Book Review: Just Care: Messy Entanglements of Disability, Dependency, and Desire by Akemi Nishida

IF 7.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Moya Bailey
{"title":"Book Review: Just Care: Messy Entanglements of Disability, Dependency, and Desire by Akemi Nishida","authors":"Moya Bailey","doi":"10.1177/08912432231169707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"suggest that young people seem less interested in “working collectively to dismantle hegemonic binaries” than they are in “practicing neoliberal individualized identities” that place “emphasis on personal choice” (p. 132). This observation left us wondering how reflexive and routine practices might differ across generations as well as how the ability (i.e., associated risk and protection) to dismantle hegemonic binaries may differ across gender and sexual identities. Overall, this book illuminates the ways reflexive and routine practices are interconnected: how reflexive can become routine; how routine practices may prompt reflexive engagements; how routine does not negate reflexivity; and how both can reinforce or resist dominant structures. The authors highlight how routine and reflexive practices do not exist in a social vacuum but, rather, are bound to social conditions, particularly relational and discursive structures. A Kaleidoscope of Identities demonstrates how reflexivity and routine serve the purpose of accountability—to dominant social structures, to community, and to one’s self. This book is suitable for researchers of all levels who are interested in gender and sexual identities. For the novice sociologist, the book follows a clear structure that begins each section with an overview outlining the objectives it sets to achieve. The authors use accessible language and operationalize terminology upon first use. Arguments build sequentially, which provides foundational learning for novice sociologists and a welcomed refresher for those more senior. And, importantly, the foundational theories upon which structured action theory is built highlight a clear gap in previous thinking and the importance of Messerschmidt and Bridges’ work in advancing our understanding of gender, sex, and sexual identities.","PeriodicalId":48351,"journal":{"name":"Gender & Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"648 - 650"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gender & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432231169707","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

suggest that young people seem less interested in “working collectively to dismantle hegemonic binaries” than they are in “practicing neoliberal individualized identities” that place “emphasis on personal choice” (p. 132). This observation left us wondering how reflexive and routine practices might differ across generations as well as how the ability (i.e., associated risk and protection) to dismantle hegemonic binaries may differ across gender and sexual identities. Overall, this book illuminates the ways reflexive and routine practices are interconnected: how reflexive can become routine; how routine practices may prompt reflexive engagements; how routine does not negate reflexivity; and how both can reinforce or resist dominant structures. The authors highlight how routine and reflexive practices do not exist in a social vacuum but, rather, are bound to social conditions, particularly relational and discursive structures. A Kaleidoscope of Identities demonstrates how reflexivity and routine serve the purpose of accountability—to dominant social structures, to community, and to one’s self. This book is suitable for researchers of all levels who are interested in gender and sexual identities. For the novice sociologist, the book follows a clear structure that begins each section with an overview outlining the objectives it sets to achieve. The authors use accessible language and operationalize terminology upon first use. Arguments build sequentially, which provides foundational learning for novice sociologists and a welcomed refresher for those more senior. And, importantly, the foundational theories upon which structured action theory is built highlight a clear gap in previous thinking and the importance of Messerschmidt and Bridges’ work in advancing our understanding of gender, sex, and sexual identities.
书评:《公正的关怀:残疾、依赖和欲望的混乱纠缠》,西田明美著
建议年轻人似乎对“集体努力拆除霸权的二元性”不太感兴趣,而更感兴趣的是“实践新自由主义的个性化身份”,强调“个人选择”(第132页)。这一观察结果让我们想知道,反身性行为和常规行为在不同世代之间可能有何不同,以及拆除霸权二元性的能力(即相关的风险和保护)在不同性别和性身份之间可能有何不同。总的来说,这本书阐明了反思性和常规做法相互联系的方式:反思性如何成为常规;日常实践如何可能引发反身性行为;常规如何不否定反身性;以及两者如何加强或抵制主导结构。作者强调,常规和反思性实践并不存在于社会真空中,而是与社会条件,特别是关系和话语结构相联系。《身份的万花筒》展示了反身性和常规性是如何服务于问责的目的的——对主导的社会结构、对社区和对一个人的自我。这本书适合对性别和性身份感兴趣的各个层次的研究人员。对于社会学家新手来说,这本书遵循一个清晰的结构,每个部分都以概述其设定的目标开始。作者使用易于理解的语言和操作术语在第一次使用。争论是循序渐进的,这为社会学家新手提供了基础学习,也为资深社会学家提供了受欢迎的复习。重要的是,构建结构化行动理论的基础理论强调了先前思想的明显差距,以及梅塞施密特和布里奇斯的工作在促进我们对性别、性和性身份的理解方面的重要性。
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
Gender & Society
Gender & Society Multiple-
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
3.60%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Gender & Society promotes feminist scholarship and the social scientific study of gender. Gender & Society publishes theoretically engaged and methodologically rigorous articles that make original contributions to gender theory. The journal takes a multidisciplinary, intersectional, and global approach to gender analyses.
×
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