Search

The truth of this is clear. For if it is asked why some witches will not confess the truth under even the greatest tortures, while others readily confess their crimes when they are questioned, . . . the reason is as follows. It may truly be said that, when it is not due to a Divine impulse conveyed through a holy Angel that a witch is made to confess the truth and abandon the spell of silence, then it is due to the devil whether she preserves silence or confesses her crimes. The former is the case with those whom he knows to have denied the Faith both with their lips and in their hearts, and also to have given him their homage; for he is sure of their constancy. But in the latter case he withdraws his protection, since he knows that they are of no profit to him (Malleus Maleficarum,' 230).

In the post-World War II era, American women have been consistently less militaristic and more opposed to war than American men. Theorists, both feminist and not, have attributed such differences to gender itself, maternalism, and feminism. Drawing on the American National Election Study 1991 Pilot Study, we explore these hypotheses and discover no support for the maternalist explanation, some evidence in favor of the feminist accounting, and substantial support for the gender explanation. We also probe into the structure of political thinking in these areas and discover that the roots of women's and men's thinking usually differ even when they basically agree on the "bottom line." In particular, men's attitudes are much more partisan in their origins than are women's.

Research on political ambition and recruitment has yet to consider seriously the role of private life and especially the family in a potential candidate's calculation of the costs and benefits of running for office. One reason is that men, who constitute the vast majority of candidates, are not usually identified as experiencing conflict between public and private roles. Using the Center for Political Studies (CPS) 1972 Convention Delegate Study, this article investigates the interrelationships of family roles, subjective conflict, and political ambition. Although many of the same features of family life conflict with men's and women's political life, the role these play in potential candidates' decisions is different for men and women.

About five percent of American political office holders are women. On this indicator of women's status, the United States approximates the worldwide norm (Putnam, 1976). A central research question for those who study women's political roles is why, given the lack of legal or obvious structural barriers to recruitment of female elites, are women still so underrepresented among political officials. The literature on women and politics offers a number of plausible answers.

C ONSCIOUSNESS and conflict are essential prerequisites of change in the status of women. As Harriet Martineau wrote one hundred forty years ago, "All women should inform themselves of the condition of their sex, and of their own position. It must necessarily follow that the noblest of them will, sooner or later, put forth a moral power which shall prostrate cant, and burst asunder the bonds (silken to some, but cold iron to others), of feudal prejudices and usages."' Martineau, like the feminists of today who join or organize consciousness-raising groups, viewed selfconsciousness and consciousness of the status of women as a group necessary to change. Her observation shows an early recognition of the difference between "objective social reality" and perception as well as the effect of both on behavior. Consciousness raising, as suggested by Martineau and asserted by more recent feminists, is a change in self-perception as well as a change in social relations involving women. Martineau assumed that feminist activity was impossible until women became capable of seeing their lives as they "really were." Each time large numbers of women become conscious of their situation conflict follows. It has never been enough for women to point out the ills they observe. More often than not change has involved the development of and conflict between feminist movements and organizations on the one side and counter movements and organizations on the other; in other words, a public, social conflict. Change does not seem to occur without the development of both consciousness and social conflict. This paper is addressed to the problem of consciousness or perception of social conflict over the status of women.