Gender linked fate explains lower legal abortion support among white married women

Autoři: Leah Ruppanner aff001;  Gosia Mikołajczak aff001;  Kelsy Kretschmer aff002;  Christopher T. Stout aff002
Působiště autorů: School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia aff001;  School of Public Policy, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, United States of America aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article


Abortion is uniquely connected to women’s experiences yet women’s attitudes towards legal abortion vary across the pro-choice/anti-abortion spectrum. Existing research has focused on sociodemographic characteristics to explain women’s levels of abortion support. Here, we argue that abortion attitudes vary with women’s perceptions of gender linked fate, or the extent to which some women see their fates as tied to other women. Drawing upon existing research showing that married white women report lower levels of gender linked fate than their non-married counterparts, we assess these relationships for abortion attitudes applying the 2012 American National Election Survey (n = 2,173). Using mediation analysis, we show that lower levels of gender linked fate among married white women (vs. non-married white women) explain their stronger opposition to abortion. As many state governments are increasingly legislating restricted access to legal abortion, understanding factors explaining opposition to legal abortion is urgently important.

Klíčová slova:

Consciousness – Elections – Religion – Sexual and gender issues – Surveys – Termination of pregnancy – Political parties – Alabama


1. Combs MW, Welch S. Blacks, whites, and attitudes toward abortion. Public Opinion Quarterly. 1982 Jan 1;46[4]:510–20. doi: 10.1086/268748 11655604

2. Granberg D, Granberg BW. Abortion attitudes, 1965–1980: Trends and determinants. Family Planning Perspectives. 1980 Sep 1;12[5]:250–61. 7439350

3. Hall EJ, Ferree MM. Race differences in abortion attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly. 1986 Jan 1;50[2]:193–207.

4. Legge JS Jr. The determinants of attitudes toward abortion in the American electorate. Western Political Quarterly. 1983 Sep;36[3]:479–90. 11655645

5. Secret PE. The impact of region on racial differences in attitudes toward legal abortion. Journal of Black Studies. 1987 Mar;17[3]:347–69.

6. Scott J. Conflicting beliefs about abortion: legal approval and moral doubts. Social Psychology Quarterly. 1989 Dec. 11655985

7. Dugger K. Race differences in the determinants of support for legalized abortion. Social Science Quarterly. 1991 Sep.

8. Lynxwiler J, Gay D. Reconsidering race differences in abortion attitudes. Social Science Quarterly. 1994 Mar.

9. Lynxwiler DG. The impact of religiosity on race variations in abortion attitudes. Sociological Spectrum. 1999 Jun 1;19[3]:359–77. doi: 10.1080/027321799280190 12349298

10. Wilcox C. Race, religion, region and abortion attitudes. Sociological Analysis. 1992 Mar 1;53[1]:97–105.

11. Cowan SK. Cohort abortion measures for the United States. Population and development review. 2013 Jun;39[2]:289–307. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2013.00592.x 26052166

12. Ebaugh HR, Haney CA. Shifts in abortion attitudes: 1972–1978. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1980 Aug 1:491–9.

13. Petersen LR. Religion, plausibility structures, and education's effect on attitudes toward elective abortion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2001 Jun;40[2]:187–204.

14. Figueira-McDonough J. Men and women as interest groups in the abortion debate in the United States. In Women's studies international forum 1989 Jan 1 [Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 539–550]. Pergamon. 11655978

15. Strickler J, Danigelis NL. Changing frameworks in attitudes toward abortion. In Sociological Forum 2002 Jun 1 [Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 187–201]. Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers.

16. Blake J. Abortion and public opinion: The 1960–1970 decade. Science. 1971 Feb 12;171[3971]:540–9. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3971.540 5539717

17. Cooper T. Race, Class, and Abortion: How Liberation Theology Enhances the Demand for Reproductive Justice. Feminist Theology. 2016 May;24[3]:226–44.

18. Bartkowski JP, Ramos‐Wada AI, Ellison CG, Acevedo GA. Faith, race‐ethnicity, and public policy preferences: Religious schemas and abortion attitudes among US Latinos. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2012 Jun;51[2]:343–58.

19. Ellison CG, Echevarria S, Smith B. Religion and abortion attitudes among US Hispanics: Findings from the 1990 Latino national political survey. Social Science Quarterly. 2005 Mar;86[1]:192–208.

20. Guth JL, Smidt CE, Kellstedt LA, Green JC. The sources of antiabortion attitudes: The case of religious political activists. American Politics Quarterly. 1993 Jan;21[1]:65–80. 11656208

21. Hess JA, Rueb JD. Attitudes toward abortion, religion, and party affiliation among college students. Current Psychology. 2005 Mar 1;24[1]:24–42.

22. Hoffmann JP, Johnson SM. Attitudes toward abortion among religious traditions in the United States: Change or continuity?. Sociology of Religion. 2005 Jul 1;66[2]:161–82.

23. Hoffmann JP, Miller AS. Social and political attitudes among religious groups: Convergence and divergence over time. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 1997 Mar 1:52–70.

24. Doherty, C & Suls, R. Widening Regional Divide over Abortion Laws, Pew Research Centre, 2013. accessed from

25. Jelen TG. Public Attitudes Toward Abortion and LGBTQ Issues: A dynamic analysis of region and partisanship. Sage Open. 2017 Mar;7[1]:2158244017697362.

26. Smith C. Change over time in attitudes about abortion laws relative to recent restrictions in Texas. Contraception. 2016 Nov 1;94[5]:447–52. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.06.005 27318007

27. Adams GD. Abortion: Evidence of an issue evolution. American Journal of Political Science. 1997 Jul 1:718–37.

28. Carsey TM, Layman GC. Changing sides or changing minds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science. 2006 Apr;50[2]:464–77.

29. Jaenicke DW. Abortion and partisanship in the US Congress, 1976–2000: increasing partisan cohesion and differentiation. Journal of American Studies. 2002 Apr;36[1]:1–22.

30. Lai R. Abortion Bans: 9 States Have Passed Bills to Limit the Procedure This Year. New York Times, 2019. Accessed on 06/11/19 from

31. Stout CT, Kretschmer K, Ruppanner L. Gender linked fate, race/ethnicity, and the marriage gap in American politics. Political Research Quarterly. 2017 Sep;70[3]:509–22.

32. Hout M. Abortion politics in the United States, 1972–1994: From single issue to ideology. Gender Issues. 1999 Mar 1;17[2]:3–4. 12349270

33. Kelley J, Evans MD, Headey B. Moral reasoning and political conflict: The abortion controversy. British Journal of Sociology. 1993 Dec.

34. Newport F. Men, Women Generally Hold Similar Abortion Attitudes, 2018, Gallup News Service.

35. Zigerell LJ, Barker DC. Safe, Legal, Rare… and Early: Gender and the Politics of Abortion. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. 2011 Feb 1;21[1]:83–96.

36. Barkan SE. Gender and abortion attitudes: Religiosity as a suppressor variable. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2014 Jan 1;78[4]:940–50.

37. Bumpass LL. The measurement of public opinion on abortion: the effects of survey design. Family Planning Perspectives. 1997 Jul 1;29:177–80. 9258650

38. Dawson MC. Behind the mule: Race and class in African-American politics. Princeton University Press; 1995 Jul 23.

39. Jaffe S. Why Did a Majority of White Women Vote for Trump?. In New Labor Forum 2018 Jan [Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 18–26]. Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

40. Cohen SA. Abortion and women of color. Conscience. 2008 Dec 1;29[3]:37.

41. Price K. What is reproductive justice?: How women of color activists are redefining the pro-choice paradigm. Meridians: feminism, race, transnationalism. 2010 Apr 1;10[2]:42–65.

42. Merolla JL. White Female Voters in the 2016 Presidential Election. Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics. 2018 Mar;3[1]:52–4.

43. American Fact Finder. Marital Status: 2013–2017 American Community 5-year Estimates. Retrieved on June 3,2019 from:

44. Miller AH, Gurin P, Gurin G, Malanchuk O. Group consciousness and political participation. American journal of political science. 1981 Aug 1:494–511.

45. Gay C, Tate K. Doubly bound: The impact of gender and race on the politics of black women. Political Psychology. 1998 Mar;19[1]:169–84.

46. Sanchez GR, Vargas ED. Taking a closer look at group identity: the link between theory and measurement of group consciousness and linked fate. Political Research Quarterly. 2016 Mar;69[1]:160–74. doi: 10.1177/1065912915624571 26924919

47. Tate K. From protest to politics: The new black voters in American elections. Harvard University Press; 1994.

48. Kingston PW, Finkel SE. Is there a marriage gap in politics?. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1987 Feb 1:57–64.

49. Stoker L, Jennings MK. Life-cycle transitions and political participation: The case of marriage. American political science review. 1995 Jun;89[2]:421–33

50. Duleep HO, Sanders S. The decision to work by married immigrant women. ILR Review. 1993 Jul;46[4]:677–90.

51. Becker GS. Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor. Journal of labor economics. 1985 Jan 1;3[1, Part 2]:S33–58.

52. Abroms LC, Goldscheider FK. More work for mother: How spouses, cohabiting partners and relatives affect the hours mothers work. Journal of Family and Economic Issues. 2002 Jun 1;23[2]:147–66.

53. García-Manglano J. Opting out and leaning in: The life course employment profiles of early baby boom women in the United States. Demography. 2015 Dec 1;52[6]:1961–93. doi: 10.1007/s13524-015-0438-6 26489959

54. Dow DM. Integrated motherhood: Beyond hegemonic ideologies of motherhood. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2016 Feb;78[1]:180–96.

55. Harris KM. Work and welfare among single mothers in poverty. American Journal of Sociology. 1993 Sep 1;99[2]:317–52.

56. Gerson K., 2009. The unfinished revolution: Coming of age in a new era of gender, work, and family. Oxford University Press.

57. Bolzendahl CI, Myers DJ. Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men. Social Forces. 2004 Dec; 83[2]:759–790.

58. Gupta S. The effects of transitions in marital status on men's performance of housework. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1999:700–11.

59. Brines J. Economic Dependency, Gender, and the Division of Labor at Home. American Journal of Sociology. 1994;100[3]:652–88.

60. Plutzer E. Preferences in family politics: Women's consciousness or family context?. Political Geography Quarterly. 1991 Apr 1;10[2]:162–73.

61. Zuo J, Tang S. Breadwinner status and gender ideologies of men and women regarding family roles. Sociological perspectives. 2000 Mar;43[1]:29–43.

62. Chong D, Citrin J, Conley P. When self‐interest matters. Political Psychology. 2001 Sep;22[3]:541–70.

63. Collins T, Moyer L. Gender, Race, and Intersectionality on the Federal Appellate Bench. Political Research Quarterly. 2008;61(2):219–27.

64. Junn J, Masuoka N. Asian American identity: Shared racial status and political context. Perspectives on Politics. 2008 Dec;6[4]:729–40.

65. Wang W, Parker K, Taylor P. Breadwinner moms: mothers are the sole or primary provider in four-in-ten households with children-public conflicted about the growing trend. 2013. Pew Research Centre, Washington DC.

66. Simien EM. Black feminist voices in politics. SUNY Press; 2006 Jul 6.

67. Baxter S, Lansing M. Women and politics: The visible minority. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.; 1983.

68. Kane EW. Racial and ethnic variations in gender-related attitudes. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000 Aug 1; 26[1]:419–439.

69. Sayer LC, Fine L. Racial-ethnic differences in US married women’s and men’s housework. Social Indicators Research. 2011 Apr 1;101[2]:259–65.

70. Roehling P, Hernandez-Jarvis L, Swope H. Variations in negative work-family spillover among white, black, Hispanic American men and women. Does ethnicity matter? Journal of Family Issues. 2005 Sep 1; 26: 840–865.

71. Silber Mohamed H. Americana or Latina? Gender and identity acquisition among Hispanics in the United States. Politics, Groups, and Identities. 2015 Jan 2;3[1]:40–58.

72. Sanchez GR, Masuoka N. Brown-utility heuristic? The presence and contributing factors of Latino linked fate. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences. 2010 Nov;32[4]:519–31.

73. Stokes AK. Latino group consciousness and political participation. American Politics Research. 2003 Jul;31[4]:361–78.

74. Lenth R. Emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version. 2018;1[1].

75. Lange T, Vansteelandt S, Bekaert M. A simple unified approach for estimating natural direct and indirect effects. American journal of epidemiology. 2012 Jul 10;176[3]:190–5. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr525 22781427

76. Steen J, Loeys T, Moerkerke B, Vansteelandt S. Medflex: an R package for flexible mediation analysis using natural effect models. Journal of Statistical Software. 2017;76[11].

77. Dolan J, Deckman MM, Swers ML. Women and politics: Paths to power and political influence. Rowman & Littlefield; 2017 Jun 1.

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10
Nejčtenější tento týden