Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Contents -- A Note on German Government Documents -- Acknowledgments -- List of Illustrations -- Introduction - Louise K. Davidson-Schmich -- 1. Throwing the Boomerang: Intersex Mobilization and Policy Change in Germany - Angelika von Wahl -- 2. Disabled Women Fighting for Equality - Lisa Pfahl and Swantje Köbsell -- 3. The Last Occupational Prohibition: Constructing Women's Entrance into the Bundeswehr - Christina Xydias -- 4. Migrant Women and Immigrant Integration Policy - Barbara Donovan -- 5. Gendering the Controversy over Education Policy Reform in Hamburg, Germany - Jeff Bale -- 6. Gendering the German Minimum Wage Debate: A Male Frame for a Female Problem - Annette Henninger -- 7. Amending Germany's Life Partnership Law: Emerging Attention to Lesbians' Concerns - Louise K. Davidson-Schmich -- 8. Grassroots Organizing in Eastern Germany to Promote Women in STEM - Katja M. Guenther -- Conclusion: Power, Institutions, and Intersectional Research in Germany and Beyond - Louise K. Davidson-Schmich -- Contributors -- Index.

Germany serves as a case study of when and how members of intersectional groups—individuals belonging to two or more disadvantaged social categories—capture the attention of policymakers, and what happens when they do. This edited volume identifies three venues through which intersectional groups are able to form alliances and generate policy discussions of their concerns. Original empirical case studies focus on a wide range of timely subjects, including the intersexed, gender and disability rights, lesbian parenting, women working in STEM fields, workers' rights in feminized sectors, women in combat, and Muslim women and girls

In this article I document the main German parties' 2021 election platforms regarding gender and sexuality. These manifestos contained considerably different portrayals of gendered inequalities in the Federal Republic, preferred diverse roles for the state in ameliorating gendered inequalities, and called for state action in distinct spheres. Parties also generally viewed "women" and "lgbti" people as homogeneous entities rather than intersectional groups. I conclude by discussing how the differences among the Social Democrats, Greens, and Free Democrats were reconciled in the 2021 coalition agreement. The "traffic light" proposals for achieving gender equality differ starkly from the platforms of the Christian Democrats and the Alternative for Germany.

One hundred years after being granted the right to active suffrage, German women remain underrepresented in elective office. Quotas have partially addressed demand-side barriers to gender parity in descriptive representation, but significant supply-side gaps remain. Men comprise over 70% of political party members in the Federal Republic, dominating the bodies that provide candidates for elective office. Solutions to this supply-side problem have often focused on "fixing" women to fit into gendered party institutions, rather than altering these structures to be more welcoming to women. In contrast, drawing on interviews with (potential) party members in Germany, this article identifies informal institutions that deter gender-balanced involvement in political parties and suggests ways in which these norms might be changed.

This article examines the 2017 German national election through
the lens of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) interests. It
depicts the ways in which sexual minorities articulated their policy preferences,
the degree to which these positions were taken up in party platforms
and electoral discourse, and the extent to which the resulting coalition agreement
pledged to address queer citizens' concerns. I argue that, as a result of
what Sarah Childs and Mona Lena Krook call a critical actor, this election
provided sexual minorities with a high degree of responsiveness on one core
issue: marriage equality. Other issues of interest to LGBTI voters, however,
remained largely invisible. The conclusions here are based on analysis of primary
documents including interest group statements, party platforms, and
coalition agreements, as well as on German-language news coverage of the
election campaign.

One hundred years after being granted the right to active suffrage, German women remain underrepresented in elective office. Quotas have partially addressed demand-side barriers to gender parity in descriptive representation, but significant supply-side gaps remain. Men comprise over 70% of political party members in the Federal Republic, dominating the bodies that provide candidates for elective office. Solutions to this supply-side problem have often focused on "fixing" women to fit into gendered party institutions, rather than altering these structures to be more welcoming to women. In contrast, drawing on interviews with (potential) party members in Germany, this article identifies informal institutions that deter gender-balanced involvement in political parties and suggests ways in which these norms might be changed.

Germany serves as a case study of when and how members of intersectional groups—individuals belonging to two or more disadvantaged social categories—capture the attention of policymakers, and what happens when they do. This edited volume identifies three venues through which intersectional groups are able to form alliances and generate policy discussions regarding their concerns. Original empirical case studies focus on a wide range of timely subjects, including the intersexed, gender and disability rights, lesbian parenting, women working in STEM fields, workers' rights in feminized sectors, women in combat, and Muslim women and girls.

Since the adoption of candidate gender quotas, women have always fared better in the "second" or PR tier of Bundestag elections than in the "first" or plurality tier, where quotas do not apply. This gap, however, has been closing. In the 2009 Bundestag election, 27 percent of the major parties' direct mandate candidates were women compared to almost 30 percent in 2013. All parties experienced an increase in the percentage of women among their nominees for direct mandates between 2009 and 2013. Why have the numbers of female candidates for the 299 directly elected Bundestag constituencies been increasing? This increase is puzzling because gender quotas have not been extended to this tier of the electoral system and candidate selection rules have not changed. This article explores five potential mechanisms that may be driving the observed rise in women nominated as constituency candidates. I argue that the main reasons for these increases lie in the advantages female incumbents incur, the openings presented when male incumbents retire, and the diffusion of female candidates across parties and neighboring Wahlkreise after one woman manages to win a direct mandate. I develop these conclusions by comparing candidate nominations and direct mandate winners in the 2009 and 2013 Bundestag elections.