Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Gender and Conditional Support for Torture in the War on Terror

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2008

Donald P. Haider-Markel
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Andrea Vieux
Affiliation:
University of Kansas

Abstract

The events of September 11 have clearly changed the way that Americans think about politics and policy and may have changed attitudes about the treatment of America's perceived enemies. At the same time, revelations about American interrogation techniques in the war on terror have forced a national dialogue on human rights during a time of war. Americans do tend to oppose a variety of harsh interrogation techniques, but opposition appears to be conditioned by gender, partisanship, and the context in which an interrogation might take place. We explore how conditions shape attitudes on interrogation techniques in the war on terror, with a particular focus on gender and contextual framing. We analyze data from a unique 2004 national survey of American adults to test several hypotheses. Our results suggest that gender strongly shapes opposition to harsh interrogation techniques, but contextual framing also shapes opposition. Partisanship and contextual framing also mediate the influence of gender on attitudes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Barkan, Steven E., and Cohn, Steven F.. 2005. “Why Whites Favor Spending More Money to Fight Crime: The Role of Racial Prejudice.” Social Problems 52 (2): 300314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjereld, Ulf. 2001. “Children and the Gender Gap in Foreign Policy Issues.” Gender and Society 15 (2): 303–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, Elaine M. 1990. Women in the Middle: The Parent Care Years. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Sapiro, Virginia. 1993. “Gender, Feminist Consciousness and War.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (4): 1079–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, Francis T., Fisher, Bonnie S., and Applegate, Brandon K.. 2000. “Public Opinion about Punishment and Corrections.” Crime and Justice 27 (1): 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Darren W., and Silver, Brian D.. 2004. “Civil Liberties vs. Security: Public Opinion in the Context of the Terrorist Attacks on America.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (1): 2846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenberg, Richard. C. 2003. “Gender Differences in Public Attitudes toward the Use of Force by the United States, 1990–2003.” International Security 28 (1): 110–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischhoff, Baruch, Gonzalez, Roxana M., Small, Deborah A., and Lerner, Jennifer S.. 2003. “Judged Terror Risk and Proximity to the World Trade Center.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 26 (2–3): 137–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Greer, Edward. 2004. “‘We Don't Torture People in America: Coercive Interrogation in the Global Village.” New Political Science 26 (3): 371–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haghighi, Bahram, and Lopez, Alma. 1998. “Gender and Perception of Prisons and Prisoners.” Journal of Criminal Justice 26 (6): 453–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haider-Markel, Donald P., Joslyn, Mark, and Al-Baghal, Mohammad Tarek. 2006. “Can We Frame the Terrorist Threat? Issue Frames, the Perception of Threat, and Opinions on Counter-Terrorism Policies.” Terrorism and Political Violence 18 (4): 545–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooks, Gregory, and Mosher, Clayton. 2005. “Outrages Against Personal Dignity: Rationalizing Abuse and Torture in the War on Terror.” Social Forces 83 (4): 1627–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooyman, Nancy R., and Gonyea, Judith. 1995. Feminist Perspectives on Family Care: Policies for Gender Justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, Susan E., and Day, Christine L.. 2000. “Complexities of the Gender Gap.” The Journal of Politics 62 (3): 858–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, Jeffrey Levine, William Morgan, and Sprague, John. 1999. “Accessibility and the Political Utility of Partisan and Ideological Orientations.” American Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 888911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Feldman, Stanley, Capelos, Theresa, and Provost, Colin. 2002. “The Consequences of Terrorism: Disentangling the Effects of Personal and National Threat.” Political Psychology 23 (3): 485507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leonie, Feldman, Stanley, Taber, Charles, and Lahav, Gallya. 2005. “Threat, Anxiety, and Support of Antiterrorism Policies.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (3): 593608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurwitz, Jon, and Smithey, Shannon. 1998. “Gender Differences on Crime and Punishment.” Political Research Quarterly 51 (1): 89115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto. 1989. “How Citizens Think About National Issues: A Matter of Responsibility.” American Journal of Political Science 33 (4): 878900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto. 1990. “Framing Responsibility for Political Issues: The Case of Poverty.” Political Behavior 12 (1): 1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, Gary C. 2007. A Divider, Not a Uniter: George W. Bush and the American People. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, Karen M., and Petrocik, John R.. 1999. “The Changing Politics of American Men: Understanding the Sources of the Gender Gap.” American Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 864–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kull, Steven. 2006. American and International Opinion on the Rights of Terrorism Suspects. College Park, MD: The Program on International Policy Attitudes.Google Scholar
Lerner, Jennifer S., Gonzalez, Roxana M., Small, Deborah A., and Fischhoff, Baruch. 2003. “Effects of Fear and Anger on Perceived Risks of Terrorism: A National Field Experiment.” Psychological Science 14 (2): 144–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCoy, Alfred. 2006. A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror. New York: Metropolitan Books.Google Scholar
McCue, Clifford P., and Gopoian, J. David. 2000. “Dispositional Empathy and the Political Gender Gap.” Women & Politics 21 (2): 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nincic, Miroslav, and Nincic, Donna J.. 2002. “Race, Gender, and War.” Journal of Peace Research 39 (5): 547–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, Suzanne T., and Myles, Jessie L.. 1987. “Race and Gender Effects on Fear of Crime: An Interactive Model with Age.” Criminology 25 (1): 133–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pew Research Center, The. 2007. Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987–2007, March 22, 2007. Washington, DC: The Pew Research Center for People and the Press.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 2004. “Torture, Terrorism and Interrogation,” In Torture: A Collection, ed. Sanford Levinson. New York: Oxford University Press, 291–98.Google Scholar
Rohter, Ira S. 1969. “Social and Psychological Determinants of Radical Rightism.” In The American Right Wing: Readings in Political Behavior, ed. Schoenberger, Robert A.. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 232–58.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Robert Y., and Mahajan, Harpreet. 1986. “Gender Differences in Policy Preferences: A Summary of Trends from the 1960s to the 1980s.” Public Opinion Quarterly 50 (1): 4261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, Tania, Seymour, Ben, O'Doherty, John P.Stephan, Klaas E., Dolan, Raymond J., and Frith, Chris D.. 2006. “Empathic Neural Responses Are Modulated by the Perceived Fairness of Others.” Nature 439 (January): 466–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Tom W. 1984. “The Polls: Gender and Attitudes Toward Violence.” Public Opinion Quarterly 50 (1): 4261.Google Scholar
Stanko, Elizabeth. 1990. Everyday Violence. London: Pandora.Google Scholar
Unnever, James D., Cullen, Francis T., and Fisher, Bonnie S.. 2007. “‘A Liberal Is Someone Who Has Not Been Mugged’: Criminal Victimization and Political Beliefs.” Justice Quarterly 24 (2): 309–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warr, Mark. 1995. “Poll Trends: Public Opinion on Crime and Punishment.” Public Opinion Quarterly 59 (2): 296310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, Clyde, Hewitt, Lara, and Allsop, Dee. 1996. “The Gender Gap in Attitudes toward the Gulf War: A Cross-National Perspective.” Journal of Peace Research 33 (1): 6782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worden, Alissa Pollitz. 1993. “The Attitudes of Women and Men in Policing: Testing Conventional and Contemporary Wisdom.” Criminology 31 (2): 203–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 8
Total number of PDF views: 130 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-2rmft Total loading time: 0.593 Render date: 2021-01-21T14:24:48.878Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Gender and Conditional Support for Torture in the War on Terror
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Gender and Conditional Support for Torture in the War on Terror
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Gender and Conditional Support for Torture in the War on Terror
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *