协商偏见与平等:分析瑞士和芬兰民粹主义激进右翼信息支持者的性别和性言论

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Helenor Tormis, Mariman Mabrouk, Katarina Pettersson, Inari Sakki
{"title":"协商偏见与平等:分析瑞士和芬兰民粹主义激进右翼信息支持者的性别和性言论","authors":"Helenor Tormis,&nbsp;Mariman Mabrouk,&nbsp;Katarina Pettersson,&nbsp;Inari Sakki","doi":"10.1002/casp.2897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research on gender, sexuality and the populist radical right has revealed the contradictory positions of such parties and politicians regarding gender issues. However, less is known about the perspective of laypeople on these matters. This study focuses on supporters of a radical right populist message and analyses how prejudice is constructed in populist gender discourse. Analysing interview material from two countries, Finland (<i>n</i> = 55) and Switzerland (<i>n</i> = 33), this study adopts a discursive–rhetorical approach and identifies six key discursive practices: radical supporters of gender equality, privileged gender and sexual minorities, assimilating individuals as exceptions, sexual minorities excluded from normality, the unprejudiced self distanced from the discriminating party and the self aligned with the rational party. First, this study sheds light on supporters' constructions of equality, gender and feminism in contemporary discourse. Second, our discursive–rhetorical analysis shows how different categorisation strategies are used in negotiating prejudice. Third, the study further complements existing research on gender populism by examining gender issues from the demand side, illustrating the appeal of radical right populist ideology among voters. We conclude that discursive category constructions and exceptions allow including, excluding and delegitimising gender and sexual minorities and their supporters while distancing and aligning oneself with (un)prejudiced positions in gender discourse. Please refer to the Supporting Information section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.</p>","PeriodicalId":47850,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","volume":"34 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/casp.2897","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Negotiating Prejudice and Equality: Analysing Gender and Sexuality Discourse Among Supporters of Populist Radical Right Message in Switzerland and Finland\",\"authors\":\"Helenor Tormis,&nbsp;Mariman Mabrouk,&nbsp;Katarina Pettersson,&nbsp;Inari Sakki\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/casp.2897\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Research on gender, sexuality and the populist radical right has revealed the contradictory positions of such parties and politicians regarding gender issues. However, less is known about the perspective of laypeople on these matters. This study focuses on supporters of a radical right populist message and analyses how prejudice is constructed in populist gender discourse. Analysing interview material from two countries, Finland (<i>n</i> = 55) and Switzerland (<i>n</i> = 33), this study adopts a discursive–rhetorical approach and identifies six key discursive practices: radical supporters of gender equality, privileged gender and sexual minorities, assimilating individuals as exceptions, sexual minorities excluded from normality, the unprejudiced self distanced from the discriminating party and the self aligned with the rational party. First, this study sheds light on supporters' constructions of equality, gender and feminism in contemporary discourse. Second, our discursive–rhetorical analysis shows how different categorisation strategies are used in negotiating prejudice. Third, the study further complements existing research on gender populism by examining gender issues from the demand side, illustrating the appeal of radical right populist ideology among voters. We conclude that discursive category constructions and exceptions allow including, excluding and delegitimising gender and sexual minorities and their supporters while distancing and aligning oneself with (un)prejudiced positions in gender discourse. Please refer to the Supporting Information section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/casp.2897\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.2897\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.2897","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对性别、性和民粹激进右翼的研究揭示了这些政党和政治家在性别问题上的矛盾立场。然而,外行人对这些问题的看法却鲜为人知。本研究聚焦于激进右翼民粹主义信息的支持者,分析偏见是如何在民粹主义性别话语中被建构的。通过分析芬兰(n = 55)和瑞士(n = 33)两个国家的访谈材料,本研究采用了一种话语修辞方法,并确定了六种关键的话语实践:性别平等的激进支持者、享有特权的性别和性少数群体、作为例外的同化个人、被排除在常态之外的性少数群体、与歧视党保持距离的无偏见的自我以及与理性党保持一致的自我。首先,本研究揭示了支持者在当代话语中对平等、性别和女权主义的建构。其次,我们的话语修辞分析表明了在谈判偏见时如何使用不同的分类策略。第三,本研究通过从需求方面考察性别问题,进一步补充了现有的性别民粹主义研究,说明了激进右翼民粹主义意识形态对选民的吸引力。我们的结论是,话语类别建构和例外允许纳入、排斥性别和性少数群体及其支持者,并使其非法化,同时在性别话语中拉开距离并与(无)偏见立场保持一致。请参阅 "辅助信息 "部分,查看本文的 "社区和社会影响声明"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Negotiating Prejudice and Equality: Analysing Gender and Sexuality Discourse Among Supporters of Populist Radical Right Message in Switzerland and Finland

Research on gender, sexuality and the populist radical right has revealed the contradictory positions of such parties and politicians regarding gender issues. However, less is known about the perspective of laypeople on these matters. This study focuses on supporters of a radical right populist message and analyses how prejudice is constructed in populist gender discourse. Analysing interview material from two countries, Finland (n = 55) and Switzerland (n = 33), this study adopts a discursive–rhetorical approach and identifies six key discursive practices: radical supporters of gender equality, privileged gender and sexual minorities, assimilating individuals as exceptions, sexual minorities excluded from normality, the unprejudiced self distanced from the discriminating party and the self aligned with the rational party. First, this study sheds light on supporters' constructions of equality, gender and feminism in contemporary discourse. Second, our discursive–rhetorical analysis shows how different categorisation strategies are used in negotiating prejudice. Third, the study further complements existing research on gender populism by examining gender issues from the demand side, illustrating the appeal of radical right populist ideology among voters. We conclude that discursive category constructions and exceptions allow including, excluding and delegitimising gender and sexual minorities and their supporters while distancing and aligning oneself with (un)prejudiced positions in gender discourse. Please refer to the Supporting Information section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

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
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology publishes papers regarding social behaviour in relation to community problems and strengths. The journal is international in scope, reflecting the common concerns of scholars and community practitioners in Europe and worldwide.
×
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