Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:24:14.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Toward a Theory of Backlash: Dynamic Resistance and the Central Role of Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2008

Jane Mansbridge
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Shauna L. Shames
Affiliation:
Harvard University

Extract

To understand backlash theoretically, we must first carve out an analytically useful term from the cluster of its common political associations. In colloquial usage, “backlash” denotes politically conservative reactions to progressive (or liberal) social or political change (Faludi 1991 is a classic in this vein). Here, however, we attempt a nonideological definition of backlash embedded in a more neutral approach to its study. In colloquial usage, backlash includes acts of genuine persuasion as well as of power. Here, however, we suggest that it may be analytically helpful to confine its meaning to acts of coercive power. We draw on the sociological literature on social movements and countermovements, as well as the political science literature on power, preferences, and interests. We focus mostly on examples drawn from the United States and relating to feminism and gender. We begin where the process of backlash itself begins, with power and a challenge to the status quo.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alinsky, Saul. 1972. Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter, and Baratz, Morton. 1963. “Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework.” American Political Science Review 57(3w): 632–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. [1789] 1961. Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Garden City, NY: Doubleday/Dolphin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faludi, Susan. 1991. Backlash: The Invisible War Against America's Women. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
Ferree, Myra Marx. 2004. “Soft Repression: Ridicule, Stigma, and Silencing in Gender-Based Movements.” In Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, ed. Myers, Daniel J. and Cress, Daniel M.. San Diego: Elsevier, vol. 25, 85101.Google Scholar
Houvouras, Shannon, and Scott Carter, J.. 2008. “The F-Word: College Students' Definitions of a Feminist.” Sociological Forum 23(2): 234–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Neely, Francis K., and Lafay, Marilyn R.. 2000. “Trends: Support for the Women's Movement.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64(3): 309–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica 47(2): 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Jack, and Johnson, James. 1997. “What Sort of Equality Does Deliberative Democracy Require?” In Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, ed. Bohman, James and Rehg, William. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 279320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraditor, Aileen. 1965. The Ideas of the Woman Suffrage Movement. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1963. The First New Nation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Raab, Earl. 1978. The Politics of Unreason: Right-Wing Extremism in America, 1790–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lukes, Steven. 1974. Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillian.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1986. Why We Lost the ERA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Jack H. l975. The Descriptive Analysis of Power. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, Diane. Forthcoming. “Sexual Coercion, Patriarchal Violence and Law.” In Evolutionary Perspectives on Sexual Coercion, ed. Wrangham, Richard and Muller, Martin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Shames, Shauna. 2001. “The Un-Candidates: Gender and Outsider Signals in Women's Political Advertising, 1968–1998.” Unpublished senior thesis. Harvard College.Google Scholar
Siegel, Reva B. 2006. “Constitutional Culture, Social Movement Conflict and Constitutional Change: The Case of the de facto ERA.” California Law Review 94(5): 13231419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar