clinton) relates to voting intentions through the increased belief that the candidate would win. However, this mediation effect occurs for only supporters of Trump or Clinton, but not for partisans of the opposing party.


2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 854-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Betsy Sinclair ◽  
Steven S. Smith ◽  
Patrick D. Tucker

The 2016 presidential election provided a unique opportunity to revisit two competing hypotheses for how voters establish their perceptions of electoral integrity. First, mass public opinion is believed to derive from elite messages. In the 2016 presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump maintained that the election system was “rigged,” while election administration experts and officials received considerable media coverage in their efforts to counter Trump’s claims. Second, literature on voter confidence has established a “winner effect”—voters who cast ballots for winners are more likely than voters on the losing side to believe their vote was counted correctly. Thus, voters were exposed to two theoretically opposite effects. In this paper, we find that the “winner” effect mitigates the effects from strong pre-election cues from elites. We also show the effect of pre-election attention to the rigging issue, find a symmetry of the election outcome effect for winners and losers, and reconsider our explanations of the winner effect. Finally, we go beyond the existing studies of the winner effect to consider the kind of citizens who are most susceptible to that effect.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document