自我保健修辞与机构责任:学院与智力劳动的理论化

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES
Emily R. Cabaniss, Shannon N. Davis, Kylie L. Parrotta
{"title":"自我保健修辞与机构责任:学院与智力劳动的理论化","authors":"Emily R. Cabaniss, Shannon N. Davis, Kylie L. Parrotta","doi":"10.1111/jftr.12567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Self‐care, a ubiquitous concept commonly touted as the solution to an array of modern‐day problems, implies unapologetic selfishness aimed at preserving mental, emotional, and physical health. The overtly individualistic framing in its most common usage—the centering of oneself for the sake of oneself—obscures power relations and structural/institutional inequalities that create the need for self‐care. To deal with difficult work or family lives, taking up a hobby or some kind of diversion offers an escape that feels good; self‐care serves as a kind of coping mechanism, but not a solution to a social problem. It also lets society, or more specifically, managers and administrators in organizations, off the hook because it places the onus on individuals to deal with challenges on their own rather than situating them as social problems. We critique shortcomings in self‐care rhetoric employed by organizations—and specifically university administrators—to their members, by extending Hochschild's economy of gratitude framework.","PeriodicalId":47446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Theory & Review","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Self‐care rhetoric and institutional culpability: Theorizing the academy and intellectual labor\",\"authors\":\"Emily R. Cabaniss, Shannon N. Davis, Kylie L. Parrotta\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jftr.12567\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Self‐care, a ubiquitous concept commonly touted as the solution to an array of modern‐day problems, implies unapologetic selfishness aimed at preserving mental, emotional, and physical health. The overtly individualistic framing in its most common usage—the centering of oneself for the sake of oneself—obscures power relations and structural/institutional inequalities that create the need for self‐care. To deal with difficult work or family lives, taking up a hobby or some kind of diversion offers an escape that feels good; self‐care serves as a kind of coping mechanism, but not a solution to a social problem. It also lets society, or more specifically, managers and administrators in organizations, off the hook because it places the onus on individuals to deal with challenges on their own rather than situating them as social problems. We critique shortcomings in self‐care rhetoric employed by organizations—and specifically university administrators—to their members, by extending Hochschild's economy of gratitude framework.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Family Theory & Review\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Family Theory & Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12567\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Theory & Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12567","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自我保健是一个无处不在的概念,通常被吹捧为解决一系列现代问题的方法,它意味着毫无保留的自私,旨在维护心理、情感和身体健康。在最常见的用法中,这种明显的个人主义框架--为了自己而以自己为中心--掩盖了造成自我保健需求的权力关系和结构性/制度性不平等。为了应对艰难的工作或家庭生活,培养兴趣爱好或进行某种消遣可以提供一种感觉良好的逃避;自我保健是一种应对机制,但不是解决社会问题的办法。它还让社会,或者更具体地说,让组织中的管理者和行政人员摆脱困境,因为它把个人应对挑战的责任放在了他们自己身上,而不是把它们归结为社会问题。我们通过扩展霍赫希尔德的 "感恩经济 "框架,批判了组织--特别是大学管理者--对其成员使用的自我保健修辞中的不足之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Self‐care rhetoric and institutional culpability: Theorizing the academy and intellectual labor
Self‐care, a ubiquitous concept commonly touted as the solution to an array of modern‐day problems, implies unapologetic selfishness aimed at preserving mental, emotional, and physical health. The overtly individualistic framing in its most common usage—the centering of oneself for the sake of oneself—obscures power relations and structural/institutional inequalities that create the need for self‐care. To deal with difficult work or family lives, taking up a hobby or some kind of diversion offers an escape that feels good; self‐care serves as a kind of coping mechanism, but not a solution to a social problem. It also lets society, or more specifically, managers and administrators in organizations, off the hook because it places the onus on individuals to deal with challenges on their own rather than situating them as social problems. We critique shortcomings in self‐care rhetoric employed by organizations—and specifically university administrators—to their members, by extending Hochschild's economy of gratitude framework.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
42
×
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