This article analyzes the methodologies, scope, and impact of manuscripts submitted to and published in Feminist Economics from 1995 to 2019. The analysis finds that in addition to becoming increasingly empirical, Feminist Economics publications have also become increasingly intersectional. However, quantitative empirical submissions, relative to other methodological approaches, are more likely to be desk rejected and less likely to be eventually published if they proceed to peer review. The increasing attention to gender in the mainstream of the economics discipline, proxied by the prevalence of gender analyses in the discipline's top thirty journals, is also associated with increased desk rejection, reflecting a rise in submissions that take a mainstream "add gender and stir" approach. Ultimately, this study aims to understand how feminist economics has evolved since the inception of the journal and to spark conversation about how to continue to make the journal and economics more feminist in the future.HIGHLIGHTSPublications in Feminist Economics have become increasingly intersectional.Non-empirical work has been favored in the publication process.Special issue articles garner more citations on average.Intersectional articles garner fewer citations on average.More "gender" papers lacking feminist engagement have been submitted over time.
