2026/07/01 by Joshua Schwartz, Meghan Garrity · 2 voices
Social Sciences · #Computational and Text Analysis Methods #Gender Politics and Representation #Social and Intergroup Psychology
paper · doi:10.1093/ia/iiag088
openalex publication_date 2026/07/01 · openalex created_date 2026/07/09 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Abstract The prominent #EndGenderApartheid campaign was launched in 2023, calling for the global recognition of the crime of gender apartheid. A key component of the campaign's strategy is to mobilize a global mass movement akin to that against racial apartheid in South Africa. The implicit assumption is that the language of gender apartheid evokes a stronger response among the public than alternatives such as the language of gender persecution. We tested the effectiveness of this rhetorical frame in a survey experiment on 1,200 members of the United States public and 100 US elites, finding null effects. However, informing respondents that the systematic oppression of women violates international law significantly increased their support for policy action. Legal codification may thus have a stronger impact on public opinion than subtle rhetorical framing related to the severity and scope of human rights abuses. We also uncovered evidence of a spillover effect between distinct human rights issues, where more pro-Israeli individuals were less responsive to the gender apartheid frame than pro-Palestinian respondents, likely because Israel has been accused of apartheid. Overall, our study contributes to broader academic debates about the impact of language, the efficacy of international law, and the possibility of backlash effects in response to human rights shaming.