Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 2,715 items for :

  • Goal 5: Gender Equality x
Clear All

Building upon its development in educational scholarship, feminist scholars have incorporated the concept of ‘critical friend’ into their methodologies. Within political science, feminists have articulated critical friendship as relational research praxis, applying the concept to relationships between feminist academics and gender experts in institutions. We bring this research into conversation with feminist care ethics, asking how commitments to care ethics interact with commitments to being a ‘critical friend’ in feminist political science research. Based on interviews with feminist researchers, we argue that care is intrinsic to feminist research and underpins friendship. Whether or not it is explicitly articulated, the concept of ‘critical friend’ carries assumptions about the centrality and practice of care. These findings suggest that feminist scholars need to surface care explicitly in methodological discussions and articulate caring strategies, including self-care. Such surfacing must include acknowledging care as a source of depletion and nourishment, as well as fundamentally political.

Restricted access

Political comedy is an increasingly popular source of political information, making it important to understand how this media format presents politics to its audience and what kind of agenda it sets. However, there are still substantial limitations to the literature. The focus has often been on partisanship as a moderator for candidate representations in political comedy, while significantly less attention has been given to the role of gender. Combining frameworks from the subfields of political comedy and gendered media representations, this article adds to the growing research agenda by examining gendered representations of US presidential candidates in impressionist sketch comedy on Saturday Night Live. Content analysis reveals a persistence of gendered stereotypes in representations of candidates. Results of this study reflect the gender double bind in political leadership races and contradict recent findings on decreases in gendered media coverage.

Restricted access

This chapter situates the book within existing knowledge of intersectionality, and more specifically within knowledge of intersectionality’s operationalization. The latter is discussed in distinct and yet related fields of practice (public policy, social movements and the NGO sector), as well as key ‘issues in practice’ which are particularly relevant to the study of intersectionality in the NGO sector: representation, and coalition and solidarity. The chapter provides a rationale for the research, one motivation for which is that there is debate about what intersectionality is and means among scholars, suggesting that there is no one agreed meaning among practitioners either. Gaps in knowledge are identified, including intersectionality’s operationalization in the NGO sector, in the UK context, and how practitioners themselves understand intersectionality. Key debates within intersectionality studies are utilized to establish the parameters of how intersectionality is employed as a framework throughout the book.

Restricted access

This chapter examines a key issue to understanding and using intersectionality: coalition, within which relationship building and solidarity are also considered. This chapter asks, when applying intersectionality together, what do equality networks do, and how? How do competing concepts of intersectionality circulate, and with what effects for intersectional solidarity and intersectional justice? Barriers to coalition and solidarity are discussed, particularly engrained siloed thinking and attitudes; coalitions at work are examined, through analysis of network engagement on local equality strategies; and challenges and conflicts that emerge are analysed, specifically an example of conflicts about trans rights. The chapter shares lessons in terms of how intersectional political solidarity can be built, and the concepts of intersectionality that it requires; and what some of the limits to this are. The chapter argues that while coalition is a core part of intersectional practice, which concept of intersectionality is employed by both coalitions themselves and participants in them determines how successful they are at building relationships of solidarity to further intersectional justice.

Restricted access

This chapter explores the implications and contributions of the book. Competing concepts of intersectionality serve distinct interests and are thus championed by particular actors; this politics is evident in conflicts about and in the arenas of representation and coalition. The chapter reflects on recommendations arising for policy and practice. While there are few ideal solutions to the problems of intersectionality’s conceptualization and operationalization in siloed policy and practice, from the perspective of thinking through the implications for intersectionally marginalized groups, some compromises and imperfections may be deemed more acceptable than others. Ultimately, the chapter argues that the way that ‘intersectionality’ is mobilized in competing and contradicting ways in policy and practice suggests that, in this context, new, more specific and more transformative concepts are required, and offers some thoughts arising from the research findings on what intersectional practice for intersectional justice might involve.

Restricted access

This chapter analyses the context in which equality NGOs conceptualize and operationalize intersectionality, namely: (i) equality policy and discourse; (ii) austerity; and (iii) the sector’s relationships to the state. Equality organizations’ work is situated within public discourses arising from UK and Scottish equality policy, and the implications of equality policy for intersectionality are analysed. The chapter introduces equality work and discourse as being distinct to the discourse of social ‘inequality’; analyses intersectionality’s take-up, uses and meanings in equality policy documents; and analyses the external barriers that equality organizations face when seeking to operationalize intersectionality. It is argued that in equality policy, there are a range of definitions of intersectionality which thus leaves it underdetermined. Its deployment is largely individualized; merely descriptive; additive; and superficial. Moreover, meaningful engagement with race as a central category of intersectionality theory is lacking in policy. The meanings and uses of intersectionality in equality policy are both influenced by and influence understandings of intersectionality among NGOs. Finally, equality organizations are significantly hampered in their attempts to operationalize intersectionality by the low status they occupy vis-à-vis the state and by neoliberal austerity contexts.

Restricted access

Social media has become an important tool for political discussion and participation. Furthermore, recently, the question of gendered harassment in online political spaces has gained much scholarly attention. However, work here has largely focused on elected representatives, with little work on how this affects ordinary citizens. This article seeks to establish whether there is a gendered online participation gap, using data from the British Election Study across three elections. It further seeks to reveal why this gap may exist by assessing specific questions about being harassed or fearing negative responses online. The findings show a persistent gender gap in political participation online across all elections studied. Furthermore, although women were not necessarily more likely to have been harassed online, they were far more likely to have avoided posting about politics for fear of a negative response. This suggests that fear of harassment may contribute to lower political participation online for women.

Restricted access

Race, class, gender and gender identity, disability status, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, migration status and faith remain salient markers of inequality in the UK, and in many ways increasingly so. Yet these inequalities have predominantly been addressed separately. Since little progress has been made by the separate single-issue approach in terms of achieving equality for the most marginalized, there is growing recognition that pursuing social justice requires policymakers and organizations to engage with intersectionality.

This chapter discusses the author’s positionality; outlines the context: UK equality policy, which has been an important driver engendering current policy and NGO sector interest in intersectionality; and describes the equality NGO sector. Then, the chapter provides an overview of the book’s core arguments, explains the research underpinning it and outlines the chapters.

Restricted access

This is the first book to explore how both practitioners and policymakers understand how to operationalize the Black feminist theory of ‘intersectionality’ – and with what effect. It is also the first to explore how intersectionality has been applied in practice in the UK – an important case study since its internationally unique unification of equality legislation and architecture creates opportunities to consider the interactions of inequalities. Focusing on non-governmental racial justice, feminist, LGBTI, migrants’ and disability rights organizations (NGOs), the book demonstrates that there is not one but five applied meanings given to ‘intersectionality’ in equality organizing and policy. This is an integral insight because some of these advance intersectional justice and are politically transformative, while others in spite of being named as ‘intersectionality’ actually serve to further entrench inequalities. Intersectional practice is about (a) representation (not only who is represented, but also whether and how to represent), and (b) coalition and solidarity, and conflicts around each are driven by these competing concepts of intersectionality; in other words, competing concepts are at the heart of the politics of who does intersectionality, and how. Intersectionality’s operationalization necessitates a focus on common issues and intersectionally marginalized identities, including emergent ones. NGOs can build greater unity through developing shared understandings of intersectionality, and work to balance acting in solidarity while prioritizing the agency of those who are intersectionally marginalized.

Restricted access

This is the first book to explore how both practitioners and policymakers understand how to operationalize the Black feminist theory of ‘intersectionality’ – and with what effect. It is also the first to explore how intersectionality has been applied in practice in the UK – an important case study since its internationally unique unification of equality legislation and architecture creates opportunities to consider the interactions of inequalities. Focusing on non-governmental racial justice, feminist, LGBTI, migrants’ and disability rights organizations (NGOs), the book demonstrates that there is not one but five applied meanings given to ‘intersectionality’ in equality organizing and policy. This is an integral insight because some of these advance intersectional justice and are politically transformative, while others in spite of being named as ‘intersectionality’ actually serve to further entrench inequalities. Intersectional practice is about (a) representation (not only who is represented, but also whether and how to represent), and (b) coalition and solidarity, and conflicts around each are driven by these competing concepts of intersectionality; in other words, competing concepts are at the heart of the politics of who does intersectionality, and how. Intersectionality’s operationalization necessitates a focus on common issues and intersectionally marginalized identities, including emergent ones. NGOs can build greater unity through developing shared understandings of intersectionality, and work to balance acting in solidarity while prioritizing the agency of those who are intersectionally marginalized.

Restricted access