A Review of Deana A. Rohlinger’s, Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America.

Double take Sociology:

Read Erin’s review of my book on Mobilizing Ideas.

Originally posted on Mobilizing Ideas:

Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America (2015) is Deana A. Rohlinger’s tour de force thus far. The book coalesces her years of research on the abortion debate, social movement organizations, and media discourse in a way that is satisfying and compelling. I was pleased to see so many of the concepts she’s used over the last 10+ years (radical flank, organizational identity vs. reputation, professionalization, branding, etc.) deployed in this book. Finally, we are able to see her extensive data (that includes content analyses of thousands of newspaper, radio, magazine, and television accounts, as well as organizational newsletters, and in-depth interviews with members of the four organizations) used in a comprehensive analysis of a movement in which Rohlinger spent well over a decade of her research career immersed.

Rohlinger

As she highlights in the introductory chapter, Rohlinger shifts the conceptual gaze away from examining the power of media…

View original 980 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

For a Limited Time Read: “What Happened to the War on Women?”

For a limited time you can read my Trends piece, “What Happened to the War on Women?,” on Contexts for Free.

I will post the link to the podcast once it is available.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Inside Trends (By Andrew Linder)

https://academics.skidmore.edu/blogs/alindner/2015/03/03/inside-trends/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Page 99 Test for Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America

Originally posted on Deana's Blog:

I took The Page 99 Test. Read it here!

View original

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Page 99 Test for Abortion Politics, Mass Media, and Social Movements in America

I took The Page 99 Test. Read it here!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Women from the waist down

In 2013, Texas senator Wendy Davis, slipped on a pair of pink sneakers and filibustered a bill regulating abortion clinics for 11 hours straight. The bill, which passed amid protests after Davis was removed from the Senate floor, prohibits abortions after 20 weeks, requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and regulates abortion clinics as ambulatory surgical centers.

Davis’ efforts drew praise and criticism across the country. Supporters of safe and legal abortion cheered her stand and continue to use the hash tags – #SupportWendyDavis and #SupportWendy – to discuss the “war on women” in Texas. Davis’ opponents called her an extremist and, playing on Davis’ good looks and blonde hair, labeled her “Abortion Barbie.”

In a surprising move Davis distanced herself from the abortion issue in her recent gubernatorial run. Her website listed education – not battling the “war on women” – as the top issue. Davis, however, was not the only Democrat who avoided the once galvanizing phrase during the most recent election cycle. Why? Did the “war on women” end?

Not exactly.

According to Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster, progressive-leaning politicians largely avoided the “war on women” in the fall because the gender politics that animated the 2012 elections failed to mobilize women in 2014.  Lake noted, the argument that “Republicans are waging a war on women actually doesn’t test very well… Women find it divisive, political – they don’t like it.”

Polling data seems to support Lake’s argument – at least on the abortion issue. The table below summarizes voters’ responses to the survey question, “Do you think the issue of abortion is a critical issue facing the country, one among many important issues, or not that important compared to other issues?” asked by the Pew Research Center in 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2013. It is clear that voter concern over legal abortion is volatile. Voters considered the abortion issue to be a more critical issue in 2011 and 2012 than they did in either 2009 or 2013.

“Do you think the issue of abortion is a critical issue facing the country, one among many important issues, or not that important compared to other issues?” From the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press/Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life Religion & Public Life Survey

2009 2011 2012 2013
A critical issue facing the country 15% 30% 31% 18%
One among many important issues 33% 28% 33% 27%
Not that important compared to other issues 48% 39% 35% 53%
Don’t know/Refused 3% 3% 2% 2%

Volatility on the abortion issue alone, however, does not explain what happened to the “war on women.” Particularly since the Republican Party used the “war on women” rhetoric in its mid-term campaign messaging.

2012 was a bad year for the Republican Party in terms of its relationship with women voters. Several Republican candidates made politically unfortunate comments about rape and abortion. Todd Akin infamously explained that women rarely become pregnant from rape because “The female body has ways to try and shut that whole thing down.” Richard Mourdock, another Republican U.S. Senate candidate, argued that pregnancy from rape was God’s will. He opined, “I think even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen.”

Republicans’ poor relationship with women voters was evident in the 2012 elections. The “gender gap,” which refers to the differences in how men and women vote, reached a new high. According to Gallup, President Obama won women’s vote by 12 percentage points while Mitt Romney won men’s vote by eight points. This 20-point gender gap is the largest Gallup has measured since it began tracking presidential voting behavior by subgroup in 1952.

In response, the Republican Party made attracting women voters a 2014 priority. Republican strategists recognized that winning women was unlikely, but narrowing the gender gap was an achievable goal. The Republican Party’s efforts to woo women changed quickly. It began as a straightforward effort to refute that a “war on women” existed – or that it existed, just in places like the  Middle East rather than in the U.S. This effort was combined with a campaign to highlight instances in which the actions of Democrats did not match their “pro-women” rhetoric.

However, Republicans realized that they could use a popular issue to combat the “war on women” rhetoric directly. The issue? Birth control. The table below summarizes voters’ responses to the survey question, “Do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that private health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female patients?” asked by the Pew Research Center in 2011, 2012, and 2014. Unlike abortion, birth control is consistently a winning political issue – and one that voters typically associated with the Democratic Party. Republican support for over-the-counter oral contraception (aka “the pill”) helped the GOP position itself as “woman friendly.”

“Do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that private health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female patients?” Pew Research Center for the People & the Press/Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

2011 2012 2014
Support 66% 66% 61%
Oppose 24% 26% 32%
Don’t Know/Refused 10% 8% 7%

Beating the drum for over-the-counter birth control has another political purpose. Republicans needed to attract women without alienating their socially conservative base, which opposes some kinds of birth control, such as intrauterine devices (IUDs). Easy access to the pill, Republicans maintain, balances religious freedom and women’s rights because it makes the pill available to women whose employers who do not want to offer contraceptives on religious grounds.

Democrats and women’s organizations were furious with the Republican Party’s rhetorical turn, calling it a cynical ploy to get votes before the November election. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told NPR, “It really is quite ironic that suddenly now the Republican Party and candidates, after voting repeatedly to take away birth control access for women, are trying to kind of do this before the November elections.” Additionally, proponents of women’s rights have pointed out that making the pill available over-the-counter does not resolve the tension between women’s rights and religious freedom. IUDs, for instance, are eligible for coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Since some religious denominations argue that life begins at fertilization, they consider IUDs abortifacients – an argument with which users of IUDs disagree.

Republicans dismiss this claim, noting that Democrats are just angry because they were caught off guard by the successful efforts to “defang” the so-called “war on women.” Kelly Anne Conway, a Republican pollster, told NPR, “They [Democrats] think that they’ve got a monopoly on talking to women from the waist down. Anything that has to do with reproduction and birth control and abortion – they call it, quote, “women’s health” and they call it women’s issues.”

So, the “war on women” has become the “war for women voters.” This shift is important because it explains why many Democrats, especially those seeking office, distanced themselves from the “war on women” rhetoric while Republicans embraced it. For the Democratic Party the “war on women” because a losing issue. The “war on women” mantra, which assumes that women have the right to control their reproductive decisions, was directly pitted against the ability of individuals (as corporate owners) to exercise their religious freedom. Choosing what or whose rights take precedence meant that the Democratic Party could only alienate some subset of voters and corporate contributors – a losing prospect, electorally speaking. The Republican Party, however, had nothing to lose and much to gain by combating a rhetorical war – even a rhetorical war that for all intent and purposes had ended.

Posted in Politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Slippery as an Old Banana: Pinning Down Explanations for Social Movement Emergence an Momentum

Originally posted on Mobilizing Ideas:

By Deana Rohlinger

Rohlinger1Rohlinger2Rohlinger3

Doron Shultziner’s article, “The Social-Psychological Origins of the Montgomery Bus Boycott,” provides an important reminder that relational dynamics matter. Whether studying a particular movement or a campaign rolled out in a specific community, we learn a lot about the emergence and course of social movements by studying the perspectives of different kinds of players, who also have a direct or indirect stake in the political game.

Some students of social movements may not find this welcome news. Studying interactions among groups of actors is messy work.

View original 946 more words

Posted in American Experiences, Politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment