Allegations of sexual assault and violence engulfed the confirmation hearings surrounding President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee (and now Justice) Brett Kavanaugh. Our work examines congressmembers’ communication concerning sexual assault and #MeToo during this critical time of the Kavanaugh hearing and how this relates to perceptions of gender and partisanship today. While previous research demonstrated a strong role of gender in influencing which members discussed #MeToo, we show that partisanship played a much larger role in discussions of sexual assault during this hearing. The findings highlight the shifting narrative surrounding the #MeToo movement and how the multiple identities of members of Congress, namely partisanship and gender, can be activated and produce changes in how elites communicate about the issue, which may have broader policymaking implications.
BaileyMichaelBradyDavid W.1998. “Heterogeneity and Representation: The Senate and Free Trade.” American Journal of Political Science42:524–44.
4.
BankertAlexaHuddyLeonieRosemaMartin. 2017. “Measuring Partisanship as a Social Identity in Multi-Party Systems.” Political Behavior39:103–32.
5.
BarnesTiffany D.BeaulieuEmilySaxtonGregory W.2020. “Sex and Corruption: How Sexism Shapes Voters’ Responses to Scandal.” Politics, Groups, and Identities8:103–21.
6.
BasingerScottMakMaxwell. 2012. “The Changing Politics of Supreme Court Confirmations.” American Politics Research40:737–63.
7.
BauerNichole M.2017. “The Effects of Counterstereotypic Gender Strategies on Candidate Evaluations.” Political Psychology38:279–95.
8.
BurnsNancyJardinaAshley E.KinderDonaldReynoldsMolly E.2015. “The Politics of Gender.” In New Directions in Public Opinion, edited by BerinskyAdam, 124–45. New York: Taylor & Francis.
9.
CarminesEdward G.StimsonJames. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
10.
CasseseErin C.2020. “Straying from the Flock? A Look at How Americans’ Gender and Religious Identities Cross-Pressure Partisanship.” Political Research Quarterly73:169–83.
11.
CasseseErin C.BarnesTiffany D.2019. “Reconciling Sexism and Women’s Support for Republican Candidates: A Look at Gender, Class, and Whiteness in the 2012 and 2016 Presidential Races.” Political Behavior41 (3): 677–700.
12.
CasseseErin C.HolmanMirya R.2016. “Religious Beliefs, Gender Consciousness, and Women’s Political Participation.” Sex Roles75 (9–10): 514–27.
13.
CasseseErin C.HolmanMirya R.2019. “Playing the Woman Card: Ambivalent Sexism in the 2016 US Presidential Race.” Political Psychology40 (1): 55–74.
14.
ClarkJennifer HayesEvansHeather K.2020. “Let’s Talk About Sex: Examining the Factors Influencing Congressional Response to #MeToo on Twitter.” PS: Political Science and Politics53 (1): 51–56.
15.
DavidsonRoger H.OleszekWalter J.LeeFrances E.ShicklerEric. 2016. Congress and Its Members. Los Angeles: SAGE.
16.
DeSouzaEros R.SolbergJoseph J.2004. “The Potential Impact of Cultural Differences on the Enforcement of Sexual Harassment Laws.” Journal of Law and Business11:55.
17.
DruckmanJames N.PetersonErikSlothuusRune. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review107:57–79.
FordCarol A.DonnisFrancisco J.1996. “The Relationship between Age and Gender in Workers’ Attitudes towards Sexual Harassment.” The Journal of Psychology130 (6): 627–33.
20.
FrederickBrian. 2009. “Are Female House Members Still More Liberal in a Polarized Era? The Conditional Nature of the Relationship between Descriptive and Substantive Representation.” Congress & the Presidency36:181–202.
21.
FreemanJo. 1993. “Feminism and Family Values: Women at the 1992 Democratic and Republican Conventions.” PS: Political Science and Politics26 (1): 21–28.
22.
GaertnerSamuel L.DovidioJohn F.AnastasioPhyllis A.BachmanBetty A.RustMary C.1993. “The Common Ingroup Identity Model: Recategorization and the Reduction of Intergroup Bias.” European Review of Social Psychology4:1–26.
23.
GainousJasonWagnerKevin M.2013. Tweeting to Power: The Social Media Revolution in American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
GlassmanMatthew EricStrausJacob R.ShoganColleen J.2010. “Social Networking and Constituent Communications: Member Use of Twitter during a Two-Month Period in the 111th Congress.” CRS Report R41066. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41066.pdf.
25.
GreenDonald P.PalmquistBradleySchicklerEric. 2004. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
26.
GreeneSteven. 1999. Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology20 (2): 393–403.
27.
GreeneSteven. 2004. “Social Identity Theory and Party Identification.” Social Science Quarterly85 (1): 136–53.
28.
HarbridgeLaurel. 2015. Is Bipartisanship Dead? Policy Agreement and Agenda-Setting in the House of Representatives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Harbridge-YongLaurel. 2020. “The Challenges of Party Conflict for Lawmaking in Congress.” In New Directions in Congressional Politics, edited by CarsonJamie L.LynchMichael S., 325–339. New York: Routledge.
30.
HuddyLeonieMasonLillianaAaroeLene. 2010. “Measuring Partisanship as a Social Identity, Predicting Political Activism.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Political Psychology, San Francisco, January.
31.
IyengarShantoSoodGauravLelkesYphtach. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly76:405–31.
32.
JonesDavid R.2001. “Party Polarization and Legislative Gridlock.” Political Research Quarterly54 (1): 125–41.
33.
KlarSamara. 2018. “When Common Identities Decrease Trust: An Experimental Study of Partisan Women.” American Journal of Political Science62 (3): 610–22.
34.
KonradAlison M.GutekBarbara B.1986. “Impact of Work Experiences on Attitudes towards Sexual Harassment.” Administrative Science Quarterly31 (3): 422–38.
35.
LeeFrancis. 2009. Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principles and Partisanship in the U.S. Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
MasonLilliana. 2014. “I Disrespectfully Agree: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science59 (1): 128–45.
PearsonKathrynDanceyLogan. 2011. “Elevating Women’s Voices in Congress: Speech Participation in the House of Representatives.” Political Research Quarterly64:910–23.
39.
RegerJo. 2002. “Organizational Dynamics and Construction of Multiple Feminist Identities in the National Organization for Women.” Gender and Society16 (5): 710–27.
RussellAnnelise. 2018. “U.S. Senators on Twitter: Asymmetric Party Rhetoric in 140 Characters.” American Politics Research46:695–723.
42.
RussellAnnelise. 2020. “Minority Opposition and Asymmetric Parties? Senators’ Partisan Rhetoric on Twitter.” Political Research Quarterly. Published electronically June. doi:10.1177/1065912920921239.
SwersMichele L.2002. The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45.
SwersMichele L.LarsonCarin. 2005. “Women and Congress: Do They Act as Advocates for Women’s Issues?” In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, edited by ThomasSueWilcoxClyde, 110–28. New York: Oxford University Press.
46.
TajfelHenriBilligM. G.BundyR. P.FlamentClaude. 1971. “Social Categorization and Intergroup Behavior.” European Journal of Social Psychology1 (2): 149–78.
47.
TajfelHenriTurnerJohn C.1979. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by AustinWilliam G.WorchelStephen, 33–47. Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
48.
TaylorVerta. 1996. Rock-a-by Baby: Feminism, Self-Help, and Postpartum Depression. New York: Routledge.
49.
TheriaultSean M.2008. Party Polarization in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
50.
TheriaultSean M.2013. The Gingrich Senators: The Roots of Partisan Warfare in Congress. New York: Oxford University Press.
51.
ThomasSue. 1991. “The Impact of Women on State Legislative Policies.” The Journal of Politics53:958–76.
52.
ThomsenDanielle. 2015. “Why So Few (Republican) Women? Explaining the Partisan Imbalance of Women in the U.S. Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly40:295–323.
53.
WeberKyle P.BauerLisa M.MartinezTomas E.2012. “The Influence of Sex, Gender, and Dress Style on Attitudes towards Sexual Harassment.” Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research17 (3): 106–14.
54.
WineingerCatherine. 2018. “Gendering Republican Party Culture.” In The Right Women: Republican Party Activists, Candidates, and Legislators, edited by OchMalligaShamesShauna L., 25–49. Colorado: Praeger.
