Quota Problems: Combating the Dangers of Essentialism

Politics and Gender

Volumn 1, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 622-638

  Mansbridge, Jane ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247483101     PISSN: 1743923X     EISSN: 17439248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1743923X05220196     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. S., Agacinski, Sylviane, Beyond French Feminisms: Debates of Women, Politics, and Culture in France, 1981–2001, “The Turning Point of Feminism: Against the Effacement of Women.” Trans. Mary Schwartz, Roger, Célestin, Eliane, DalMolin, Isabelle, de Courtivron, London, Palgrave, (2003), 17-22
2. L., Baldez, Lisa, The Pros and Cons of Gender Quota Laws: What Happens When You Kick Men Out and Let Women In?, Politics & Gender, Forthcoming, 2, 1
3. M.R., Banaji, Mahzarin R., The Nature of Remembering, Implicit Attitudes Can be Measured, H. L., Roediqer, I. N., Nairne, A. M., Suprenant, Washington DC, American Psychological Association, (2001), 117-150
4. Banaji, Mahzarin, Max H. Bazerman, and Dolly Chugh. 2003.“How (Un)ethical Are You?” Harvard Business Review 81 (12):56–64.
5. Bartlett, Katharine T. 1990.“Feminist Legal Methods,” Harvard Law Review 103 (4):829–88.
6. Burden, Barry C. 2005. Personal Roots of Representation. Unpublished book manuscript(burden@fas.harvard.edu).
7. Carter, Stephen L. 1994.“Forward.” In Lani Guinier, The Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy. New York: Free Press.
8. Collins, Patricia Hill. 1990. Black Feminist Thought. London: Allen and Unwin.
9. Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology, The Combahee River Collective Statement, Combahee River Collective, Barbara, Smith, New York, Women of Color/Kitchen Table Press, (1983), 272-282
10. Cott, Nancy. 1987. The Grounding of Modern Feminism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11. Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1991.“‘Mapping the Margins’: Intersectionality,Identity Politics and Violence Against Women.” Stanford Law Review 43 (6):1241–99.
12. R., Darcy, Robert, C.D., Hadley, Charles D., J.F., Kirksey, Jason F., Election Systems and the Representation of Black Women in American State Legislatures, Women & Politics, (1993), 13, 2, 73-89
13. Davis, Angela. 1983. Women, Race, and Class. New York: Vintage Books.
14. S., Dovi, Suzanne, Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Every Woman, Black, and Latino Do?, American Political Science Review, (2002), 96, 4, 729-743
15. M., Ferguson, Michaele, Sharing and Sharing Alike: Political Unity in Deeply Diverse Democracies, Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, (2003)
16. Gaspard, Françoise. 1994.“De la parité: genèse d'un concept,naissance d'un mouvement.” Nouvelles Questions Féministes 15 (4):42.
17. C., Gay, Claudine, The Effect of Black Congressional Representation on Political Participation, American Political Science Review, (2001), 95, 3, 589-602
18. C., Gay, Claudine, Spirals of Trust? The Effect of Descriptive Representation on the Relationship Between Citizens and Their Government, American Journal of Political Science, (2002), 46, 6, 717-733
19. Goldstein, Joshua S. 2001. War and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. C., Gould, Carol, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Diversity and Democracy: Representing Differences, Seyla, Benhabib, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, (1996)
21. Griffiths, A. Phillips, and Richard Wollheim. 1960.“How Can One Person Represent Another?” Aristotelian Society, Supplement 34: 182–208.
22. Harris, Angela. 1990.“Race and Essentialism in Legal Theory.” Stanford Law Review 42 (3):581–616.
23. J.S., Hyde, Janet Shibley, Meta-Analysis and the Psychology of Gender Differences, Signs, (1990), 16, 1, 5-73
24. R., Inglehart, Ronald, P., Norris, Pippa, Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003, (2003)
25. Katznelson, Ira. 2005. When Affirmative Action Was White. New York: W. W. Norton.
26. Kraditor, Aileen S. 1965. The Ideas of the Woman Suffrage Movement, 1890–1920. New York: Columbia University Press.
27. Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. J.L., Lawless, Jennifer L., R.L., Fox, Richard L., It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Political Office, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, (2005)
29. Maccoby, Eleanor E. 1998. The Two Sexes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30. Maccoby, Eleanor E., and Carol Nagy Jacklin. 1978. The Psychology of Sex Differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
31. Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond Adversary Democracy. New York: Basic Books.
32. J., Mansbridge, Jane, Democratic Community: NOMOS XXXV, Feminism and Democratic Community, John W., Chapman, Ian, Shapiro, New York, New York University Press, (1993), 339-395
33. J., Mansbridge, Jane, Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes, Journal of Politics, (1999), 61, 3, 628-657
34. S.M., Marilley, Suzanne M., Woman Suffrage and the Origins of Liberal Feminism in the United States 1820–1920, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, (1996)
35. R.E., Matland, Richard E., D.C., King, David C., Women Transforming Congress, Women as Candidates in Congressional Elections, Cindy S., Rosenthal, Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, (2002), 119-145
36. T., Mendelberg, Tali, C., Karpowitz, Christopher, Can the People Decide? Theory and Empirical Research on Democratic Deliberation, How People Deliberate About Justice, Forthcoming, Shawn W., Rosenberg
37. J.A., Morone, James A., T.R., Marmor, Theodore R., Representing Consumer Institutions: The Case of American Health Planning, Ethics, (1981), 91, 3, 431-450
38. National Opinion Research Center. General Social Surveys, Cumulative Codebook, http://webapp.icpsr.umich.edu/GSS/, Chicago, National Opinion Research Center, (1972)
39. Pennock, J. Roland. 1979. Democratic Political Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
40. Phillips, Anne. 1995. The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. J.W., Scott, Joan W., La Querelle des Femmes’ in the Late Twentieth Century, New Left Review, (1997), 226, 3-19
42. Strauss, Julie Etta. 1998.“Women in Congress: The Difference They Make.” Ph.D. diss. Northwestern University.
43. Sunstein, Cass R. 2002.“The Law of Group Polarization.” Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2):175–95.
44. M.L., Swers, Michele L., The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, (2002)
45. Thomas, Sue. 1994. How Women Legislate. New York: Oxford University Press.
46. Turner, John C. 1987. Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
47. S., Welch, Susan, The Impact of At-Large Elections on the Representation of Blacks and Hispanics, Journal of Politics, (1990), 52, 4, 1050-1076
48. Welch, Susan, and Donley T. Studlar. 1990.“Multi-member Districts and the Representation of Women:Evidence from Britain and the United States.” Journal of Politics 52 (2):391–412.
49. S.L., Weldon, S. Laurel, Inclusion, Solidarity and Social Movements: The Global Movement Against Gender Violence, Perspectives on Politics, March, (2006), 4, 55-74
50. M., Williams, Melissa, Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, (1998)
51. I.M., Young, Iris Marion, Gender as Seriality: Thinking About Women as a Social Collective, Signs, (1994), 19, 3, 713-738
52. I.M., Young, Iris Marion, Nomos XXXIX: Ethnicity and Group Rights, Deferring Group Representation, Ian, Shapiro, Will, Kymlicka, New York, New York University, (1997), 349-376
53. Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. L., Zerilli, Linda, Doing Without Knowing: Feminism's Politics of the Ordinary, Political Theory, (1998), 24, 4, 435-458