Publications
Works in Progress
  • “Masculinity, Femininity, and the Measurement of Gender Identity in Survey Research."
    • Chapter 2 of my dissertation explores the measurement of gender identity using masculinity and femininity scales. I look at four options varying on the number of scales (one or two) and type of scale (numerical or categorical). I argue in favor of a unidimensional categorical scale because it best manages the trade-off between nuance/complexity.
  • “Retesting the Gender Gap in Support for War.”
    • Chapter 3 of my dissertation explores the so-called "gender gap" in support for war. I build off of the work of Brooks and Valentino (2011), who used survey experiments to try to "flip" the gender gap under certain conditions. With new survey data, I was unable to replicate their results, finding instead that men's and women's support for war moved in the same direction between the control and treatment groups in both experiments. I therefore argue that researchers should stop looking for explanations of a "gap" between genders, and instead look at the driver's of support for war separately for men and women. I look at two variables: feminist identity and partisanship. I find that feminist identity can explain changes in men's support for war, but not women's. I also find that partisanship can explain some of the changes in both men's and women's support for war.
  • “Rethinking the Gender Gap in Support for War.”
    • Chapter 4 of my dissertation builds off of the previous two chapters. Feminist security studies scholars have long argued that how people identify with or are influence by masculinity and femininity does more to shape their views on conflict than their binary gender. Therefore, using the same data as in Chapter 3, but with an additional independent gender variable, I look at the relationship between masculine and feminine identity and support for war. I do so in three ways. First, independent of other variables, meaning that I look at the differences between masculine, feminine, and gender non-conforming people in support for war. I find no statistically significant results, as masculine and feminine people had nearly the same levels of support for war in both experiments, while gender non-conforming people had a much higher level of support for war in one experiment, but much lower in the other. Second, I look at both gender measures together, so that I can compare, for example, differences in support for war between gender conforming (very masculine) men and gender non-conforming (anyone else) men (and vice versa for women). I find statistically significant results in only one of four tests. Third, I proxy gender conformity and non-conformity through LGBTQ+ identity. I find statistically significant results in one of the two tests.
  • “Phalluses in Foreign Policy, Or: George Carlin’s ‘Bigger Dick’ Theory of Foreign Policy.”
    • In late 2017, tense relations between the United States and North Korea led President Trump and Chairman Kim to trade insults via Twitter. Trump referred to Kim as “Little Rocket Man” and bragged that “I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my button works.” Gender scholars quickly noted that the phallic subtext was obvious and speculated about the intended effect of Trump’s invocation of his penis size, strength, and effectiveness in foreign policy (and the “Little Rocket” of his adversary). However, no typology exists to help us understand the use of phallic discourse in foreign policy. How common is it? What are the intended effects? What are the actual effects? This paper begins to address this gap in two ways. First, I document the existence of phallic discourse in foreign policy. I draw on examples as wide-ranging as presidential statements to political cartoons. Second, I develop a typology of the intended effects of phallic discourse in US foreign policy. Phallic discourse is often used for one of two reasons: to enhance one’s masculinity or diminish another’s through two types of metaphors: castration (emasculation) and/or penetration (feminization). In making these claims, I draw on the comedian George Carlin’s “bigger dick” theory of foreign policy. Doing so helps demonstrate how this project speaks to more than just gender scholars. Future research will address the actual effects of phallic discourse in foreign policy.
  • “Relationships for Dummies.” (With Andrew H. Kydd)
    • When is a binary (dummy) identity variable acceptable to use, and when should a more nuanced variable with more than two categories be used? In this paper, we suggest that the ideal number of identity categories is based on the number of local maxima and minima in a research study. In other words, the ideal number of identity categories depends on what your research question is.