Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Should Feminists Give Up on Critical Mass? A Contingent Yes

  • Sarah Childs (a1) and Mona Lena Krook (a2)
Abstract

Today's historic level of women in national parliaments—while still far short of parity at 16%—owes much to the global spread of gender quotas. This process, in turn, owes much to the concept of “critical mass”: International organizations, transnational networks, party politicians, women's activists, and even ordinary citizens argue that women should constitute 30% of all political bodies, the magic number where female legislators are said to be able to make a difference. As the notion of critical mass has gained wide currency in the real world, however, many scholars have come to question its utility and relevance for analyzing women's legislative behavior. Indeed, as the number of studies grows, it is increasingly obvious that there is neither a single nor a universal relationship between the percentage of women elected to political office and the passage of legislation beneficial to women as a group: In some cases, women are able to work more effectively together as their numbers grow, but in others, women appear to make a difference—in fact, sometimes a greater difference—when they form a small minority of legislators, either because their increased numbers provoke a backlash among male legislators or because their increased numbers allow individual women to pursue other policy goals. These contradictions thus raise the question: Should feminists give up on critical mass? Or are there any compelling reasons—either theoretical or practical—for retaining the concept in debates on women's political representation?

Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
This title adapts two classic articles on women's political representation: Anne Phillips' “Must Feminists Give Up on Liberal Democracy?” (1993), and Jane Mansbridge's “Should Women Represent Women and Blacks Represent Blacks: A Contingent Yes” (1999).
Footnotes
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Bratton, Kathleen A. 2005. “Critical Mass Theory Revisited: The Behavior and Success of Token Women in State Legislatures.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 97125.

Bratton, Kathleen A., and Leonard P. Ray. 2002. “Descriptive Representation, Policy Outcomes, and Municipal Day-Care Coverage in Norway.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (2): 42837.

Childs, Sarah, and Julie Withey. 2006. “The Substantive Representation of Women: The Case of the Reduction of VAT on Sanitary Products.” Parliamentary Affairs 59 (1): 1023.

Cowley, Philip, and Sarah Childs. 2003. “Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour's Women MPs.” British Journal of Political Science 33 (3): 34565.

Crowley, Jocelyn Elise. 2004. “When Tokens Matter.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 29 (1): 10936.

Dahlerup, Drude. 1988. “From a Small to a Large Minority: Women in Scandinavian Politics.” Scandinavian Political Studies 11 (4): 27597.

Dolan, Kathleen, and Lynne E. Ford. 1995. “Women in State Legislatures: Feminist Identity and Legislative Behaviors.” American Politics Quarterly 23 (1): 96108.

Flammang, Janet. A. 1985. “Female Officials in the Feminist Capital: The Case of Santa Clara County.” Western Political Quarterly 38 (1): 94118.

Granovetter, Mark. 1978. “Threshold Models and Collective Behavior.” American Journal of Sociology 83 (6): 142043.

Heath, Roseanna Michelle, Leslie A. Schwindt-Bayer, and Michelle M. Taylor-Robinson. 2005. “Women on the Sidelines: Women's Representation on Committees in Latin American Legislatures.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (2): 42036.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977a. “Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life.” American Journal of Sociology 82 (5): 96590.

Meyer, Birgit. 2003. “Much Ado about Nothing? Political Representation Policies and the Influence of Women Parliamentarians in Germany.” Review of Policy Research 20 (3): 40121.

Towns, Ann. 2003. “Understanding the Effects of Larger Ratios of Women in National Legislatures: Proportions and Gender Differentiation in Sweden and Norway.” Women & Politics 25 (1–2): 129.

Wängnerud, Lena. 2000. “Testing the Politics of Presence: Women's Representation in the Swedish Riksdag.” Scandinavian Political Studies 23 (1): 6791.

Weldon, S. Laurel. 2002. “Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policymaking.” Journal of Politics 64 (4): 115374.

Whip, Rosemary. 1991. “Representing Women: Australian Female Parliamentarians on the Horns of a Dilemma.” Women & Politics 11 (3): 122.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Politics & Gender
  • ISSN: 1743-923X
  • EISSN: 1743-9248
  • URL: /core/journals/politics-and-gender
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF

 PDF (201 KB)
201 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 46
Total number of PDF views: 266 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 927 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.