Making publics in a pandemic: Posthuman relationalities, 'viral' intimacies and COVID-19.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Sociology Review Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-02 DOI:10.1080/14461242.2021.1961600
Kiran Pienaar, Jacinthe Flore, Jennifer Power, Dean Murphy
{"title":"Making publics in a pandemic: Posthuman relationalities, 'viral' intimacies and COVID-19.","authors":"Kiran Pienaar,&nbsp;Jacinthe Flore,&nbsp;Jennifer Power,&nbsp;Dean Murphy","doi":"10.1080/14461242.2021.1961600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic has placed sexual relationships into sharp focus as strict containment measures, including physical distancing and 'stay at home' restrictions, were initiated to control the spread of the virus. Governments in some jurisdictions prevented contact between non-cohabiting sexual partners (except for couples in pre-existing relationships), while community organisations recommended people avoid casual sexual encounters. This article analyses Australian media articles, commentary and public health messages published during March to October 2020 to explore the normative assumptions underpinning these measures. Applying posthumanist perspectives and Warner's (2002) conceptualisation of 'publics', we consider how COVID-19 public health advice enacts the (human) subject of public health as monogamous, coupled, and living with their partner or nuclear family. Those in non-normative relationships and households are not only excluded from this narrow enactment of the 'ideal' public health subject, but are rendered potentially risky disease vectors by virtue of their alternative kinship arrangements. We explore the implications of these findings for the more-than-human relationalities that shape health inequalities and processes of marginalisation during public health crises, and we offer suggestions for public health measures that address the needs of diverse 'publics'.</p>","PeriodicalId":46833,"journal":{"name":"Health Sociology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14461242.2021.1961600","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2021.1961600","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed sexual relationships into sharp focus as strict containment measures, including physical distancing and 'stay at home' restrictions, were initiated to control the spread of the virus. Governments in some jurisdictions prevented contact between non-cohabiting sexual partners (except for couples in pre-existing relationships), while community organisations recommended people avoid casual sexual encounters. This article analyses Australian media articles, commentary and public health messages published during March to October 2020 to explore the normative assumptions underpinning these measures. Applying posthumanist perspectives and Warner's (2002) conceptualisation of 'publics', we consider how COVID-19 public health advice enacts the (human) subject of public health as monogamous, coupled, and living with their partner or nuclear family. Those in non-normative relationships and households are not only excluded from this narrow enactment of the 'ideal' public health subject, but are rendered potentially risky disease vectors by virtue of their alternative kinship arrangements. We explore the implications of these findings for the more-than-human relationalities that shape health inequalities and processes of marginalisation during public health crises, and we offer suggestions for public health measures that address the needs of diverse 'publics'.

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
在大流行中公开:后人类关系、“病毒”亲密关系和COVID-19。
COVID-19大流行使性关系成为人们关注的焦点,因为采取了严格的遏制措施,包括保持身体距离和“呆在家里”限制,以控制病毒的传播。一些司法管辖区的政府禁止非同居性伴侣之间的接触(已有关系的伴侣除外),而社区组织建议人们避免随意的性接触。本文分析了2020年3月至10月期间发布的澳大利亚媒体文章、评论和公共卫生信息,以探讨支撑这些措施的规范性假设。运用后人类主义的观点和华纳(2002)的“公众”概念,我们考虑了COVID-19公共卫生建议如何将公共卫生的(人类)主体制定为一夫一妻制、已婚、与伴侣或核心家庭生活在一起。那些处于不规范关系和家庭中的人不仅被排除在这一狭隘的“理想”公共卫生主体之外,而且由于其替代性亲属关系安排而成为潜在危险的疾病传播媒介。我们探讨了这些发现对公共卫生危机期间形成健康不平等和边缘化过程的非人类关系的影响,并为解决不同“公众”需求的公共卫生措施提出了建议。
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
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: An international, scholarly peer-reviewed journal, Health Sociology Review explores the contribution of sociology and sociological research methods to understanding health and illness; to health policy, promotion and practice; and to equity, social justice, social policy and social work. Health Sociology Review is published in association with The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) under the editorship of Eileen Willis. Health Sociology Review publishes original theoretical and research articles, literature reviews, special issues, symposia, commentaries and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Drug consumption stigma and patient legitimacy: experiences of people who use drugs seeking care for chronic non-cancer pain in Nigeria. Gut feelings and lived experiences: a qualitative study of 'anti-diet' dietitians' and psychologists' motivations and experiences regarding the weight-neutral approach. Shifting solutions: tracking transformations of drugs, health and the 'human' through human rights processes in Australia. Masculine enhancement as health or pathology: gender and optimisation discourses in health promotion materials on performance and image-enhancing drugs (PIEDs). The good pain patient: a critical evaluation of patients' self-presentations in specialist pain clinics.
×
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