Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:38:23.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Women Acting for Women? An Analysis of Gender and Debate Participation in the British House of Commons 2005–2007

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2009

Ana Catalano
Ana Catalano
Affiliation:
London School of Economics
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The recent push for more women parliamentarians around the world via positive action measures such as gender quotas naturally begs the question of whether the increased descriptive representation of women in parliament is making a substantive difference, in terms of the types of policies passed, behavioral norms, and procedures. How does the substantive representation of women take place? One way of measuring gendered impacts in politics is to look at the participation of Members of Parliament (MPs) in formal, parliamentary debate on key policy issues. It is reasonable to assume that one (though certainly not the only) measure of a good MP is his or her ability to contribute his or her voice and thoughts to public policy debates in parliament. Furthermore, if we consider women MPs representative of women in particular as a marginalized group, making their voices heard in parliamentary debates is perhaps one of the best ways of acting for women. As Melissa Williams (1998, 138) argues, the unique voice of women is a necessary component for women's political equality:

It is not enough that women communicate their perspectives to men; a full respect for women's agency, and a full protection of their interests, requires that they act on their own behalf. Only through their legislative presence can women be sure that the “woman's point of view” on each policy issue is formulated and expressed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 45 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barnett, Hilaire. 2002. Britain Unwrapped. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Bird, Karen. 2005. “Gendering Parliamentary Questions.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 7 (3): 353–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara C. 1994. A Woman's Place Is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Rosie. 2004. “Gender, Ideology and Issue Preference: Is There Such a Thing as a Political Women's Interest in Britain?” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 6 (1): 20–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celis, Karen, and Childs, Sarah. 2008. “Introduction: The Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Women: New Directions.” Parliamentary Affairs 61: 419–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaney, Paul. 2006. “Critical Mass, Deliberation and the Substantive Representation of Women: Evidence from the UK's Devolution Programme.” Political Studies 54 (4): 691–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 1999. “Revisiting Women's Political Representation.” Paper presented at EPOP Annual ConferenceUniversity College, Northampton.Google Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2001. “In Their Own Words: New Labour Women and the Substantive Representation of Women.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 3 (2): 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2004. Women Representing Women: New Labour's Women MPs. London: Frank Cass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2005. “Feminizing British Politics: Sex and Gender in the 2005 General Election.” In Britain Decides the UK General Election 2005, ed. Geddes, Andrew and Tonge, Jonathan. London: Palgrave Macmillan: 155–167.Google Scholar
Childs, Sarah. 2006. “The Complicated Relationship between Sex, Gender and the Substantive Representation of Women.” European Journal of Women's Studies 13(1): 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, Sarah, and Krook, Mona Lena. 2006. “Gender and Politics: The State of the Art.” Politics 26 (1): 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, Sarah, and Krook, Mona Lena. 2008. “The Substantive Representation of Women.” In Women and British Party Politics, ed. Childs, Sarah. New York: Routledge: 108–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childs, S., and Withey, J.. 2004. “Sex and the Signing of Early Day Motions in the 1997 Parliament,” Political Studies 52 (3): 552–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowley, Philip, and Childs, Sarah. 2003. “Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour's Women MPs.” British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 345–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowling, David. 2005. “Who Deserted Labour?” BBC News May 7. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/issues/4520847.stm (accessed September 1, 2007).Google Scholar
Dod's Parliamentary Communications. 2007. “Selective Biographies of Members of Parliament.” [Free link from UK House of Commons Website] http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm (accessed September 1, 2007).Google Scholar
Dovi, Suzanne. 2003. “Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black or Latino Do?” American Political Science Review 96 (4):729–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Economic and Social Research Council. 2007. “Mental Health and Mental Illness in the UK.” UK Fact Sheets. http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/facts/index56.aspx (accessed September 1, 2007).Google Scholar
Griffiths, A. Phillips, and Wolheim, Richard. 1960. “How Can One Person Represent Another?” Aristotelian Society Supplement 34: 182–208.Google Scholar
Hall, R. L. 1996. Participation in Congress. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hansard (the Official Report). 2005–2007. “Volume Indexes to the House of Commons Parliamentary Debates.” Parliamentary copyright. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmbvindx.htm (accessed September 1, 2007).Google Scholar
Henderson, Alisa. 2005. “Forging a New Political Culture: Plenary Behaviour in the Scottish Parliament.” Journal of Legislative Studies 11 (2): 275–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbing, J. R. 1991. Congressional Careers: Contours of Life in the U.S. House of Representatives. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). 2008. “Women in National Parliaments” Database. http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm (accessed February 29, 2008).Google Scholar
Kavanagh, D. 1987. Thatcherism and British Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction.” Party Systems and Voter Alignments, ed. Lipset, Seymour Martin and Rokkan, Stein. New York: Free Press, 1–64.Google Scholar
Lovenduski, Joni. 2005. Feminizing Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
MacKay, Fiona. 2001. Love and Politics: Women Politicians and the Ethics of Care. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes.’” Journal of Politics 6 (3): 628–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D. R. 1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan M., Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1997. Income Redistribution and the Realignment of American Politics. Washington, DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 1996. “Women Politicians: Transforming Westminster?” In Women in Politics ed. Lovenduski, Joni and Norris, Pippa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2000. “Gender and Contemporary British politics.” In British Politics Today, ed. Hay, C.. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Inglehart, Ron. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, and Lovenduski, Joni. 1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
“Parliamentary Stages of a Government Bill.” 2007. Factsheet L1, Legislation Series. House of Commons Information Office: June.Google Scholar
Phillips, Anne. 1995. The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, Anne. 1999. Which Equalities Matter? Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
The Public Whip. 2007. “MPs—Current Members.” http://www.publicwhip.org.uk (accessed September 1, 2007).Google Scholar
Puwar, N. 2004. “Thinking about Making a Difference,” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 6 (1): 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, Joan. 1997. “La Querelle des Femmes in the Late Twentieth Century.” New Left Review Nov/Dec: 226.Google Scholar
Shaw, Sylvia. 2000. “Language, Gender and Floor Apportionment in Political Debates.” Discourse and Society 11 (3): 401–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd-Robinson, L., and Lovenduski, J.. 2002. Women and Candidate Selection in British Political Parties. London: The Fawcett Society.Google Scholar
Skjeie, H. 1991. “The Rhetoric of Difference: On Women's Inclusion into Political Elites.” Politics and Society 19 (2): 233–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squires, Judith. 2005. “Rethinking Substantive Representation.” Presented at Symposia #1: Gender and Substantive Political Representation, European Consortium of Political Research, Budapest.Google Scholar
Taylor-Robinson, Michelle, and David, Sky. 2002 . “Who Participates and Who is Seen and Not Heard? Evidence From the Honduran Congress.” Journal of Legislative Studies 8 (1): 10–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, Susan. 1985. “Are Women More Liberal Than Men in the U.S. Congress?” Legislative Studies Quarterly 10 (1): 125–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Melissa S.Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Withey, Julie. 2003. Redefining Gender Gaps: Political Behaviour through the Changing Lens of Gender. London: Guildhall University Press.Google Scholar
Young. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar