The contemporary feminist movement that emerged in the mid-1960s had dual origins: liberal women's rights organizations that pursued legislative and judicial reforms, and a radical movement based in numerous small local groups. Over the past 25 years, both movements have been transformed in ways that reflect and complement American federalism. In order to influence legislative policy-making that dominates on the national and state levels, women's rights groups have become professionalized interest group lobbies and have formed policy networks that pursue diverse agendas. Because urban politics are uniquely bureaucratic politics, local feminists currently act through issue-specific women's policy networks composed of advocacy groups, women-run alternative services, and urban bureaucracies responsible for funding, delivering, or regulating programs that meet the special needs of women.
References
1.
Jo Freeman , The Politics of Women's Liberation (New York: Longman, 1975).
2.
2. Freeman, Politics, p. 119.
3.
3. Anne N. Costain, “Representing Women: The Transition from Social Movement to Interest Group,” in Women, Power and Policy, ed. Ellen Boneparth and Emily Stoper (New York: Pergamon, 1988), pp. 26-47.
4.
4. Maren Lockwood Carden, Feminism in the Mid-1970s (New York: Ford Foundation, 1977), pp. 5-6.
5.
5. Verta Taylor, “The Future of Feminism: A Social Movement Analysis,” in Feminist Frontiers II, ed. Laurel Richardson and Verta Taylor (New York: Random House, 1989), p. 481.
6.
6. Alice Echols, Daring to Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America, 1967-1975 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), p. 5.
7.
7. Ibid.
8.
8. Alaine Touraine, The Voice and the Eye: An Analysis of Social Movements (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 100.
9.
9. Mary Fainsod Katzenstein, “Comparing the Feminist Movements of the United States and Western Europe: An Overview,” in The Women's Movements of the United States and Western Europe, ed. Mary Fainsod Katzenstein and Carol McClurg Mueller (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987), p. 3.
10.
10. Anne N. Costain and W. Douglas Costain, “Strategy and Tactics of the Women's Movement in the United States: The Role of Political Parties,” in ibid., p. 202.
11.
11. Lawrence D. Longley, “Interest Group Interactions in a Legislative System,”Journal of Politics, 29:637-658 (Aug. 1967).
12.
12. “Survey Results,”Women's Political Times, 10:4 (Sept.-Oct. 1985).
13.
13. Joyce Gelb and Ethel Klein, Women's Movements: Organizing for Change (Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, 1988), p. 5.
14.
14. Joyce Gelb and Marian Lief Palley, Women and Public Policies (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987), p. 26.
15.
15. Anne N. Costain and W. Douglas Costain, “The Women's Lobby: Impact of a Movement on Congress,” in Interest Group Politics, ed. Allan J. Cigler and Burdett A. Loomis (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1983), p. 198.
16.
16. Gelb and Palley, Women and Public Policies, p. 25.
17.
Kay Lehman Schlozman, “Representing Women in Washington: Sisterhood and Pressure Politics,” in ibid., pp. 339-82.
18.
18. Costain and Costain, “Women's Lobby,” p. 194.
19.
Gelb and Palley, Women and Public Policies, pp. 35-50.
20.
Keith T. Poole and L. Harmon Zeigler, Women, Public Opinion, and Politics (New York: Longman, 1985).
21.
21. Janet Saltzman Chafetz, Gender Equity: An Integrated Theory of Stability and Change (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990), p. 177.
22.
22. Quoted in David Bouchier, The Feminist Challenge (New York: Schocken, 1983), p. 180.
23.
23. See Mayer N. Zald and John D. McCarthy, “Introduction,” in Social Movements in an Organizational Society, ed. Mayer N. Zald and John D. McCarthy (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1987), p. 119.
24.
24. Scholzman, “Representing Women in Washington.”
25.
25. Costain and Costain, “Strategy and Tactics.”
26.
26. Taylor, “Future of Feminism.”
27.
27. NOW adopted a policy in 1978 that discouraged participation in coalitions. See Suzanne Staggenborg, “Coalition Work in the Pro-Choice Movement: Organizational and Environmental Opportunities and Obstacles,”Social Problems, 33:385 (June 1986).
28.
28. See Anne N. Costain, “The Struggle for a National Women's Lobby: Organizing a Diffuse Interest,”Western Political Quarterly, 33:476-491 (Dec. 1980).
29.
Taylor , “Future of Feminism,” p. 480.
30.
30. See Sarah Harder, “Flourishing in the Mainstream: The U.S. Women's Movement Today,” in The American Woman, 1990-91: A Status Report, ed. Sara E. Rix (New York: Norton, 1990), pp. 281-286.
31.
31. Based on rosters sent to NOW and NWPC members in October 1990 and July 1986, respectively.
32.
32. U.S., Department of Labor, Women's Bureau, “Commissions, Committees, and Councils on the Status of Women,” 1990.
33.
33. Rina Rosenberg, “Representing Women at the State and Local Levels: Commissions on the Status of Women,” in Women, Power and Policy, ed. Ellen Boneparth (New York: Pergamon, 1982), pp. 38-46.
34.
34. Norma Paulus, “Women Find Political Power in Unity,”Journal of State Government, 60:227-229 (Sept.-Oct. 1987).
35.
35. Susan J. Carroll and Wendy S. Strimling, Women's Routes to Elective Office (New Brunswick, NJ: Center for the American Woman and Politics, 1983), pp. 87-89.
36.
36. Harder, “Flourishing in the Mainstream,” p. 280.
37.
Jo Freeman , “A Model for Analyzing the Strategic Options of Social Movement Organizations,” in Social Movements of the Sixties and Seventies, ed. Jo Freeman (New York: Longman, 1983), p. 206.
38.
38. Kathryne Shane McCarty, Women in Municipal Government—1986 (Washington, DC: National League of Cities, 1986).
39.
U.S., Department of Labor, Women's Bureau , “Commissions.”
40.
40. See Janet K. Boles, “Catalysts and Lightning Rods: The Linkage between Women's Groups and Local Female Elected Officials” (Paper submitted to the Center for the American Woman and Politics, Rutgers University, 1990).
42. Mayer N. Zald, “The Trajectory of Social Movements in America,”Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change, 10:29 (1988).
43.
43. Anne N. Costain, “Women's Claims as a Special Interest,” in The Politics of the Gender Gap, ed. Carol M. Mueller (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988), pp. 150-172.
