Skip to main content
×
×
Home

“Seeing What Has Always Been”: Opening Study of the Presidency

  • Georgia Duerst-Lahti (a1)
Extract

The 2008 presidential election has been widely touted as historic because a woman and an African American became viable candidates for a major party, thereby thrusting gender and race into the spotlight. Of course, gender and race have always been present as informal criteria for U.S. presidential candidates. At the constitutional founding, only white propertied men with sufficient affluence to be gentlemen of leisure were deemed suitable for national office (Wood 1991). Following the traditions of kings and military leaders, the executive was assumed to be an elite man and the institution itself became associated with men and fashioned in the preferences of its founders (March and Olsen 1989). For the presidency, founding fathers sought a heroic man, capable of leading in the extra-legal realm that they recognized could not be fully anticipated in law (Kann 1998). Since then, presidential campaigns have always been about what kind of man should hold an office predicated upon masculinity. While certainly presidential candidates' characters have been most discussed, the quality of each candidate's masculinity has been embedded in the sizing up of presidential timber, character, and the person.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Butler Judith. 1993. Bodies That Matter: On the Limits to Discursive “Sex.” New York: Routledge.
Chappell Louise. 2006. “Comparing Political Institutions: Revealing the Gendered ‘Logic of Appropriateness.’Politics & Gender 2 (June): 223–34.
Connell R.W. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Dawson Michael C. 2001. Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dodson Debra. 2006. The Impact of Women on Congress. New York: Oxford University Press.
Duerst-Lahti Georgia 2002a. “Governing Institutions, Ideologies, and Gender: Toward the Possibility of Equal Political Representation.” Sex Roles 47 (October): 371–88.
Duerst-Lahti Georgia 2002b. “Knowing Congress as a Gendered Institution: Manliness and the Implications of Women in Congress.” In Women Transforming Congress, ed. Rosenthal C.S.. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2049.
Duerst-Lahti Georgia 2005. “Institutional Gendering: Theoretical Insights into the Environment of Women Officeholders.” In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, 2nded., ed. Thomas Sue and Wilcox Clyde. New York: Oxford University Press, 230243.
Duerst-Lahti Georgia 2006. “Presidential Elections as Gendered Space.” In Gender Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, ed. Carroll Susan J. and Fox Richard L.. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1242.
Duerst-Lahti Georgia 2008. “Gender Ideology: Masculinism, Feminalism, and Gray Zones.” In Politics, Gender, and Concepts: Theory and Methodology, ed. Goetz Gary and Mazur Amy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 212–44.
Garcia Bedolla Lisa. 2007. “Intersections of Inequality: Understanding Marginalization and Privilege in the Post-Civil Rights Era.” Politics & Gender 3 (June): 232–47.
Hancock Ange-Marie. 2007. “When Multiplication Doesn't Equal Quick Addition: Examining Intersectionality as a Research Paradigm.” Perspectives on Politics 5 (March): 6380.
Hawkesworth Mary. 2003. “Congressional Enactments of Race-Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced-Gendered Institutions.” American Political Science Review 97 (November): 529–50.
Hawkesworth Mary. 2005. “Engendering Political Science: An Immodest Proposal.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 141–56.
Hawkesworth Mary. 2006. Feminist Inquiry: From Political Conviction to Methodological Innovation. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Jaggar Alison M., and Bordo Susan R., eds. 1989. Gender/Body/Knowledge: Feminist Reconstructions of Being and Knowing. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Junn Jane. 2007. “Square Pegs and Round Holes: Challenges of Fitting Individual-Level Analysis to a Theory of Politicized Context of Gender.” Politics & Gender 3 (March): 124–34.
Kann Mark E. 1998. A Republic of Men: The American Founders, Gendered Languages, and Patriarchal Politics. New York: New York University Press.
Kenney Sally J. 1996. “Field Essay: New Research on Gendered Political Institutions.” Political Research Quarterly 49 (2): 445–66.
Lorber Judith. 1993. “Believing Is Seeing: Biology as Ideology.” Gender & Society 7 (December): 568–81.
March James G., and Olsen Johan P.. 1989. The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: Free Press.
Moi Toril. 1999. What is a Woman? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nelson Thomas E., Sanbonmatsu Kira, and McClerking Harwood K.. 2007. “Playing a Different Race Card: Examining the Limits of Elite Influence on Perceptions of Racism.” Journal of Politics 69 (May): 416–29.
Rose Richard. 1993. Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy: A Guide to Learning Across Time and Space. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
Walby Sylvia. 1997. Gender Transformations. London: Routledge.
Weldon S. Laurel. 2006. “The Structure of Intersectionality: A Comparative Politics of Gender.” Politics & Gender 2 (June): 235–48.
Yanow Dvora, and Schwartz-Shea Peregrine, eds. 2006. Interpretation and Methods: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Young Iris Marion. 2002. “Lived Body vs. Gender: Reflections on Social Structure and Subjectivity.” Ratio: An International Journal of Analytic Philosophy 15 (December): 410–28.
Young Iris Marion. 2005. On Female Body Experience: “Throwing Like a Girl” and Other Essay. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wood Gordon S. 1991. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. New York: A.A. Knopf.
Recommend this journal

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

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 29 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 139 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 18th February 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.