P SC 1113 1st Edition Lecture 6 Outline of Last LectureI. Original PhilosophiesII. Testing ToleranceIII. Rights and the Path to LeadershipOutline of Current LectureI. The Data on GenderII. The Data on ReligionIII. The Data on Sexual OrientationIV. Encouraging? Discouraging?V. Who are You?VI. The 1950s and 1960sVII. Participation Transformation Post-1970sVIII. A Result: Problem SolvingIX. Social CapitalCurrent LectureI. The Data on GenderA. What happened between 1999 and 2002? Polls show that more people supported a woman president in 1999 because they thought a man would “be more competent punishing these responsible for 9/11" (35%) and “men would do a better job protecting the homeland” (40%)B. By 2011, back to 93% willingness to support a woman presidentII. The Data on ReligionA. Increasing acceptance of voting for well qualified Jewish candidates (from 45% in 1937 to 80% now) and Catholic (from 60 in 1937 to 85% candidate over time)B. Same cant be said for well-qualified Mormon candidates (about ¾ of Americans in 1967, similar numbers today)C. Struggling for acceptance: Muslim and atheist candidates1. 49% say the fact that a candidate is Muslim wouldn’t affect their vote, 46% say it would make them less likely to support2. 33% say the fact that a candidate is atheist wouldn’t affect their vote, 61% say it would make them less likely to supportThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.III. The Data on Sexual OrientationA. Increasing openness on candidates mirrors increasing openness in general1. 1978: ¼ of Americans would be willing to vote for a well qualified gay or lesbian candidate2. 2007: 46%, 2011: 67%IV. Is all this Data Encouraging or Discouraging?A. Positive: TrendsB. Negative: Meaningful minority (especially given closeness of elections) still hesitantC. Another negative: levels of implicit prejudiceD. Hypotheticals and Realities1. Numbers can be overcome (right times, right issues, right candidates)2. Successful examples can further overcome the hesitant3. End result: underrepresentation dissipates a bitV. Who are you?A. What organizations we are in vs. the organizations our parents are in vs. the organizations our grandparents are in?B. Robert Putnam’s “Bowling Alone”1. Subtitled “the collapse and revival of American community”2. Americans used to join bowling leagues and meet new people and make friends, but now we go with a few close friends far less oftena. The collapse: last ¼ of the 20th century3. The revival: online? If so: implicationsVI. The 1950s and 1960sA. Post-depression: number of community groups increases each yearB. Increasing affluence and education as wellC. Church attendance boomsD. The “threat of leisure”1. More free time, how are they going to use it?E. Heeding the call of Kennedy… “The torch has been passed”F. Number of parents who would like to see children go into politics doublesVII. Participation Transformation Post-1970sA. Serving as an officer in a club/organization down 42%B. Served on a committee down 39%C. Attending a town meeting down 35%D. Attending a political rally down 34%E. Signing a Petition down 22%F. From joiners to loners (joiners in 1950s and 60s, loners in 70s)VIII. A Result: Problem SolvingA. Segregation still the normB. New –isms rise (feminism, environmentalism)C. Community improvement rakes off (proactive vs. reactive)IX. Social CapitalA. Connections between individualsB. Norms of reciprocity and trust that arise from connectionsC. 1916: “the individual is helpless socially, if left to himself”D. Benefits our personal interests (“private good”)E. Benefits the world around us (“public