Andrew J. Oswald and Nattavudh Powdthavee write:
In remarkable research, the sociologist Rebecca Warner and the economist Ebonya Washington have shown that the gender of a person's children seems to influence the attitudes and actions of the parent.
Warner (1991) and Warner and Steel (1999) study American and Canadian mothers and fathers. The authors' key finding is that support for policies designed to address gender equity is greater among parents with daughters. This result emerges particularly strongly for fathers. Because parents invest a significant amount of themselves in their children, the authors argue, the anticipated and actual struggles that offspring face, and the public policies that tackle those, matter to those parents. . . The authors demonstrate that people who parent only daughters are more likely to hold feminist views (for example, to favor affirmative action).
By collecting data on the voting records of US congressmen, Washington (2004) is able to go beyond this. She provides persuasive evidence that congressmen with female children tend to vote liberally on reproductive rights issues such as teen access to contraceptives. In a revision, Washington (2008) argues for a wider result, namely, that the congressmen vote more liberally on a range of issues such as working families flexibility and tax-free education.
Our [Oswald and Powdthavee's] aim in this paper is to argue, with nationally representative random samples of men and women, that these results generalize to voting for entire political parties. We document evidence that having daughters leads people to be more sympathetic to left-wing parties. Giving birth to sons, by contrast, seems to make people more likely to vote for a right-wing party. Our data, which are primarily from Great Britain, are longitudinal. We also report corroborative results for a German panel. Access to longitudinal information gives us the opportunity -- one denied to previous researchers -- to observe people both before and after they have a new child of any particular gender. We can thereby test for political 'switching'. Although
panel data cannot resolve every difficulty of establishing cause-and-effect relationships, they allow sharper testing than can simple cross-section data.
They addressed the concerns about the research I'd expressed earlier.
Just one thing . . .
I have only one request, and I know it's too late because the article is already scheduled to appear in a journal, but I'll ask anyway. The article has lots of graphs and lots of tables--and I'll spare you my detailed thoughts on these, because, again, it's already scheduled to appear.
But one thing that I didn't see graphed is what I would think is the most natural and important thing to graph: the estimated change in the probability of voting for the conservative party, comparing a parent of a boy compared to the parent of a girl. That is, the estimated effect on the vote of having a boy, compared to a girl. I assume this effect varies by sex and age of parent and also by age, number of previous children, past voting patterns, and other factors.
(The graphs that are in the Oswald and Powdthavee article give average numbers of boys and girls for voters of different parties, but that's not quite what I'm looking for. As the authors so clearly explained, the key question is the effect of the sex of the child on parents' attitudes and behavior, and I'd like a graph that would really show this. As it is, I honestly have difficulty figuring out the estimated effect size here. Yes, it's great to see that coefficients are statistically significant--but I want to see what's going on here. I want to see the estimated effect.)
58 comments
1st!!!
or maybe this means that people with liberal views are more likely to openly admit to having daughters
What is a 'liberal view'? Believing that women have the right to call a fetus a parasite?
If so, count me in. I'd be happy to put the parasite in a fat ugly rich white man. Maybe you know one.
Mark, How old are you?
Mark is "1st!!!!" years old.
Too bad there aren't enough conservatives with daughter-only families. =)
Unfortunately, this could be interpreted as the "sissing" out of such congressmen, and therefore sexism could become rampant _at least when it comes to voting, where candidates with only daughters could lose out to "all macho" candidates.
In some countries, like China -under the "One Child" policy, rural couples are likelier to seek an abortion if they are going to birth a daughter rather than a son. So some all-daughter families put there are already perceptually at a disadvantage.
out there, not put there (sorry)
I think this is already reasonably well established in the US, and the effect on partisan identity is only a couple of percentage points.
That is, the research illuminates the process by which people come to identify with an ideology or political party, but it's not really large enough to be useful in targeting.
Case in point: Dick Cheney
Mark, anyone old enough to be interested in this site is certainly old enough not to do that ever again. Agreed?
Garrett, that was perfect.
Maybe this poll explains why my dad has become so much more liberal as he's gotten older. (I'm the third of his three daughters. No sons.)
Or maybe it's because his Republican party went all bat-shit insane and made everything about god. Or maybe it was the laws they passed to allow his employer to renege on the retirement he had been depending on (42 years).
Saulie, city women in China (and India) selectively abort based on gender too. This is wikepedia, but whatever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%27s_one-child_policy#The_.22Four-Two-One.22_problem
"Saulie, city women in China (and India) selectively abort based on gender too."
Er, that is what I said.
"Case in point: Dick Cheney"
Exception to the rule
Ok, I should have said "In some countries, like China, both urban and rural couples . . ."
Thanks for NOT splitting hairs
It may sound a little silly, but as far as I can tell, this study lacks anything empirical to address causality.
Perhaps being a liberal makes you more likely to have a girl. Surely, there are physiological effects that are affected by one's mental state. While it may unlikely, it is an interesting prospect.
In my previous post, I claimed this effect is aleady well-established in the U.S. I've searched for my source, which I dimly recall reading about two years ago, and can find no trace of it.
Maybe I made it up. Sorry.
Of my father's siblings (twelve in all), the ones who had more daughters than sons were/are all more liberal than the siblings who had more sons than daughters. Granted, most of my father's siblings were/are more liberal than 'the average American', but even so, the parents of 'majority-daughter families' were/are all more liberal than the parents of 'majority-son families'.
I can't speak for my father (two sons, no daughters), as he died when I was 2-1/2 years old, my first memory in life was after his death, and so I didn't have the opportunity to assess his personal political philosophy.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Andrew…
Your commentary demonstrates that this article is based on a very poorly controlled sifting of facts. Such is the usually the case when scientists set out to demonstrate an effect they have decided they want to find.
All else being equal, parents' political views tend to reflect some rudimentary ability to empathize with their own children?
I am shocked. Shocked, I say.
Yet another ass-backwards study. This data proves no such thing. We already know that women with higher levels of testosterone (with more dominant, positive behaviors)produce more sons than daughters. Women with lower levels of testosterone (more empathetic, better listeners, etc.) produce more daughters. I'll bet dollars to donuts that parents who already are conservatives have more sons, and parents who already are liberals more daughters. Having children of either sex doesn't change their politics one way or another. Sometimes I think scientists are the most stupid people on the planet.
My parents were Goldwater Republicans, argued that Wallace had his good points, and thought Reagan was too leftist. Good Lord, what would they have been like had they not had daughters only? (They did manage to produce 100% Liberal daughters.)
No wonder I'm Libertarian, and middle of the road.
Adult daughter, teenage son.
Obama's moving to the right, and he has TWO daughters . . . OH! just like Cheney! Maybe two daughters cancel each other out?
Is automated polling unreliable? Rasmussen want to know.
From Political wire:
"On Automated Polling
Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling responds to a Washington Post article over the weekend that claimed automated polling is unreliable.
"What I do find interesting is the lack of methodological rigor behind the Post's choice not to run automated poll results, given that's essentially what they're accusing our polls of lacking. They have no statistical evidence pointing to a lack of reliability in IVR poll results, just a couple anecdotes from campaign pollsters about how they don't use it. They say more research is needed on the validity of automated polls..."
"What I find most disappointing is the fact that the Post isn't conducting its own polling on the race. It's a good chance for them to put their money where their mouth is and prove their superiority to us and Survey USA. They might be right, but we'll never know if they don't try."
Side note: Both Roll Call and The Hotline recently changed their policies and now report results from automated polls."
Val - males biologically determine sex. Remember Henry the VIII? It's an X/Y chromosome thing. You could also throw in the fact that 'boy' sperm is faster yet weaker than 'female' sperm. That's definitely a determinant. There is also some thought that different sexual positions/post-coital yoga :) could encourage the speedy males or the mighty females to get to the egg first. So about your statement regarding how stupid scientists are...need I say more?
Interesting- I wonder how this fits in with the (slight) tendency for youngest sons to be gay when they have older brothers. This might suggest that conservatives could be more likely to have homosexual sons, or alternatively, that homosexual sons have an effect on their father's political views.
@Val:
Aside from what velouria pointed out, you seem to have ignored the fact that the study compared people's political views before birth (of sons or daughters) and after, thus apparently controlling for whatever hormonal characteristics either parent possessed.
As velouria also pointed out, it's dangerous to ridicule others' intelligence, unless you're absutively certain that your analysis is iron-clad.
My mother had three daughters, and she was far, far right, completely conservative. My husband and I have two sons, and we are liberal. Good friends of ours have a daughter and are far, far right. I say back to the drawing board on this study.
Stop posting that you know a conservative with a daughter, or a liberal with no daughters, like that totally disproves the study. That means nothing. They are talking about the probability over a large sample of population. If a statistical change appears over a large group it is significant for all sorts of reasons at a macro level. But it tells you nothing about the guy down the street, or your dad or whatever.
Amen, Matt. For people who post on a blog centered around statistical analysis, people sure do like to talk about anecdotes. And like you pointed out earlier, it's mentioned n the excerpt of the article that part of the study is about how people's views changed after having daughters/sons. I'm guessing many people just stopped reading before that bit (and definitely didn't bother reading the linked article).
The main flaw of this study is that having only one daughter or only one son is a matter of choice. If people who are more conservative prefer boys, they will not stop having children after having just one daughter.
However, if the study is able to limit the time of the votes to right after having a male or female child, the effects would be much more convincing.
This study needs more. I am female. I have a son. I am liberal. My son is liberal. Doesn't mean, if I had a daughter that I'd be more or less liberal.I have been liberal before having my son. I think this study is more global reaching, all encompassing, and is trying to say, as a society. Cause, actually, before birth, there is only a guarantee of a boy or a girl. Having one or the other, is the product of child birth,and does not warrrent a change in the parent's political behavior.
Interesting thoughts! When was the last Democratic President with male offspring? LBJ didn't have any sons I can't think of did he? Must be JFK then. 3 in a row with just female offspring certainly. Mind you 3 in a row in general for having female offspring only.
> The authors' key finding is that support for policies designed to address gender equity is greater among parents with daughters.
Scientists lag behind poets and artists. There’s a Lake Woebegone monolog where Keillor describes the town meeting that was called to referee gym usage now that the girls had a basketball team, too, and when it was decreed that the boys basketball team would continue to get the floor first for after school practice and then the girls, forcing them to walk home in the dark in the cold in the winter, well, “you never saw chauvinists become feminists as fast as the fathers of the girls on that basketball team.”
This study does not seem to square with Nate's recent posting indicating that party ID seems to be strongly influenced by the political environment when a voter turns 18. He showed that the gap persisted far into the future - and that Democrats will be thanking W for a long time for his contribution to building their voting ranks.
Presumably, most 18-year-old voters are childless. I agree that it would be interesting to see the strength of the effect of offspring gender relative to the effect of party in power when the voter turns 18 - and other influences on party ID or relative liberalism.
I think that one needs only to look at Laura and George and think maybe this whole idea is bunk.
Are the Comments being moderated (again? were they ever?)? I haven't seen any of the dingbats and clinically insane for a while now....
If so, many thanks!
If not, I guess some of them must have overdosed on their own bile. And good riddance!
While this is an interesting post, it doesn't give enough info to allow folks to critically analyze the data...and yes, I know the latest study is just now being published.
However, the author of the newest study has published other studies on the same issue. Without more data, people make assumptions without critically evaluating the evidence.
This post needs much more information. To give the result of a study without any info as to how the study was executed is irresponsible and misleading.
At least give us links to further info. I personally will look up all of the mentioned journal articles. But, with just the authors' names and publication dates, that is difficult. But most people are not going to look up the info and will continue to make BS comments based on assumptions of what the study "might" really mean based on a lack of substantial info regarding these studies.
I don't doubt the content of the post...I am sure that the results of the study are as you have noted. But, as you can see by the comments to this post, there is a vast misunderstanding of the meaning of these studies.
The author of this post needs to give more complete information.
Oops...found the link to the article. My apologies to the author.
To the comm enters...read the study before making broad assumptions about the science behind such research.
Doesn't our previous President have daughters?
My daughter will be three in August and I am in no way leaning Liberal. I have been more confirmed in my conviction of Conservative ideals. There should also be a question about abortion.
I wonder how many dads think that their teenage daughter ought to be able to get an abortion without any parents consent? Especially is she was impregnated by an adult. Planned Parenthood has been exposed on numerous occasions of hiding just that. And even is spite of Planned Parenthood hiding the rape of teenage girls, Liberal Democrats still pledge to fund this morally bankrupt organization
Now that we know that people with female children are more likely to be sympathetic to feminism, perhaps we should commission a study to see if people with black children are more likely to support affirmative action.
This is also true of Supreme Court justices. The family medical leave act got a pass while the ADA was shot down because the conservative justices have daughters who work, but not disabled children.
My friend is one of two girls in a family of three and her dad loved Sarah Palin.
Good lord, if I read another anecdotal exception I may scream. Don't worry, next-few-people-with-anecdotes--I've already figured out I can stop reading.
On the one hand, it seems obvious that people should be more likely to vote with the interests of their children (and therefore people like them) in mind. But the questions begged by that are: doesn't being a woman have a similar effect? Being married to one?
The response to that is that, well, historically, neither condition necessarily has that effect (though of course more women are feminists than men, there are plenty of misogynist or super-traditionalist women out there). But why is it different when it's your child(ren) you're relating to rather than yourself or your spouse? Or is this whole thing kind of a strawman? I'm getting myself turned around.
Oh yeah? Well, I know somebody who knows somebody who's child is androgynous, and they're Joe Biden supporters. Which absolutely proves...wait, what was the question again?
Anyone who thinks having daughters makes you less conservative never read this. :-)
As everyone knows, conservatives abort female fetuses.
This is fascinating! I always assumes that ones political views reflected their parents views, childhood home life, etc. Do these studies address what type of household these adult voters grew up in? For example, a daughter who grew up in a hippie household but became the mother of sons vote more conservatively than her parents? Would a son who grew up in a bible-thumping home and became the father of daughters vote more liberally than his parents?
VERY interesting, but I would caution claiming much about anecdotal evidence. At the very least, we expect to see a lot of noise, and you want to make sure you have a good and large sample to talk about this.
Also, might some of it be due to selection? Adoption isn't unknown.
Val- thank you for the entertaining comment. You're a tad off (in space terms, about half a million miles), though, in describing scientists as the most stupid people on the planet. That title belongs to neocon apologists like yourself.
Along with people who didn't get subjected to an abstinence-only "education," much less a "creation-science" one, scientists understand that the sperm, not the egg, carries the gender determining chromosome.
I wish you the best of luck in dealing with all the other circumstances where real life conflicts with what "we already know."
Is the same true for men with more sisters than brothers?
It seems obvious that men in households with greater numbers of females would adopt a more feminist perspective than men in male dominated households. Seth is right, I'd like to see data on siblings.
All this article seems to say is that parents will try to protect/help their children through their votes. Surely this isn't surprising?
Any parent with a child in a disadvantaged group (i imagine) will vote for a party that would make life easier for their child - Minorities don't vote for the British National Party, and i doubt that a white family adopting a black child would either.
it would be foreclosing on logic and ancient wisdom to not consider all directions of causality. i.e. ancient daoist wisdom and even now modern science confirm that if a woman orgasms just before conception, the outcome is more likely female. if this translates into liberals are more likely to have girls i cannot say, but such correlation possibilities should be considered. now i ain't saying that only liberals are more likely to pursue types of intimacy that favor or ensure female orgasm, but i would venture to guess that conservative households are more likely to not be as feminist or skilled in this department. daoists have known for millennia that there are many ways to choose the gender of the child at conception. Some outcomes are unconsciously chosen. Learning to become more liberal and feminist through raising female children might well have even earlier roots. now that is some research i would like to see undertaken.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
From cell phones users to see the specific situation of occupational segmentation in 2009, accounting for 19.5% of students dropped 21.2 percent over last year, other types of occupations than those last year, the proportion of Internet users cheap cell phones increase. White collar crowd from last year's 29.2% increase to 38.9% this year, accounting for 9.7 percentage points up to replace the student groups cellphone users as one of the biggest occupational hierarchy; blue-collar crowd from last year's 13.9% to 18.9% this year, accounting for rose by 5.0 percentage points, showing that mobile phones users by a group of students to the occupational groups a significant trend in the development. Ereli advice that, cheap cell phones and mobile phone users Internet users monthly income distribution of age, education, occupational distribution has strong correlation with high spending capacity of white-collar workers and some students in the crowd will be a huge cell phone china online potential consumer groups.
The survey found that consumer 3G wholesale china from the crowd of view, the buyer 25 to 40 years old mainly white-collar workers, accounting for about 40%, followed by consumer groups of students, accounting for about three into. According to statistics, 3G wholesale products in sales, compared with a 2G mobile phone sales are still a wide gap between, but since June has been, 3G mobile phones increase in the average monthly buy products for more than 50%, "11" period due to holiday business, the increase of more than 150%. Pk that the "11" after the peak sales of 3G handsets likely to usher in more stable growth.
By comparing the traditional Internet users, Internet users to iResearch found that the traditional white-collar-based, cell phones wholesale, corporate general staff accounted for 18.9%, higher than the 5.6% of the wholesale cell phones users accounting; and discount cell phones users in the years students and blue-collar workers accounted for significantly more than the traditional Internet users, respectively, accounting for 19.5% and 18.9%, higher than the traditional Internet users Students and blue-collar workers accounted for 7.8% and 5.1% respectively.
Post a Comment