The Political Consequences of Motherhood

Chapter 4. Distinctions: Political Perspectives of Mothers and Nonmothers

119 Chapter four Distinctions: Political Perspectives of Mothers and Nonmothers I think our political perspectives are colored by who we are. I don’t think anyone can be a parent and not have that impact them or become a huge part of who they’ve become. —angela, massaChusetts Chapters 2 and 3 demonstrated that throughout the past nine decades, candidates frequently used motherhood as a way to frame political appeals to voters—primarily female voters. While candidates spoke of the virtues of mothers and their needs and fears, some also spoke in more concrete terms about policies believed to be important to mothers. From concerns over war to demands for child care, presidential candidates spoke to women about policy issues connected to motherhood and mothering responsibilities. Did they do this because mothers actually differ from women without children? This chapter and the subsequent chapter move past the assumptions of political actors, and explore whether motherhood shapes the positions women take on public-policy issues. While previous scholarship has offered some evidence that motherhood does produce differences among women, these investigations have been limited in the scope of political attitudes under investigation as well as the time frame examined (Howell and Day 2000; Eagly et al. 2004; Elder and Greene 2006; 2011; 2012). Here I offer a more expansive exploration of how motherhood colors women’s political perspectives using data from the American National Election Study (ANES). In this chapter, I show that mothers have distinct attitudes from women without children, and that these distinctions emerge in political contexts that highlight the mothering role. 120 the politiCal ConsequenCes of motherhood sourCes of differenCe between mothers and nonmothers One of the primary ways in which motherhood can shape women’s political views is through the direction of their attitudes.1 These distinctions between mothers and nonmothers can emerge in two ways. First, self-selection into one group can correlate with other factors that shape political attitudes. In other words, attitudinal differences between mothers and nonmothers may not be due to the dynamics of motherhood itself, but rather due to the characteristics of the individuals who choose to enter motherhood.2 Selfselection then implies a societal “sorting” of women into one group or another such that differences between groups emerge. Second, distinctions between mothers and nonmothers may emerge because of changes produced by motherhood itself. Motherhood may alter women’s self-interest, leading them to support policies that are likely to benefit their children or families, and oppose those that they can clearly identify as being harmful. Alternately, when women become mothers, they may also become responsive to social norms surrounding this role, and their political attitudes may reflect that adaptation. While all women may be shaped politically by diffuse gender roles that promote societal expectations that women are more nurturing and family oriented than men, women who adopt the specific role of mother may be further marked by societal expectations (see Diekman and Schneider 2010). Thus, social role theory may help to explain differences between the political stances of mothers and nonmothers. To better understand if motherhood maps onto divisions in political attitudes among women, I examine different political attitudes across several years. I consider the isolated effects of motherhood by controlling for variables such as marital status, religiosity, education, political leanings (including partisan identification and ideological orientation), and age. This is a first cut at the problem of trying to evaluate whether motherhood differences are a result of more than selection processes. Later, I explore whether becoming and being a mother actually drives change in women’s political attitudes. attitudes on publiC poliCy I primarily focus on matters of public policy. (See the appendix for question wording.) There are several reasons for this. First, stances on public-policy Distinctions 121 issues are often less deeply rooted than other political attitudes such as partisan identification and ideological orientation, and therefore are more likely to change in response to experiences, events, communications, and information. As a result, attitudes on public-policy issues should be more susceptible to shifts than other attitudes, and the parenting role and the myriad changes that accompany it, should be seen more clearly. Second, many public-policy issues have direct implications for children. Unlike political orientations and civic orientations, public policies often have an explicit connection to children, focusing on their well-being or needs. Funding for child care and public schools are just two examples of...