The #MeToo movement in Japan is usually considered to have started slowly, and it remains far smaller and quieter compared with those found in the United States or South Korea. Few celebrities or high-profile figures have come forward to support the movement, and even fewer powerful men have been brought down as a result of allegations of sexual assault. The strategy of naming and shaming has rarely been used, but there is collective empowerment through empathy resulting from a nationwide grassroots movement known as “Flower Demo.” This movement has provided victims with a safe space to share their experiences. Those breaking their silence have appeared in various sectors of society, and this has raised the social consciousness of deep-rooted sexism inherent in Japanese society.

Citizens hold gender-specific stereotypes about women in political office, yet scholars disagree on whether these stereotypes lead to a “double bind” in which female legislators are held to higher standards than male legislators. Two survey experiments reveal how citizen evaluations of elite responsiveness to constituent mail are conditioned by gender and sexist attitudes. The findings suggest that a double bind does exist in legislator–constituent communication, even among people who have positive views of women. For instance, although the least sexist respondents favor communication from female legislators regardless of the quality of communication, they also punish women, but not men, for taking longer to respond to constituent mail. Male legislators are also more likely to be rewarded for being friendly as respondents’ sexism increases, but female legislators do not enjoy the same advantage, likely due to gender stereotypes and expectations regarding women's behavior.

In the rich literature on women and conflict, many scholars have assumed that the outbreak of civil war suppresses women's political involvement. However, during Syria's civil war, there was significant subnational and temporal variation in the involvement of women in the institutions established by armed groups and civilians in rebel-held areas. Why were some Syrian women able to secure a place for themselves in insurgent governance? How were they able to influence the form of local institutions to secure a role for women? Bringing together the scholarship on social movements and rebel governance, this article argues that two factors determine whether women were able to mobilize politically during conflict: the organizational capacity of women and the strength and ideology of locally active armed groups. The article leverages data on local organizations and institutions in Syria, Syrian news sources, and correspondence with several women's organizations operating in Syria in 2017. By doing so, this article strives to bring attention to the role of gender in the expanding literature on rebel governance. It also highlights the significance of armed groups’ ideologies, an aspect often dismissed in the literature in favor of a focus on material factors.

It has long been claimed in the gender and politics literature that male and female legislators have different communication styles. The evidence for this claim has come mostly from interviews with legislators as the key informants on gendered differences. We contribute to this literature in two ways: First, we empirically examine speeches by Members of Parliament to establish whether gendered differences are observable in parliamentary debates. Second, we advance existing measurement approaches by testing for multiple dimensions of communication style, providing a more systematic approach to studying gendered speech behavior. Communication style is examined through a content analysis of almost 200 speeches in three parliamentary sessions of the British House of Commons. We find compelling evidence for differences in communication style: women evidence arguments with personal experience, discuss policies in a concrete way, and are less adversarial than men. Our findings have important implications for how political communication styles might improve public engagement with politicians, offer a different focus to the discussion, and improve democratic legitimacy.

Where female representatives are located within legislatures and what they do matters for the substantive representation of women. Previous scholarship has found that female parliamentary committee members participate differently than their male counterparts in relation to both policy area and status of positions held. Here, we draw on an original time-series data set (n = 9,767) to analyze the U.K. select committee system. We test for the impact of four variables previously found to be important in explaining changes in gendered divisions of labor: the system of appointment/election, the proportion of female representatives in the legislature, sharp increases in the number of female representatives, and changes in government from right-wing parties to left-wing parties. We find that horizontal and vertical divisions of labor persist over time and that membership patterns in the United Kingdom mainly correspond to those found elsewhere. Moreover, there is little evidence that any of the four variables have systematically affected membership patterns.

Extensive research has affirmed the potential of gender quotas to advance women's political inclusion. When Kenya's gender quota took effect after a new constitution was promulgated in 2010, women were elected to the highest number of seats in the country's history. In this article, we investigate how the process of implementing the quota has shaped Kenyan women's power more broadly. Drawing on more than 80 interviews and 24 focus groups with 140 participants, we affirm and refine the literature on quotas by making two conceptual contributions: (1) quota design can inadvertently create new inequalities among women in government, and (2) women's entry into previously male-dominated spaces can be met with patriarchal backlash, amplifying gender oppression. Using the ongoing process of quota implementation in Kenya as a case to theoretically question inclusionary efforts to empower women more generally, our analysis highlights the challenges for implementing women's rights laws and policies and the need for women's rights activists to prioritize a parallel bottom-up process of transforming gendered power relations alongside top-down institutional efforts.

In October 2015, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2242 calling on member states to work toward the greater integration of the women, peace, and security (WPS) agenda with efforts to counter terrorism and violent extremism. While the rapprochement between counterterrorism and WPS may appear to be a step forward, particularly for those seeking to increase women's participation in areas traditionally dominated by men, it is also potentially dangerous. This article makes a significant contribution to the larger debate on the WPS agenda by studying the impact and unintended consequences of linking WPS with countering violent extremism on the ground in Kenya. Based on original research in the field, including key informant interviews, I argue that in the Kenyan context, connecting WPS with violent extremism has had several damaging consequences for women and their communities. Far from advancing the WPS agenda, this new policy shift has caused tension between local and international priorities, precipitated the redirection of donor funding away from important gender initiatives and toward countering violent extremism, and resulted in women's additional stigmatization, insecurity, and exclusion.

Research on state-level suffrage associations points to women's greater participation in the public sphere—higher education, the professions, and civic organizations—as a significant predictor of a state's suffrage association succeeding in securing woman suffrage prior to passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. This finding raises the question of how women gained access to those areas of public life that had formal barriers to entry—higher education and the professions. Specifically, did women's participation in civic organizations play a role in helping women gain access to these areas of the public realm? Using event history analysis, this study explores the role of the Literary Club movement and the Suffrage movement in influencing a state's policy regarding women's right to practice law. I employ the concept of institutional logics to argue that Clubwomen and Suffragists exploited contradictions in the logics of traditional gender roles and of the American political system to press for expanded opportunities for women in the public realm. Their success in these efforts, however, was influenced by their organizations’ deference to the dictates of traditional gender roles.

Under what conditions are voters likely to invoke gender-trait stereotypes and ethnic biases when they evaluate the performance of local political leaders? We test arguments from role congruity and social identity theories and employ intersectional analysis to explore voter reliance on gender-trait stereotypes and ethnic biases across four diverse Russian regions. We find that the structure of the regional economy matters for the reduction of gender-trait stereotypes, while spatial and labor market integration matters for the dissipation of ethnic favoritism in leader evaluation. Our findings have important implications for policy makers aiming to reduce political biases in diverse contexts. On the one hand, we encourage scholars to pay careful attention to stereotypes of underrepresented social groups and evaluate how they can translate into understanding the traits associated with good leadership. On the other hand, we demonstrate that the roots of social biases stem from complex structural phenomena, such as limited labor opportunities for women and minorities, and thus require transformative political and economic changes.

Countries around the world adopt different types of gender equality principles in government action plans, and these principles play a critical role in determining public policies regarding gender issues. International actors may prod countries in this direction; these actors include regional international parliaments. However, the power of regional international parliaments varies, allowing us to investigate the extent to which they have an impact on national governments’ adoption of policy frameworks for gender equality. This study analyzes the impact of regional international parliaments on governments’ gender equality policy frameworks. A three-dimension scale was developed to measure the degree to which governments have developed policy frameworks for gender equality. In multivariate modeling using a broad range of control variables, the study finds that the strength of regional international parliaments has a robust impact on governments’ policy frameworks for gender equality.

Which factors explain variation in the gendered composition of governing cabinets? To address this question, we transpose the idea of proportionality between legislative seat shares and cabinet seats shares from studies of the partisan composition of cabinets to studies of the gender composition of cabinets. Gamson's law identifies a strong association between the proportion of legislative seats a party contributes to a governing coalition and the proportion of seats the party receives in the cabinet. We attempt to gender Gamson's law. We develop a theory of why a gendered Gamson's logic should apply to cabinets in parliamentary systems. We test our intuition via analysis of a new dataset covering 18 OECD parliamentary systems from 1990 through early 2019. We find a strong relationship between the gendered distribution of seats in governing parties’ parliamentary delegations and the gendered distribution of seats in the cabinets those parties create.

American foreign policy has expanded in recent years to address issues that affect women and girls worldwide, global women's rights, yet there has been minimal investigation into how these representative claims for women worldwide are formed and the substantive U.S. commitment. Is this a reflection of a growing American feminist foreign policy or symbolic rhetoric for domestic audiences? To better understand the representation of global women's rights in American foreign policy, I analyze the political context behind three widely supported American foreign policy bills focusing on women that were introduced during the 111th Congress (2009–10). Each of these bills failed to become statute. Drawing from qualitative comparative case study analysis, I show how antiabortion politics constrain the legislative success of any American foreign policy legislation that focuses on women, regardless of relevance. This suggests that foreign women's bodies are a terrain for U.S. legislators to advance abortion policy objectives with minimal electoral constraint. Although advancing women's rights furthers broader U.S. foreign policy objectives, such as preventing terrorism and growing market economies, domestic abortion politics shape the boundaries of how global women's rights are represented in American foreign policy.

Why is the #MeToo movement very active in some countries but not in others? What factors encourage the transnational diffusion of digital feminist activism? Although transnational forces are important, we argue that domestic political opportunity structures play a more significant role than transnational influences in the country-level diffusion of #MeToo. We collected 35,211 global tweets and used Bayesian statistical modeling to test the implications of our theory. Our findings support the idea that as a country better protects its citizens’ political and civil rights and civil liberties, individuals in that country are more likely to engage in the #MeToo movement.