RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      Gender mainstreaming, affirmative action and diversity

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A105834972

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      This paper addresses two questions. First, how is it that gender mainstreaming at times comes to replace women-specific policies (affirmative action) and Women's Policy units (focal points) when prominent spokespeople associated with its development s...

      This paper addresses two questions. First, how is it that gender mainstreaming at times comes to replace women-specific policies (affirmative action) and Women's Policy units (focal points) when prominent spokespeople associated with its development state explicitly that this should not happen (Hannan 2008: 37)? Second, how do concerns for cross-cutting processes of social subordination, captured in the shorthand terms 'diversity' or 'intersectionality', come, at times, to mean a reduction in attention to 'women's issues' when that was never the objective' A third underlying question is - what can those committed to egalitarian politics do about these unexpected and untoward developments' The paper makes the case that it is important to pay attention to the meanings imparted to key concepts, including gender mainstreaming, affirmative action and diversity. It offers a methodology for analysing concepts called 'what's the problem represented to be?'(Bacchi 1999; 2009), which encourages the identification of underlying presuppOSitions in concepts and their accompanying effects. As an example, returning to the questions posed at the outset, conceptualising affirmative action as 'special assistance' or 'preferential treatment' for 'disadvantaged' women, which is the dominant representation of the reform, helps explain how gender mainstreaming, in some incarnations, comes to displace it. So too particular versions of 'diversity', e.g. as something located within individuals or groups, produces the discursive
      practice of 'commatisation' (O'Brien 1984). With commatisation, the policy emphasis goes onto the he 'disadvantages' of 'women (comma) blacks (comma) gays (comma). .' etc., etc. and leaves the advantages available to the unspoken norm (white, male, straight, etc) hidden from view (Eveline, 1994).The paper uses these examples, among others, to illustrate that how 'problems'are conceptualised matters in terms of political outcomes and to reflect on the political repercussions of this observation - what to do when concepts 'let us down'.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Politics and meaning in gender equality policies
      • Politics and meaning in affirmative action
      • Politics and meaning in gender mainstreaming
      • Politics and meaning in diversity
      • What to do with this theory? How to proceed?
      • Politics and meaning in gender equality policies
      • Politics and meaning in affirmative action
      • Politics and meaning in gender mainstreaming
      • Politics and meaning in diversity
      • What to do with this theory? How to proceed?
      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼