INCREASED ABUSE, HARASSMENT, VIOLENCE, AND TRAUMA FOR WOMEN IN POLITICS

Recent reports document a disturbing escalation in violence aimed at elected officials in the United States including physical violence, psychological abuse, and threats of violence to them, their property, and those close to them. US Capitol Police report that threats against congressional officials, as well as actual violent encounters, increased by 119% from 2017 to 2020 (Higgins Reference Higgins2021; US Capitol Police 2021). In 2021, these threats reached a new high in the wake of the 2020 election, increasing by 107% during the previous year (US Capitol Police. 2021). Similarly, in 2021, the Washington Post found “myriad elections officials around the country who had done little more than administer fair elections that Trump lost targeted with violent threats” (Bump Reference Bump2021).

Research centered on VAWIP substantiates reports of physical violence and psychological abuse experienced by elected officials, specifically the gendered targeting and impacts of this violence (Herrick and Thomas Reference Herrick and Thomas2021; Herrick et al. Reference Herrick, Thomas, Franklin, Godwin, Gnabasik and Schroedel2021). Empirical data demonstrate that women candidates are exposed to more sexual and psychological violence than men candidates (Bardall, Bjarnegård, and Piscopo Reference Bardall, Bjarnegård and Piscopo2020; Bjarnegård Reference Bjarnegård2018); that women officeholders experience greater levels of violence and abuse than men (Herrick et al. Reference Herrick, Thomas, Franklin, Godwin, Gnabasik and Schroedel2021); and that the exposure to violence increases as women advance into the highest levels of public office (Håkansson Reference Håkansson2021).

A resurgence in white supremacist and white nationalist movements animated by intersecting forms of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and transphobia informs a significant portion of these violent encounters (Krook Reference Krook2017; Krook and Restrepo Sanín Reference Krook and Sanín2016). Krook (Reference Krook2020) documents the sexualized and racialized discourse emanating from these movements aimed at women and its relationship to masculinized institutional behaviors that include microaggressions, sexual harassment, and violence. The resurgence of these movements in the United States parallels pervasive and global intersectional, racialized-gendered, and state-sanctioned violence targeting Black, lesbian, and transgender women in public office (Caldwell Reference Caldwell2020).

Political violence in the United States increasingly targets women of color elected to public office whose very presence in predominantly white political institutions disrupts and transgresses norms of whiteness and masculinity and whose work often challenges intersecting modes of inequality and subordination to represent marginalized communities. Despite the increasing reports of violence, few studies focus specifically on the intersectional nature of escalating violence and its impacts for women of color serving in public office (Holm Reference Holm2020). An Amnesty International (2018) study of online violence experienced by British members of Parliament (MPs) in the six months leading up to the 2017 elections found racialized and gendered patterns of abuse. The study noted that Black, Asian, and minority ethnic women MPs experienced far more abuse than their white colleagues. In addition, Håkansson (Reference Håkansson2021) found that women officeholders also experience greater penalties in the form of political violence in cases in which they substantively represent minority communities and their interests. The Jankowicz et al. (Reference Jankowicz, Hunchak, Pavliuc, Davies, Pierson and Kaufman2021) study of online conversations among politicians across six social media platforms found widespread evidence of gendered, sexualized, and racialized abuse directed at women in office and women of color in particular.

Krook (Reference Krook2020) argues that for women of color, the violence stems from both enduring forms of racial and gendered inequality and that it is uniquely tailored to undermine, discredit, deter, and deny their existence in politics. In this way, the violence is not merely an extension of partisan competition nor a “gendered extension of existing definitions of political violence privileging physical aggressions” but rather a collection of practices intent on denying women’s participation as women in politics (Krook Reference Krook2020, 3). Moreover, intersectional violence results in attacks on the policies and practices advanced by women of color to address inequalities among their constituencies as well as attacks that are intent on curtailing their ability merely to exist in political office and public life.

Norwood and Padilla (Reference Norwood and Padilla2022) and Cramer (Reference Cramer2022) document professional, emotional, and psychological impacts of increased violence. This includes forms of short- and long-term trauma among both elected officials and public service providers, heightened forms of fear and anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and significant expenditures of intellectual and emotional energy to simply process the onslaught of threats. For some, the violence prompts substantial changes in their life and work: changing how and where they drive, the security in their home and neighborhood, constituent outreach, mobilization, fundraising, and even whether they can safely hold in-person events in their district. These changes come with additional costs of money and time that directly impact their political future. Herrick et al. (Reference Herrick, Thomas, Franklin, Godwin, Gnabasik and Schroedel2021) further demonstrate how violence often undermines the political careers, public confidence, and willingness and desire of public officials to serve. They note in their survey of physical violence and psychological abuse encountered by US mayors that “15.61% who experienced violence/abuse considered leaving office as a result” and “those who were threatened were more likely to have considered leaving than those who faced other types of psychological abuse” (Herrick et al. Reference Herrick, Thomas, Franklin, Godwin, Gnabasik and Schroedel2021, 692).

The escalating violence increases the precarity, vulnerability, and costs of public service while also creating new challenges for women of color who are considering running for national office. These challenges are especially problematic for Latina congressional candidates and officeholders in the United States because they occur at the same time that Latinas are making important political gains at the national level. In particular, Latinas figured prominently in the 2018, 2020, and 2022 general elections as major-party candidates for political office, as political organizers, and as a key proportion of the electorate in states with competitive statewide and national races—all while reports of targeted harassment and violence aimed at national candidates and officeholders were increasing (Sampaio Reference Sampaio2019, Reference Sampaio, Carroll, Fox and Dittmar2021). A record number of Latinas ran for national office as major-party candidates and won in 2018, 2020, and 2022. By the beginning of the 118th Congress in January 2023, 19 Latinas were serving in national office as voting members. This included 18 Latinas in the US House of Representatives (i.e., 13 Democrats and five Republicans) and one US Senator (Center for American Women and Politics 2018, 2020, 2022). That is, between 2017 and 2023, at the same time that US Capitol Police reported a 119% increase in threats and attacks directed at congressional officials, the number of Latina candidates for Congress increased by more than 50% and those elected to Congress as voting members doubled from 10 to 20 (Acevedo Reference Acevedo2020; Dittmar Reference Dittmar2020, Reference Dittmar2022; Higgins Reference Higgins2021).

The escalating forms of intersectional violence documented in this research threatens to derail or dismantle the momentum of Latina congressional candidates and officeholders at a time when they have run more successful campaigns for national office than at any other time in US history—but their numbers fall far below parity. In 2022, Latinas constituted more than 9% of the total US population, more than 18% of all women in the United States, and 50% of the largest racial/ethnic minority community in the United States (Lopez Reference Lopez, Krogstad and Passel2023). However, they represented only 2.8% of the entire congressional body. This group of women includes US Senator Catherine Cortez Masto from Nevada—the only Latina ever elected to the US Senate. With 19 Latinas currently serving as voting members of Congress (i.e., 14 Democrats and five Republicans), Latinas remain vastly underrepresented in national politics. The gains made during the last three election cycles are jeopardized by the escalating forms of violence designed to push women out of the political sphere. Moreover, because the violence is both raced and gendered in form and also targets work that empowers communities of color, it equally threatens intersectional legislative and policy work advanced by these Latina congressional members. The research presented here that focuses on Latina elected officials who were serving in Congress or running for office in 2018, 2020, and 2022 helps to better understand the impacts of escalating racialized and gendered violence and the implications for the future of race and gender politics in the United States.

METHODS AND DATA

This research, which was approved by the author’s university Institutional Review Board, draws from a larger project examining the emergence of Latina candidates for national office in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Grounded in critical intersectional methodology, the data represent a sample of interviews conducted from July 2020 through September 2022 with Latina congressional members and candidates from California and Texas. These two states are highlighted because the largest contingent of Latina congressional candidates has consistently emerged from them. This is due to both the concentration of Latinas/os/xs in these states and their history as sites of major Latina/o/x political organizing and mobilization. Even as more Latina candidates emerge from nontraditional states (e.g., Kansas, Georgia, and Indiana), more than half of all Latina congressional candidates who ran in 2018 (51%) and 2020 (53%) were from California and Texas (Center for American Women and Politics 2018, 2020).

Interview data were supplemented with information amassed from public databases including Ballotpedia, the US Census, Vote Smart, and Open Secrets, as well as candidate profiles archived at the Center for American Women and Politics and candidates’ websites. Participants were recruited through emails, letters, telephone calls, and social media requests (i.e., when an official office or campaign site was no longer operational). All interviews were conducted via Zoom and ranged in length from 35 minutes to 2-1/2 hours.

In total, 20 interviews were collected with Latina congressional members or candidates, including 15 Democrats and five Republicans, as well as four sitting congressional members. Questions centered on their political development as candidates and prior political experiences, as well as their experiences in the 2018 and/or 2020 election cycles. Because the project and interviews centered around public officials and a relatively small group of candidates engaged in a highly publicized process, it was important that interviewees be able to speak comfortably and be quoted directly about their experiences. For this reason, all subjects interviewed agreed to be presented with their full name and no one in the project appears anonymously. However, in accordance with the research protocol, some interviewees did share information “off the record”; that information was not recorded and any notes regarding it was maintained separately from the files and recordings of the interviews.

DISCUSSION: LATINAS RECALL MOUNTING THREATS, ATTACKS, AND VIOLENCE

For some Latinas serving in Congress, the escalating violence has invoked past trauma, such as the violence encountered by immigrants escaping authoritarian governments, economic upheaval, and militarized unrest. Congresswoman Norma Torres, representing the 35th Congressional District (CD) in California, fled political violence in Guatemala with her family at age five, following thousands of other Central American migrants who sought refuge in the United States. As a naturalized immigrant who had witnessed state violence, the January 6, 2021, insurrection prompted painful parallels with the conditions that her family faced:

Significantly, Congresswoman Torres bore the weight of escalating violence while still retaining a deep-seated commitment to serve. Like other women of color, she linked her election to office and commitment to service in the face of escalating threats to a strongly held relationship with her district—one that is grounded in her own identity—and her pledge to defend and protect marginalized communities who increasingly were the targets of racialized and gendered attacks.

Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (representing the 16th CD in Texas) drew similar parallels in describing her landmark run for Congress in 2018 during the height of the Trump administration:

Along with Silvia Garcia from the 29th CD in Texas, Congresswoman Escobar won election to Congress in 2018 and they became the first Latinas from Texas to win in a national election. Her fears about the targeted threats of political violence aimed at Latina/o/x populations proved prescient. Less than a year after her election, a 21-year-old man—motivated explicitly by the desire to kill “Mexicans” and stop “the Hispanic invasion of Texas”—opened fire in a crowded shopping mall on a Sunday afternoon, killing 22 people and wounding 24 more. The racially motivated mass shooting was one of the deadliest in US history.

Whereas the impacts of escalating threats of violence were noted prominently in interviews with current Latina congressional members, several Latina congressional candidates also described racialized and gendered threats stemming from the resurgence of white supremacy. Reflecting on her 2020 campaign in the 24th CD in Texas and the types of racist comments and scrutiny she experienced as an Afro-Latina, Candace Valenzuela noted:

The intense psychological, emotional, and physical impacts of racist narratives, such as the replacement theory and its amplification and enabling among conservative media, generated costs for candidates including Valenzuela that extended far beyond the election outcome. These racist narratives were replete in campaign ads, mailers, and even national debates (Sampaio Reference Sampaio2020).

One of the most common and pervasive forms of abuse and harassment occurred through email and social media platforms, where trolls are rewarded for incendiary messaging and relative anonymity makes accountability more difficult. Republican candidate (16th CD in Texas) Irene Armendariz-Jackson noted: “There were trolls on social media calling me derogatory names, saying, ‘go back to Mexico,’ ‘pura India’…‘wetback.’”

Although the preponderance of Latina candidates who reported online harassment described aggressors as associated with alt-right and conservative groups, escalating harassment and threatening behavior were not limited to one party or ideological sector. Running in a highly competitive race in the 50th CD in California in 2020, Democrat Marisa Calderon recounted threatening behavior from supporters of her Democratic challenger:

Calderon’s description highlights how frequently the violence draws on forms of aggressive masculinity to intimidate and undermine the safety, security, and autonomy of women and to push them out of the political process. In this case, Calderon needed a physical shield simply to file her candidacy papers. Elsewhere, women described needing bodyguards and support from local law enforcement or capitol police to ensure their own safety and that of their staff and family members in their daily work.

Finally, common throughout the interviews was a mindfulness about recovery and care for themselves and those around them in the wake of mounting abuse and violating experiences. Far from atomized efforts intent on strengthening personal resolve, many of the women formed supportive coalitions with other Latinas and women of color similarly situated around the country. They pressed for accountability against trolls and attackers, and they made significant investments in therapy and recovery for themselves and those around them who were left traumatized by violence. In summary, the women tethered care for themselves to coalition building, accountability, and efforts to address the underlying sources of violence. Reflecting on both the trauma and the recovery that she endured after a deeply racialized and abusive campaign season in 2020, Candance Valenzuela reiterated this theme:

Valenzuela’s account underscores the vital need for attending to the unaccounted costs of violence being borne by women of color—especially with structured and resourced support that understands the intersectional impacts and provides direct and meaningful care while addressing the underlying sources of escalating threats.