Nevertheless, she persisted: Mobilization after the Women’s March

Bettina Spencer, Ernesto Verdeja

Abstract


The Women’s March in Washington D.C. had a crowd size of approximately 750,000 people, possibly much higher. Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City and numerous other cities across the United States experienced large and diverse demonstrations. What is particularly noteworthy is both the size of individual demonstrations and the number of demonstrations across the country. With such high levels of participation, and with such an intersectional platform, the Women’s March created an inclusive, large-scale social movement and was an impressive display of political mobilization.

We are interested in whether the participants in the Washington D.C. march were likely to continue to participate in other forms of social mobilization as compared to participants who marched elsewhere, or who did not march at all that day.  We administered a survey to assess whether people who attended the women’s march in D.C. were indeed influenced to participate in more marches, and importantly, for a greater range of causes, than people who attended smaller marches or who did not march at all. We found that our hypotheses were partially supported in that participants did not differ in their level of protest participation before the women’s march.  However, whether participants marched in D.C. or elsewhere did make a significant difference on future intentions; participating in any march that day increased interest in future protests for a wider set of causes.

Keywords: Women’s March, feminism, social movements, activism

 


Full Text:

Spencer & Verdeja

References


Chong, D. (1991). Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

Darrow, B. (2017, January). Turns Out Attendance at Women’s March Was Bigger Than

Estimated. Fortune. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/01/23/womens-march-crowd-estimates/.

DeNardo, J. (1985). Power in Numbers: The Political Strategy of Protest and Rebellion.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Goodwin, J., Jasper, J. M., & Polletta, F. (2004). Emotional Dimensions of Social Movements.

In D. Snow, S. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (pp. 413–32). Oxford: Blackwell.

Kitts, J. (2000). Socializing in Black Boxes: Social Networks and SMO Participation.

Mobilization, 5, 241-257.

Marwell, G., & Oliver, P. (1993). The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-Social

Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McAdam, D., & Paulsen, R. (1993). Specifying the Relationship Between Social Ties and

Activism. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 640-667.

Olson, M. (1971). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Opp, K.-D. (1989). The Rationality of Political Protest. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Polletta, F., & Jasper, J. M. (2001). Collective Identity and Social Movements. Annual Review of

Sociology, 27, 283–305.

Pressman, J., & Chenoweth, E. (2017, January). Crowd Estimates: 1.21.2017. Fortune. Retrieved

from http://fortune.com/2017/01/23/womens-march-crowd-estimates/.

Ramanathan, L. (2017, January). Was the Women’s March Just Another Display of White

Privilege? Some Think So. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/2017/01/26/was-women-march-just-another-display-white-privilege-some-think/

Smith, J., & Verdeja, E. (2013). Introduction. In J. Smith and E. Verdeja, (Eds.), Globalization,

Social Movements and Peacebuilding (pp. 1-20). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

Wallace, T., & Parlapiano, A. (2017, January). Crowd Scientists Say Women’s March in Washington Had 3 Time as Many People as Trump’s Inauguration. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/22/us/politics/womens-march-trump-crowd-estimates.html


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Bettina Spencer, Ernesto Verdeja

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.