Beyond compare? Women's movements in comparative perspective

Abstract

This article reviews a selected range of comparative political research on women's movements, a subfield of political science whose recent proliferation now positions it at the leading edge of women and politics scholarship. Recognizing that "women" as a category of research is of necessity heterogeneous and informed by differences of race, class, ethnicity, nationality, generation, and religion, the article argues that this complex intersectionality need not mean that women's movements are beyond the scope of comparative political research. Rather, as the research focus of women and politics scholars has become increasingly carefully specified, general patterns are evident in the research that should serve to advance the comparative study of women's movements and comparative political research more generally. The article focuses on definitional challenges and the limitations of conflating "women's movements", "feminist movements", and "women in social movements", and discusses four major research arenas within which cross-national commonalities among women's movements are evidenced. These include the relationship between women's movements and political parties; "double militancy" as a potentially distinctive collective identity problem for women's movement activists; the extent to which political opportunities for women's movements are (or can be) gendered; and the relationship between women's movements and the state. The article concludes with suggestions for future research in the subfields of comparative women's movements and comparative politics.

The Civic Origins of Progressive Policy Change: Combating Violence against Women in Global Perspective, 1975–2005

“…Democratic theorists argue that social movements are critical for advancing inclusion and democracy (Costain 2005;Dryzek 1990;Dryzek et al 2003;Young 1990;2000). Yet our standard cross-national datasets for the study of social policy include few indicators of this type of political phenomenon.…”

State Feminism and Women's Movements

“…They neither included women in positions of power nor routinely incorporated gender perspectives in the policy process. Her observations are supported by feminist analysts in Europe and North America who show that the absence of women in positions of power may explain the extent to which public policies in many post-industrial democracies are gender biased and therefore discriminate against women (Haavio-Mannila et al 1985;Lovenduski 1986;Bergqvist et al 1999;Beckwith 2000). Phillips' arguments support her claim for presence in arenas of decision-making, arguing that women need women to represent them in decision-making, otherwise decisions will not reflect their interests and concerns.…”

Women's Political Parties in Europe

“…This does not, however, 2. For a discussion of the politics of presence, see Mansbridge 1999;Phillips 1995. render them beyond our ability to find common patterns and generate knowledge of use in social movement theory and feminist research (see Beckwith 2000). Women's parties may represent and mobilize women in markedly disparate ways and place very different kinds of demands on political systems, but they share a common agenda to advance the interests of women in politics.…”