Chapter 2 offers a re-reading of classic and newer research on women’s political representation. It is designed not to provide the reader with a comprehensive, global account of what has been said and found by multiple generations of scholars. Rather, by using more select work, the authors show through a critical reading that the dominant “dimensional approach” to political representation limits both conceptual understanding and empirical evaluation of the quality of women’s political representation. This tendency toward individual dimensions of representation—oftentimes discrete analysis of descriptive, substantive, symbolic, and affective representation—not only presumes that women’s good representation is somehow a simple question of adding up and taking away scores for each dimension, but it also makes it particularly hard to conceive, theoretically and empirically, when women are well represented, given women’s ideological and intersectional differences. Hence, the authors’ claim to redress intersectionally women’s poverty of representation demands that we conceive of representation as a mélange.