‘International, intersectional and interdisciplinary’ – Gender and feminist studies degree descriptions and logics of representation in marketised English higher education

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 WOMENS STUDIES Womens Studies International Forum Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.wsif.2024.102936
Lili Schwoerer
{"title":"‘International, intersectional and interdisciplinary’ – Gender and feminist studies degree descriptions and logics of representation in marketised English higher education","authors":"Lili Schwoerer","doi":"10.1016/j.wsif.2024.102936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article explores how the academic field of gender and feminist studies in England represents itself, by drawing on a discourse analysis of online descriptions from websites of all gender and feminist studies degree programmes and departments in English universities, all but one of which are graduate degrees. Foregrounding the context of the neoliberal university, in which feminist and gender knowledge is simultaneously marginalised and mainstreamed, the article asks how representations of the field are shaped by the marketisation of higher education. This analysis reveals a disjuncture between two representative logics: while most feminist, gender studies and queer scholarship relies on anti-essentialist epistemologies and ontologies, the dominant logic of representation in contemporary universities understands difference as static and representable. This representability enables and is in turn facilitated by marketisation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47940,"journal":{"name":"Womens Studies International Forum","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102936"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Womens Studies International Forum","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277539524000748","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"WOMENS STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores how the academic field of gender and feminist studies in England represents itself, by drawing on a discourse analysis of online descriptions from websites of all gender and feminist studies degree programmes and departments in English universities, all but one of which are graduate degrees. Foregrounding the context of the neoliberal university, in which feminist and gender knowledge is simultaneously marginalised and mainstreamed, the article asks how representations of the field are shaped by the marketisation of higher education. This analysis reveals a disjuncture between two representative logics: while most feminist, gender studies and queer scholarship relies on anti-essentialist epistemologies and ontologies, the dominant logic of representation in contemporary universities understands difference as static and representable. This representability enables and is in turn facilitated by marketisation.

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
国际、交叉和跨学科"--英国高等教育市场化中的性别和女权研究学位描述与代表逻辑
本文通过对英国大学所有性别与女权研究学位课程和院系(除一所大学外均为研究生学位)网站的在线描述进行话语分析,探讨了英国的性别与女权研究学术领域是如何自我表述的。在新自由主义大学的背景下,女性主义和性别知识既被边缘化,又被主流化,文章从这一背景出发,探讨了高等教育市场化是如何塑造这一领域的表征的。这一分析揭示了两种代表性逻辑之间的脱节:大多数女权主义、性别研究和同性恋学术研究都依赖于反本质主义的认识论和本体论,而当代大学中占主导地位的代表性逻辑则将差异理解为静态的、可表征的。这种可表征性使市场化成为可能,反过来又促进了市场化。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
63
审稿时长
79 days
期刊介绍: Women"s Studies International Forum (formerly Women"s Studies International Quarterly, established in 1978) is a bimonthly journal to aid the distribution and exchange of feminist research in the multidisciplinary, international area of women"s studies and in feminist research in other disciplines. The policy of the journal is to establish a feminist forum for discussion and debate. The journal seeks to critique and reconceptualize existing knowledge, to examine and re-evaluate the manner in which knowledge is produced and distributed, and to assess the implications this has for women"s lives.
期刊最新文献
The struggle for identity among Black professional women who are widowed: A South African feminist perspective Research trends on the intricate dimensions of divorce among women: A bibliometric analysis Intersectionality in gender inequality among women: Adopting policies to minimise unpaid care burden on rural women in north-western Ghana The effect of pregnant women's childbirth beliefs on fear of childbirth Kinship support and coping with infertility: A qualitative study of women struggling with infertility from Delhi-NCR, India
×
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