1973-2013 年美国和英国社会生育的社会经济和性别组织比较

Katherine A. Moos, Pilar Gonalons-Pons
{"title":"1973-2013 年美国和英国社会生育的社会经济和性别组织比较","authors":"Katherine A. Moos, Pilar Gonalons-Pons","doi":"10.1093/sp/jxae007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Drawing on both gender regime theory and social reproduction theory, this article compares the socioeconomic and gendered organization of social reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom from 1973 to 2013. Integrating data from the Luxembourg Income Study, the Multinational Time-Use Study, and additional sources, we examine how men and women of different socioeconomic groups contribute to social reproduction through household production, paid work, and government social benefits. Our results demonstrate that household social reproduction has not been universally refamilialized, marketized, or desocialized in either country. While there is some evidence of degendering, questions remain about its feminist implications.","PeriodicalId":517187,"journal":{"name":"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society","volume":" 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of the Socioeconomic and Gendered Organization of Social Reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom, 1973–2013\",\"authors\":\"Katherine A. Moos, Pilar Gonalons-Pons\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/sp/jxae007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Drawing on both gender regime theory and social reproduction theory, this article compares the socioeconomic and gendered organization of social reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom from 1973 to 2013. Integrating data from the Luxembourg Income Study, the Multinational Time-Use Study, and additional sources, we examine how men and women of different socioeconomic groups contribute to social reproduction through household production, paid work, and government social benefits. Our results demonstrate that household social reproduction has not been universally refamilialized, marketized, or desocialized in either country. While there is some evidence of degendering, questions remain about its feminist implications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society\",\"volume\":\" 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxae007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxae007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文借鉴性别制度理论和社会再生产理论,比较了1973年至2013年美国和英国社会再生产的社会经济和性别组织。通过整合卢森堡收入研究、多国时间使用研究和其他来源的数据,我们考察了不同社会经济群体的男性和女性如何通过家庭生产、有偿工作和政府社会福利为社会再生产做出贡献。我们的研究结果表明,在这两个国家中,家庭社会再生产并没有普遍地重新家庭化、市场化或非社会化。虽然有一些退化的证据,但其对女性主义的影响仍然存在疑问。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Comparison of the Socioeconomic and Gendered Organization of Social Reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom, 1973–2013
Drawing on both gender regime theory and social reproduction theory, this article compares the socioeconomic and gendered organization of social reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom from 1973 to 2013. Integrating data from the Luxembourg Income Study, the Multinational Time-Use Study, and additional sources, we examine how men and women of different socioeconomic groups contribute to social reproduction through household production, paid work, and government social benefits. Our results demonstrate that household social reproduction has not been universally refamilialized, marketized, or desocialized in either country. While there is some evidence of degendering, questions remain about its feminist implications.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Comparison of the Socioeconomic and Gendered Organization of Social Reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom, 1973–2013 Do Men Care about Childcare? Women’s Relative Resources and Men’s Preferences for Work–Family Reconciliation Policies Rethinking Part-Time Outsiders’ Risks and Welfare Attitudes What About Fertility? The Unintentional Pro-natalism of a Nordic Country
×
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