Although a voluminous literature has studied the substantive representation of women, these studies have largely been confined to advanced democracies. Similarly, studies that focus on the relationship between Islam and women’s rights largely ignored the substantive representation of women in Muslim-majority countries. As one of the first studies of its kind, this article investigates the role of religion in the substantive representation of women by focusing on a Muslim-majority country: Turkey. Using a novel data set of 4,700 content coded private members’ bills (PMBs) drafted in the Turkish parliament between 2002 and 2015, this article synthesizes competing explanations of women’s representation in the Middle East and rigorously tests the implications of religion, ideology, critical mass, and labor force participation accounts. The results have significant implications for the study of gender and politics in Muslim-majority countries.
Abu-ZaydG.1998. “In Search of Political Power: Women in Parliament in Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon.” In Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers, edited by KaramAzza, 43–54. Stockholm: IDEA.
2.
AksoyH. A.2015. “Invigorating Democracy in Turkey: The Agency of Organized Islamist Women.” Politics & Gender11 (1): 146–70.
3.
AlexanderA. C.WelzelC.2011. “Islam and Patriarchy: How Robust Is Muslim Support for Patriarchal Values?” International Review of Sociology21 (2): 249–76.
4.
AndersenK.1975. “Working Women and Political Partici-pation, 1952–1972.” American Journal of Political Science10:439–55.
5.
AndersenK.CookE.1985. “Women, Work, and Political Attitudes.” American Journal of Political Science29:606–25.
6.
AratY.2005. Rethinking Islam and Liberal Democracy: Islamist Women in Turkish Politics. New York: SUNY Press.
7.
AtkinsonM. L.2020. “Gender and Policy Agendas in the Post-war House.” Policy Studies Journal48:133–56. doi:10.1111/psj.12237.
8.
AyataA. G.TütüncüF.2008. “Critical Acts without a Critical Mass: The Substantive Representation of Women in the Turkish Parliament.” Parliamentary Affairs61 (3): 461–75.
9.
BäckH.DebusM.2019. “When Do Women Speak? A Comparative Analysis of the Role of Gender in Legislative Debates.” Political Studies67 (3): 576–96.
10.
BäckH.DebusM.MüllerJ.2014. “Who Takes the Parliamentary Floor? The Role of Gender in Speech-Making in the Swedish Riksdag.” Political Research Quarterly67 (3): 504–518.
11.
BektasE.Issever-EkinciE.2018. “Who Represents Women in Turkey? An Analysis of Gender Difference in Private Bill Sponsorship in the 2011–15 Turkish Parliament.” Politics & Gender15: 851–81.
12.
BensteadL. J.2016. “Why Quotas Are Needed to Improve Women’s Access to Services in Clientelistic Regimes.” Governance29 (2): 185–205.
13.
BensteadL. J.JamalA. A.LustE.2015. “Is It Gender, Religiosity or Both? A Role Congruity Theory of Candidate Electability in Transitional Tunisia.” Perspectives on Politics13 (1): 74–94.
BulutA. T.2017. “Measuring Political Agenda Setting and Representation in Turkey: Introducing a New Approach and Data Set.” Party Politics23 (6): 717–30.
16.
BulutA. T.İlterE.2020. “Understanding Legislative Speech in the Turkish Parliament: Reconsidering the Electoral Connection under Proportional Representation.” Parliamentary Affairs73 (1): 147–65.
17.
BulutA. T.YildirimT. M.2019. “The Turkish Policy Agendas Project.” In Comparative Policy Agendas: Theory, Tools, Data, edited by BaumgartnerF. R.BreunigC.GrossmanE., 167–75. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
BulutA. T.YildirimT. M.2020. Political Stability, Democracy and Agenda Dynamics in Turkey. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
19.
BushS. S.GaoE.2017. “Small Tribes, Big Gains: The Strategic Uses of Gender Quotas in the Middle East.” Comparative Politics49 (2): 149–67.
20.
CelisK.2008. “Studying Women’s Substantive Representation in Legislatures: When Representative Acts, Contexts and Women’s Interests Become Important.” Representation44 (2): 111–23.
21.
CelisK.ChildsS.2008. “Introduction: The Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Women: New Directions.” Parliamentary Affairs61 (3): 419–25.
CelisK.ErzeelS.2015. “Beyond the Usual Suspects: Non-left, Male and Non-feminist MPs and the Substantive Representation of Women.” Government and Opposition50 (1): 45–64.
25.
ChafetzJ. S.1990. Gender Equity: An Integrated Theory of Stability and Change. Newbury Park: SAGE.
26.
ChhibberP.2002. “Why Are Some Women Politically Active? The Household, Public Space, and Political Participation in India.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology43 (3–5): 409–29.
27.
ChildsS.2004. New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Repre-senting Women. London: Routledge.
28.
ChildsS.KrookM. L.2009. “Analysing Women’s Substantive Representation: From Critical Mass to Critical Actors.” Government and Opposition44 (2): 125–45.
CoşarS.YeğenoğluM.2011. “New Grounds for Patriarchy in Turkey? Gender Policy in the Age of AKP.” South European Society and Politics16 (4): 555–73.
33.
DahlerupD.1988. “From a Small to a Large Minority: Women in Scandinavian Politics.” Scandinavian Political Studies11 (4): 275–97.
34.
DodsonD.2006. The Impact of Women in Congress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
DonnoD.RussettB.2004. “Islam, Authoritarianism, and Female Empowerment: What Are the Linkages?” World Politics56 (4): 582–607.
36.
EcevitY. A.KocapınarG.2018. “Do Party Lists Matter? Political Party Strategies in Legislative Candidate Nominations.” Parliamentary Affairs, 71 (3): 697–716.
37.
GerrityJ. C.OsbornT.MendezJ. M.2007. “Women and Representation: A Different View of the District?” Politics & Gender3 (2): 179–200.
38.
GidengilE.KarakoçE.2016. “Which Matters More in the Electoral Success of Islamist (Successor) Parties—Religion or Performance? The Turkish Case.” Party Politics22 (3): 325–38.
39.
Güneş-AyataA.DoğangünG.2017. “Gender Politics of the AKP: Restoration of a Religio-conservative Gender Climate.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies19 (6): 610–27.
40.
HuntingtonS.1993. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs72 (3): 22–49.
InglehartR.NorrisP.2003a. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
InglehartR.NorrisP.2003b. “The True Clash of Civilizations.” Foreign Policy, November4, 63–70.
44.
IversenT.RosenbluthF.2006. “The Political Economy of Gender: Explaining Cross-national Variation in the Gender Division of Labor and the Gender Voting Gap.” American Journal of Political Science50 (1): 1–28.
45.
IversenT.RosenbluthF.2008. “Work and Power: The Connection between Female Labor Force Participation and Female Political Representation.” Annual Review of Political Science11:479–95.
46.
JosephS.2000. “Civil Myths, Citizenship, and Gender in Lebanon.” In Gender and Citizenship in the Middle East, edited by JosephSuad, 107–36. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
KangA. J.2015. Bargaining for Women’s Rights: Activism in an Aspiring Muslim Democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
49.
KanterR. M.1977a. “Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life.” American Journal of Sociology82 (5): 965–90.
50.
KanterR. M.1977b. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.
51.
KenworthyL.MalamiM.1999. “Gender Inequality in Political Representation: A Worldwide Comparative Study.” Social Forces78 (1): 235–69.
52.
KorkmanZ. K.2016. “Politics of Intimacy in Turkey: A Distraction from “Real” Politics?.” Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies12 (1): 112–121.
53.
KoyuncuB.ÖzmanA.2019. “Women’s Rights Organizations and Turkish State in the Post-2011 Era: Ideological Disengagement Versus Conservative Alignment. Turkish Studies20 (5): 728–753.
54.
LewisBernard. 1990. “The Roots of Muslim Rage.” The Atlantic Monthly266 (3): 47–60.
55.
LowandeK.RitchieM.LauterbachE.2019. “Descriptive and Substantive Representation in Congress: Evidence from 80,000 Congressional Inquiries.” American Journal of Political Science63 (3): 644–59.
56.
MackayF.2008. “‘Thick’ Conceptions of Substantive Representation: Women, Gender and Political Institutions.” Representation44 (2): 125–39.
57.
MansbridgeJ.1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes.” Journal of Politics61 (3): 628–57.
58.
MarschallM.AydoganA.BulutA.2016. “Does Housing Create Votes? Explaining the Electoral Success of the AKP in Turkey.” Electoral Studies42:201–12.
59.
MeserveS.PemsteinD.BernhardW.2020. “Gender, Incumbency and Party List Nominations.” British Journal of Political Science50 (1): 1–15.
60.
MeyerssonE.2014. “Islamic Rule and the Empowerment of the Poor and Pious.” Econometrica82 (1): 229–69.
RossM. L.2008. “Oil, Islam, and Women.” American Political Science Review102 (1): 107–23.
70.
RowleyC.SmithN.2009. “Islam’s Democracy Paradox: Muslims Claim to Like Democracy, so Why Do They Have so Little?” Public Choice139 (3): 273–99.
71.
ShalabyM.2016. “Deconstructing Women’s Empowerment in the Middle East and North Africa.” In Empowering Women after the Arab Spring, edited by ShalabyMarwaMoghadamValentina, 171–91. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
72.
ShalabyM.2018. “Women’s Representation in the Middle East and North Africa.” In MaiselL.S. (Ed.) Oxford Bibliographies in Political Science, edited by MaiselL.S., 1–4. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
73.
StudlarD. T.McAllisterI.2002. “Does a Critical Mass Exist? A Comparative Analysis of Women’s Legislative Representation Since 1950.” European Journal of Political Research41 (2): 233–53.
74.
SwersM.2007. “Building a Reputation on National Security: The Impact of Stereotypes Related to Gender and Military Experience.” Legislative Studies Quarterly32 (4): 559–95.
75.
The Economist. 2003. “The Law of Man or the Law of God?” September11, 229.
76.
TohidiN.BayesJ. H.2001. “Women Redefining Modernity and Religion in the Globalized Context.” In Globalization, Gender, and Religion, edited by BayesJ.TohidiN., 17–60. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
77.
Ugur-CinarM.2017. “Embedded Neopatrimonialism: Patri-archy and Democracy in Turkey.” Social Politics: Inter-national Studies in Gender, State & Society24 (3): 324–43.
VerbaS.BurnsN.SchlozmanK. L.1997. “Knowing and Caring about Politics: Gender and Political Engagement.” Journal of Politics59:1051–72.
80.
WeberMax. (1922) 1978. “Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Translated from German by FischoffEphraim, et al. Edited by RothGuentherWittichClaus. Berkeley: University of California Press.
YildirimT. M.2020. “Gender and Agenda Diversity: Cognitive Differences in Representatives’ Information Processing.” Policy Studies Journal48 (2): 327–41.
83.
YildirimT. M.KocapınarG.EcevitY. A.2019a. “Status Incongruity Backlash against Female Legislators: How Legislative Speechmaking Benefits Men but Harms Women.” Political Research Quarterly. Published electronically July 18. doi:10.1177/1065912919861443.
84.
YildirimT. M.KocapınarG.EcevitY. A.2019b. “Staying Active and Focused? The Effect of Parliamentary Performance on Candidate Renomination and Promotion.” Party Politics25 (6): 794–804.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
