Policy Relay: How Affirmative Consent Went from Controversy to Convention

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
Katelyn Rose Malae
{"title":"Policy Relay: How Affirmative Consent Went from Controversy to Convention","authors":"Katelyn Rose Malae","doi":"10.1177/07311214221100836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes how a formerly mocked policy idea became a widespread solution. Through content analysis of newspaper articles and legal documents, I develop a framework that extends timelines of social movement influence, expands the range of actors and locations of mobilization, and traces how activists frame policy ideas over time: the policy relay. This framework allows for an analysis of how opponents unintentionally advanced the reform process in 1993 by turning its originators into laughingstocks. Anti-rape advocates eventually reformulated the policy in 2014. This time, the origin was removed from the story, presenting a concise narrative that credited politicians and college administrators, rather than activists, for the reform. By tracing the ideas of a movement, rather than focusing on organizations or public protests, I uncover a complicated process of social change, where consequential actors work across different settings to ignite reforms and strategically remove controversial aspects from narratives of social change.","PeriodicalId":47781,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Perspectives","volume":"65 1","pages":"1117 - 1143"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07311214221100836","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyzes how a formerly mocked policy idea became a widespread solution. Through content analysis of newspaper articles and legal documents, I develop a framework that extends timelines of social movement influence, expands the range of actors and locations of mobilization, and traces how activists frame policy ideas over time: the policy relay. This framework allows for an analysis of how opponents unintentionally advanced the reform process in 1993 by turning its originators into laughingstocks. Anti-rape advocates eventually reformulated the policy in 2014. This time, the origin was removed from the story, presenting a concise narrative that credited politicians and college administrators, rather than activists, for the reform. By tracing the ideas of a movement, rather than focusing on organizations or public protests, I uncover a complicated process of social change, where consequential actors work across different settings to ignite reforms and strategically remove controversial aspects from narratives of social change.
政策接力:肯定同意如何从争议到惯例
这篇文章分析了一个以前被嘲笑的政策想法是如何成为一个广泛的解决方案的。通过对报纸文章和法律文件的内容分析,我制定了一个框架,该框架延长了社会运动影响的时间线,扩大了参与者的范围和动员地点,并追溯了活动家如何随着时间的推移制定政策理念:政策接力。这个框架可以分析反对者是如何在1993年无意中将改革进程的始作俑者变成笑柄的。反强奸倡导者最终在2014年重新制定了这项政策。这一次,故事的起源被删除了,呈现了一个简洁的叙述,将改革归功于政治家和大学管理人员,而不是活动家。通过追踪一场运动的理念,而不是关注组织或公众抗议,我发现了一个复杂的社会变革过程,在这个过程中,重要的行动者在不同的环境中工作,以点燃改革,并从战略上消除社会变革叙事中有争议的方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Established in 1957 and heralded as "always intriguing" by one critic, Sociological Perspectives is well edited and intensely peer-reviewed. Each issue of Sociological Perspectives offers 170 pages of pertinent and up-to-the-minute articles within the field of sociology. Articles typically address the ever-expanding body of knowledge about social processes and are related to economic, political, anthropological and historical issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信