精英女权主义的坚持和框架:女性诺贝尔奖获得者反对性别不平等

Q2 Social Sciences
A. Hendley, H. Hurwitz
{"title":"精英女权主义的坚持和框架:女性诺贝尔奖获得者反对性别不平等","authors":"A. Hendley, H. Hurwitz","doi":"10.1080/00380237.2023.2178047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As feminist movements have become more diffuse, feminisms have increasingly emerged from and thrived within unexpected, “other” spaces. Elites have the potential to be powerful feminist adherents in social movement organizations as well as in these “other” spaces, yet we know little about the heterogeneity of their feminisms. We examined an understudied group of elites – women Nobel laureates – and the ways they forward a variety of feminisms across a range of historical and professional contexts. Drawing on a content analysis of 76 speeches, we examined if laureates express feminist adherence, how adherents frame gender inequality, and how adherence and framing vary over time and across award categories. Of all women Nobel laureates analyzed, nineteen expressed feminist adherence, framing gender inequality as: 1) women’s underrepresentation among laureates, 2) women’s oppression under patriarchy, and/or 3) not just a women’s issue. Feminist adherence became more common over time, and use of the third, most expansive and intersectional frame was especially concentrated within recent decades (more so than the other two frames). Peace and Literature laureates were more likely than Science laureates to express feminist adherence and to frame issues beyond the gender disparity among laureates. We argue that the variation in adherence and framing correspond to differences in laureates’ historical context and field of work. Our analysis responds to calls for more comparative research on framing, and we contribute to scholarship about variation in feminist attitudes by showing how historical conditions and professional communities can both influence adherence to and articulations of feminism.","PeriodicalId":39368,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Focus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elite Feminist Adherence and Framing: Women Nobel Laureates Speak Out against Gender Inequality\",\"authors\":\"A. Hendley, H. Hurwitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00380237.2023.2178047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT As feminist movements have become more diffuse, feminisms have increasingly emerged from and thrived within unexpected, “other” spaces. Elites have the potential to be powerful feminist adherents in social movement organizations as well as in these “other” spaces, yet we know little about the heterogeneity of their feminisms. We examined an understudied group of elites – women Nobel laureates – and the ways they forward a variety of feminisms across a range of historical and professional contexts. Drawing on a content analysis of 76 speeches, we examined if laureates express feminist adherence, how adherents frame gender inequality, and how adherence and framing vary over time and across award categories. Of all women Nobel laureates analyzed, nineteen expressed feminist adherence, framing gender inequality as: 1) women’s underrepresentation among laureates, 2) women’s oppression under patriarchy, and/or 3) not just a women’s issue. Feminist adherence became more common over time, and use of the third, most expansive and intersectional frame was especially concentrated within recent decades (more so than the other two frames). Peace and Literature laureates were more likely than Science laureates to express feminist adherence and to frame issues beyond the gender disparity among laureates. We argue that the variation in adherence and framing correspond to differences in laureates’ historical context and field of work. Our analysis responds to calls for more comparative research on framing, and we contribute to scholarship about variation in feminist attitudes by showing how historical conditions and professional communities can both influence adherence to and articulations of feminism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Focus\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2023.2178047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Focus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2023.2178047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要随着女权运动的日益扩散,女性主义越来越多地从意想不到的“其他”空间中产生并蓬勃发展。精英们有潜力在社会运动组织和这些“其他”空间成为强大的女权主义追随者,但我们对他们女权主义的异质性知之甚少。我们研究了一个研究不足的精英群体——女性诺贝尔奖获得者——以及她们在一系列历史和职业背景下推进各种女权主义的方式。根据对76篇演讲的内容分析,我们研究了获奖者是否表达了对女权主义的坚持,坚持者如何界定性别不平等,以及坚持和界定如何随着时间和奖项类别的变化而变化。在分析的所有诺贝尔奖获得者中,有19人表示坚持女权主义,将性别不平等定义为:1)女性在获奖者中的代表性不足,2)父权制下的女性压迫,和/或3)不仅仅是女性问题。随着时间的推移,女权主义的坚持变得越来越普遍,第三种、最广泛和最交叉的框架的使用在近几十年内尤其集中(比其他两种框架更为广泛)。和平与文学奖获得者比科学奖获得者更有可能表达对女权主义的坚持,并提出超越获奖者性别差异的问题。我们认为,坚持和框架的变化与获奖者的历史背景和工作领域的差异相对应。我们的分析回应了对框架进行更多比较研究的呼吁,我们通过展示历史条件和职业社区如何影响对女权主义的坚持和表达,为研究女权主义态度的变化做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Elite Feminist Adherence and Framing: Women Nobel Laureates Speak Out against Gender Inequality
ABSTRACT As feminist movements have become more diffuse, feminisms have increasingly emerged from and thrived within unexpected, “other” spaces. Elites have the potential to be powerful feminist adherents in social movement organizations as well as in these “other” spaces, yet we know little about the heterogeneity of their feminisms. We examined an understudied group of elites – women Nobel laureates – and the ways they forward a variety of feminisms across a range of historical and professional contexts. Drawing on a content analysis of 76 speeches, we examined if laureates express feminist adherence, how adherents frame gender inequality, and how adherence and framing vary over time and across award categories. Of all women Nobel laureates analyzed, nineteen expressed feminist adherence, framing gender inequality as: 1) women’s underrepresentation among laureates, 2) women’s oppression under patriarchy, and/or 3) not just a women’s issue. Feminist adherence became more common over time, and use of the third, most expansive and intersectional frame was especially concentrated within recent decades (more so than the other two frames). Peace and Literature laureates were more likely than Science laureates to express feminist adherence and to frame issues beyond the gender disparity among laureates. We argue that the variation in adherence and framing correspond to differences in laureates’ historical context and field of work. Our analysis responds to calls for more comparative research on framing, and we contribute to scholarship about variation in feminist attitudes by showing how historical conditions and professional communities can both influence adherence to and articulations of feminism.
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
Sociological Focus
Sociological Focus Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
×
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