One explanation for the dearth of women in elected office is that voters stereotype candidates based on their gender. Research in this vein often assumes that female candidates will be stereotyped similarly to women (e.g., as compassionate) and measures stereotypes as such. We question this assumption, proposing instead that female politicians constitute a subtype-a new stereotypical category with its own qualities-of the broader group of women. We compare the content of female politician stereotypes to other relevant comparison groups including politicians, male politicians, and female professionals. Using a classic methodology to determine stereotype content (Katz & Braly, 1933), we find that female politicians do not share the qualities that are ascribed to women (e.g., warm, empathetic). Our results show that female politicians seem to be "losing" on male stereotypical qualities while also not having any advantage on qualities typical of women. The content of female politician stereotypes is nebulous and lacks clarity in comparison to all other groups examined. We discuss implications for the future measurement of politician stereotypes.

Social role theory provides a framework to help understand the complexity of gender in the political sphere. We demonstrate how SRT both helps to explain extant research findings and to generate future research that will help explain the complicated ways in which gender shapes U.S. politics. This article considers two broad categories of behavior: the gendered opinions and engagement of the citizenry and the gendered evaluations of political actors by elites and voters. Within each category, we propose moving beyond the male-female binary and consider the effects of gender in conjunction with other key political identities, such as race, ethnicity, age, as well as examining the effects of (dis)ability, and class. As well, our work demonstrates how masculinity encompasses the U.S. political system and serves as a backdrop in front of which gender roles shape political behavior, and role incongruity can lead to prejudice. This project lays the groundwork for future work to apply theories from psychology to a gendered analysis of U.S. politics. Through a better understanding of sex, gender, and their combined effects with race and other intersectional identities, we contribute to a broader goal of creating a more inclusive U.S. politics. bs_bs_banner Gender in the CitizenryTo consider how gender affects the opinions and participation of the citizenry, we first introduce key concepts that lay the groundwork for social role theory. As a central organizing theory, social role theory provides an explanation for how the powerful, pervasive, segregated social roles of men and women produce gender stereotypes and gendered behavior. Then, we organize the article into sections that address the main outcomes of interest we introduced above: public opinion and political participation. We conclude each section with future research.

Do voters have the same stereotypes of Black politicians that they have of Black people in general?We argue that common stereotypes of Blacks (e.g., lazy, violent) may not apply to perceptions of Black politicians. Instead, we hypothesize that Black politicians are a unique subtype of the larger group Blacks, different enough to warrant their own stereotypes. We take an inductive approach to understanding the stereotypes of Black politicians. Employing a classic psychology research design (Katz & Braly, 1933) in which respondents list traits for a target group, we find that there is little overlap of stereotype content between Black politicians and Blacks. Our results therefore indicate that Black politicians constitute a separate and unique subtype of Blacks. Our analysis explores similarities and differences between stereotypes of Black politicians and two other groups: Black professionals (another subtype of Blacks) and politicians. We discuss the implications of our findings for the relationship between stereotypes and voter decisions.

No abstract

No abstract