Sex Wars and TERF Wars: The Divisiveness of Who is Included in Feminism

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Sex Roles Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1007/s11199-024-01473-2
Thekla Morgenroth, Teri A. Kirby, Miriam K. Zehnter, Michelle K. Ryan
{"title":"Sex Wars and TERF Wars: The Divisiveness of Who is Included in Feminism","authors":"Thekla Morgenroth, Teri A. Kirby, Miriam K. Zehnter, Michelle K. Ryan","doi":"10.1007/s11199-024-01473-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>An increasing number of people identify as feminists, but there is disagreement about whom and what feminism should be fighting for. Using a multi-method approach, across three studies (total <i>N</i> = 3,387), we examine (1) disagreements in today’s feminist movement and how these disagreements come together to form different ideological groups as well as (2) psychological variables associated with different feminist beliefs and ideologies. In doing so we establish a nuanced picture of contemporary feminism in the UK and the US. Study 1 used open-response data to identify topics on which today’s feminists disagree. Study 2 used exploratory factor analyses to examine how views on these topics hang together, resulting in eight feminist beliefs scales. Finally, Study 3 used cluster analysis to determine what ideological groups of feminists exist in quasi-representative samples from the US and the UK and explored the associations of these beliefs with relevant psychological constructs. Transgender issues, sex work, and the importance of marginalized perspectives were the most polarizing issues across studies, highlighting that feminists are more divided on the issue of <i>who</i> feminism should fight for, than <i>what</i> feminism should fight for. These studies show the heterogeneity of feminist ideologies and the continued barriers to a truly inclusive and intersectional feminist movement.\n</p>","PeriodicalId":48425,"journal":{"name":"Sex Roles","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sex Roles","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01473-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An increasing number of people identify as feminists, but there is disagreement about whom and what feminism should be fighting for. Using a multi-method approach, across three studies (total N = 3,387), we examine (1) disagreements in today’s feminist movement and how these disagreements come together to form different ideological groups as well as (2) psychological variables associated with different feminist beliefs and ideologies. In doing so we establish a nuanced picture of contemporary feminism in the UK and the US. Study 1 used open-response data to identify topics on which today’s feminists disagree. Study 2 used exploratory factor analyses to examine how views on these topics hang together, resulting in eight feminist beliefs scales. Finally, Study 3 used cluster analysis to determine what ideological groups of feminists exist in quasi-representative samples from the US and the UK and explored the associations of these beliefs with relevant psychological constructs. Transgender issues, sex work, and the importance of marginalized perspectives were the most polarizing issues across studies, highlighting that feminists are more divided on the issue of who feminism should fight for, than what feminism should fight for. These studies show the heterogeneity of feminist ideologies and the continued barriers to a truly inclusive and intersectional feminist movement.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性别战争与 TERF 战争:女权主义中包括哪些人的分歧
越来越多的人认为自己是女权主义者,但对于女权主义应该为谁而战、为什么而战却存在分歧。通过三项研究(总人数 = 3,387 人),我们采用多种方法研究了:(1)当今女权运动中的分歧,以及这些分歧如何汇聚成不同的意识形态群体;(2)与不同的女权信仰和意识形态相关的心理变量。通过这些研究,我们对英国和美国的当代女权主义有了细致入微的了解。研究 1 采用开放式回答数据来确定当今女权主义者存在分歧的话题。研究 2 采用探索性因素分析法来研究对这些主题的观点是如何组合在一起的,从而得出八个女权主义信念量表。最后,研究 3 利用聚类分析确定了在美国和英国的准代表性样本中存在哪些意识形态的女权主义者群体,并探讨了这些信念与相关心理结构之间的关联。变性问题、性工作和边缘化观点的重要性是各项研究中最两极分化的问题,这突出表明女权主义者在女权主义应该为谁而战的问题上比女权主义应该为什么而战的问题上更有分歧。这些研究显示了女权主义意识形态的异质性,以及真正具有包容性和交叉性的女权运动所面临的持续障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Sex Roles
Sex Roles Multiple-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Sex Roles: A Journal of Research is a global, multidisciplinary, scholarly, social and behavioral science journal with a feminist perspective. It publishes original research reports as well as original theoretical papers and conceptual review articles that explore how gender organizes people’s lives and their surrounding worlds, including gender identities, belief systems, representations, interactions, relations, organizations, institutions, and statuses. The range of topics covered is broad and dynamic, including but not limited to the study of gendered attitudes, stereotyping, and sexism; gendered contexts, culture, and power; the intersections of gender with race, class, sexual orientation, age, and other statuses and identities; body image; violence; gender (including masculinities) and feminist identities; human sexuality; communication studies; work and organizations; gendered development across the life span or life course; mental, physical, and reproductive health and health care; sports; interpersonal relationships and attraction; activism and social change; economic, political, and legal inequities; and methodological challenges and innovations in doing gender research.
期刊最新文献
Not All of Me Is Welcome Here: The Experiences of Trans and Gender Expansive Employees of Color in the U.S. Being Not Binary: Experiences and Functions of Gender and Gender Communities In Their Own Words: Re-Examining Gender Differences in Career Interests and Motivations in a New Generation Think Manager-Think Male Re-Examined: Race as a Moderator Playing the Game Differently: How Women Leaders in Academia Are Challenging Neopatriarchy
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1