In the APSA Public Scholarship Program, graduate students in political science produce summaries of new research in the American Political Science Review. This piece, written by Komal Preet Kaur, covers the new article by Martin Naunov, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “The Effect of Protesters’ Gender on Public Reactions to Protests and Protest Repression.”
Protests serve as a significant form of political participation in both democratic and non-democratic countries, albeit with distinct implications and outcomes. In democratic countries, protests serve as a visible manifestation of free speech and assembly rights, allowing individuals to voice dissent, demand actions, and hold elected officials accountable. Although protests are more challenging in nondemocratic countries than in democratic ones, citizens in non-democratic countries routinely protest despite facing repression and crackdowns from authorities. They can also attract international attention and solidarity, amplifying the voices of dissent against authoritarian rule.
Some protests face greater government crackdowns than others. Public reactions to such government intervention also differ; some individuals are more inclined to justify the government’s repression of protests than others. In his recent research published in the APSR, Martin Naunov investigates when citizens are more likely to accept government propaganda depicting protests as violent and explores the reasons behind the varying public responses to government repression of protests.
Naunov argues that protesters’ gender and the associated stereotypes explain the public’s willingness to justify government repression of a protest. Naunov’s research is set in the context of Russia which has experienced thousands of protests in the last decade, spanning from anti-corruption movements to allegations of election fraud. Many of these protests have encountered instances of police brutality. To comprehend when the public justifies such acts of police brutality and government repression, Naunov analyzes responses from 1,350 respondents in Russia. These participants were randomly assigned to read a newspaper article about protests related to Russia’s deteriorating economy, with the articles framed as led by men, women, patriarchy-compliant women (mothers), and patriarchy-defiant women (feminists).
It remains an open question whether this advantage for women is contingent upon factors such as age, race, or religious identity.The results reveal that gender identity significantly influences how citizens perceive protests and the state’s repressive tactics against protesters. Respondents perceived protests led by women as more peaceful than those led by men. Additionally, respondents were less inclined to
tolerate state repression against protests led by women, particularly those whom they perceive as compliant with the patriarchal ideals of femininity such as wives and mothers. However, they were more accepting of repression tactics when protests were led by men or feminist women, even when they perceived these protests as equally peaceful as those led by mothers.
Naunov explains these findings by highlighting that public support for state repression of protesters depends on whether individuals perceive the protesters as morally upright. Feminist women, who are often seen as challenging traditional patriarchal norms, are perceived as less moral. On the other hand, family-oriented women such as wives and mothers are perceived as upholding patriarchal gender norms and thus, are viewed as moral. These stereotypes of morality help explain why respondents are more tolerant of state repression against feminist protesters compared to repression against mothers.
These findings underscore the impact of identity-based stereotypes on shaping citizens’ perceptions of protesters and the legitimacy of state justifications for repression. Individuals are more susceptible to government propaganda that portrays protests as violent, thus justifying their crackdown when the protesters are perceived as immoral. Protest movements that center around family-oriented women who are perceived as morally upright, thus, tend to have a greater ability to garner public support. It remains an open question whether this advantage for women is contingent upon factors such as age, race, or religious identity.