Bloody widows? Discourses of tradition and gender in Ghanaian politics

IF 2.4 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Discourse & Society Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1177/09579265221088160
G. Diabah
{"title":"Bloody widows? Discourses of tradition and gender in Ghanaian politics","authors":"G. Diabah","doi":"10.1177/09579265221088160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, although there have been steady increases in the number of women in politics, widespread gender inequalities persist. This is particularly pervasive in patriarchal societies where gender norms and practices are deeply entrenched, with socio-cultural barriers often cited as some of the key impediments to women’s search for political power. There have, therefore, been calls to remove such barriers for effective participation. Unfortunately, some events that occurred before Ghana’s 2020 election discourage, rather than encourage, women’s participation in governance. With data from articles, headlines and comments from various online media outlets, this paper examines three events that reinforce what may be called ‘a bloody widow discourse’ in Ghana’s politics. Using Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis, the paper shows how traditional norms and expectations associated with widowhood can be perceived as barriers to women’s (and not men’s) quest for political power, thereby sustaining the unequal gender and power relations in politics. The use of allusion, rhetorical questions and presuppositions further perpetuate a ‘blame-the-widow’ discourse which makes the women appear unworthy of the power they seek.","PeriodicalId":47965,"journal":{"name":"Discourse & Society","volume":"33 1","pages":"154 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265221088160","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, although there have been steady increases in the number of women in politics, widespread gender inequalities persist. This is particularly pervasive in patriarchal societies where gender norms and practices are deeply entrenched, with socio-cultural barriers often cited as some of the key impediments to women’s search for political power. There have, therefore, been calls to remove such barriers for effective participation. Unfortunately, some events that occurred before Ghana’s 2020 election discourage, rather than encourage, women’s participation in governance. With data from articles, headlines and comments from various online media outlets, this paper examines three events that reinforce what may be called ‘a bloody widow discourse’ in Ghana’s politics. Using Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis, the paper shows how traditional norms and expectations associated with widowhood can be perceived as barriers to women’s (and not men’s) quest for political power, thereby sustaining the unequal gender and power relations in politics. The use of allusion, rhetorical questions and presuppositions further perpetuate a ‘blame-the-widow’ discourse which makes the women appear unworthy of the power they seek.
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
血腥寡妇?加纳政治中的传统与性别话语
据各国议会联盟称,尽管参政的妇女人数稳步增加,但普遍存在的性别不平等仍然存在。这在性别规范和做法根深蒂固的男权社会尤为普遍,社会文化障碍往往被认为是女性寻求政治权力的一些主要障碍。因此,有人呼吁消除有效参与的这种障碍。不幸的是,在加纳2020年大选之前发生的一些事件阻碍而不是鼓励妇女参与治理。本文以各种网路媒体的文章、标题和评论为资料,检视三件强化加纳政治中所谓“血腥寡妇话语”的事件。本文运用女性主义批评话语分析,展示了与守寡相关的传统规范和期望如何被视为女性(而不是男性)追求政治权力的障碍,从而维持了政治中不平等的性别和权力关系。典故、反问句和预设的使用进一步延续了“指责寡妇”的话语,使女性看起来不配获得她们所追求的权力。
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
4.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Discourse & Society is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal whose major aim is to publish outstanding research at the boundaries of discourse analysis and the social sciences. It focuses on explicit theory formation and analysis of the relationships between the structures of text, talk, language use, verbal interaction or communication, on the one hand, and societal, political or cultural micro- and macrostructures and cognitive social representations, on the other hand. That is, D&S studies society through discourse and discourse through an analysis of its socio-political and cultural functions or implications. Its contributions are based on advanced theory formation and methodologies of several disciplines in the humanities and social sciences.
期刊最新文献
The Islamic State’s use of the Qur’an in its Magazines, Dabiq and Rumiyah Pro-vaccination personal narratives in response to online hesitancy about the HPV vaccine: The challenge of tellability. Racist discourse in a German far-right blog: A corpus-driven approach using word embeddings Antisemitism in contemporary Türkiye: Discourses on Turkish Jews on Twitter You’re a murderer: Critical discourse analysis of conversations around abortions in the Russian talk show
×
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