我的身体,我的选择?研究对人工流产和 COVID-19 规定的态度所依据的不同特征

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Sex Roles Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1007/s11199-024-01533-7
Danny Osborne, Joaquin Bahamondes, Eden V. Clarke, Deborah Hill Cone, Kieren J. Lilly, Morgana Lizzio-Wilson, Eduardo J. Rivera Pichardo, Nicole Satherley, Natalia Maria Simionato, Emma F. Thomas, Elena Zubielevitch, Chris G. Sibley
{"title":"我的身体,我的选择?研究对人工流产和 COVID-19 规定的态度所依据的不同特征","authors":"Danny Osborne, Joaquin Bahamondes, Eden V. Clarke, Deborah Hill Cone, Kieren J. Lilly, Morgana Lizzio-Wilson, Eduardo J. Rivera Pichardo, Nicole Satherley, Natalia Maria Simionato, Emma F. Thomas, Elena Zubielevitch, Chris G. Sibley","doi":"10.1007/s11199-024-01533-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Protestors recently repurposed the abortion rights’ mantra, “my body, my choice,” to oppose COVID-19 mandates. But do those who oppose public health mandates fully support the right to choose? We answer this question by using exploratory analyses to identify the unique response patterns underlying support for abortion and COVID-19 mandates in random samples from the United States (Study 1; <i>N</i> = 2,331) and New Zealand (Study 2; <i>N</i> = 33,310). Latent profile analyses revealed a small subgroup in both countries (12.6% and 3.4% of the respective samples) who opposed mandates. Yet contrary to the “my body, my choice” rhetoric seen at anti-mandate protests, they also opposed abortion. Across both studies, those in the <i>Anti-Mandate</i> profile tended to be more religious, conservative, and distrustful of institutions. In Study 2, they were also low on cognitive consistency and high on conspiracy belief. Finally, the <i>Anti-Mandate</i> profile was opposed to free speech critical of both the United States and religion (Study 1), high on sexual prejudice (both studies), unsupportive of progressive protests (but supportive of reactionary protests; Study 2), and likely to vote for conservative parties (both studies). These results reveal the mobilization potential of the anti-mandate movement, uncover important contradictions within its members, and illustrate the nuanced ways in which opposition to gender policies (i.e., reproductive rights) coalesce with reactionary protests.</p>","PeriodicalId":48425,"journal":{"name":"Sex Roles","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"My Body, My Choice? Examining the Distinct Profiles Underlying Attitudes Toward Abortion and COVID-19 Mandates\",\"authors\":\"Danny Osborne, Joaquin Bahamondes, Eden V. Clarke, Deborah Hill Cone, Kieren J. Lilly, Morgana Lizzio-Wilson, Eduardo J. Rivera Pichardo, Nicole Satherley, Natalia Maria Simionato, Emma F. Thomas, Elena Zubielevitch, Chris G. Sibley\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11199-024-01533-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Protestors recently repurposed the abortion rights’ mantra, “my body, my choice,” to oppose COVID-19 mandates. But do those who oppose public health mandates fully support the right to choose? We answer this question by using exploratory analyses to identify the unique response patterns underlying support for abortion and COVID-19 mandates in random samples from the United States (Study 1; <i>N</i> = 2,331) and New Zealand (Study 2; <i>N</i> = 33,310). Latent profile analyses revealed a small subgroup in both countries (12.6% and 3.4% of the respective samples) who opposed mandates. Yet contrary to the “my body, my choice” rhetoric seen at anti-mandate protests, they also opposed abortion. Across both studies, those in the <i>Anti-Mandate</i> profile tended to be more religious, conservative, and distrustful of institutions. In Study 2, they were also low on cognitive consistency and high on conspiracy belief. Finally, the <i>Anti-Mandate</i> profile was opposed to free speech critical of both the United States and religion (Study 1), high on sexual prejudice (both studies), unsupportive of progressive protests (but supportive of reactionary protests; Study 2), and likely to vote for conservative parties (both studies). These results reveal the mobilization potential of the anti-mandate movement, uncover important contradictions within its members, and illustrate the nuanced ways in which opposition to gender policies (i.e., reproductive rights) coalesce with reactionary protests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48425,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sex Roles\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-28\",\"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/s11199-024-01533-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sex Roles","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01533-7","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

摘要

最近,抗议者将堕胎权利的口号 "我的身体,我的选择 "改头换面,用来反对 COVID-19 强制规定。但是,那些反对公共卫生授权的人是否完全支持选择权呢?我们通过探索性分析来回答这个问题,我们从美国(研究 1;样本数 = 2,331)和新西兰(研究 2;样本数 = 33,310)的随机样本中找出了支持堕胎和 COVID-19 强制规定的独特反应模式。潜在特征分析显示,这两个国家都有一小部分人(分别占各自样本的 12.6% 和 3.4%)反对强制堕胎。然而,与反强制规定抗议活动中 "我的身体,我做主 "的言论相反,他们也反对堕胎。在这两项研究中,"反强制 "人群往往更信教、更保守、更不信任机构。在研究 2 中,他们的认知一致性较低,阴谋论信念较高。最后,"反授权 "群体反对批判美国和宗教的自由言论(研究 1),性偏见高(两项研究),不支持进步的抗议活动(但支持反动的抗议活动;研究 2),可能投票给保守党(两项研究)。这些结果揭示了反授权运动的动员潜力,发现了其成员内部的重要矛盾,并说明了反对性别政策(即生殖权利)与反动抗议的微妙结合方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
My Body, My Choice? Examining the Distinct Profiles Underlying Attitudes Toward Abortion and COVID-19 Mandates

Protestors recently repurposed the abortion rights’ mantra, “my body, my choice,” to oppose COVID-19 mandates. But do those who oppose public health mandates fully support the right to choose? We answer this question by using exploratory analyses to identify the unique response patterns underlying support for abortion and COVID-19 mandates in random samples from the United States (Study 1; N = 2,331) and New Zealand (Study 2; N = 33,310). Latent profile analyses revealed a small subgroup in both countries (12.6% and 3.4% of the respective samples) who opposed mandates. Yet contrary to the “my body, my choice” rhetoric seen at anti-mandate protests, they also opposed abortion. Across both studies, those in the Anti-Mandate profile tended to be more religious, conservative, and distrustful of institutions. In Study 2, they were also low on cognitive consistency and high on conspiracy belief. Finally, the Anti-Mandate profile was opposed to free speech critical of both the United States and religion (Study 1), high on sexual prejudice (both studies), unsupportive of progressive protests (but supportive of reactionary protests; Study 2), and likely to vote for conservative parties (both studies). These results reveal the mobilization potential of the anti-mandate movement, uncover important contradictions within its members, and illustrate the nuanced ways in which opposition to gender policies (i.e., reproductive rights) coalesce with reactionary protests.

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
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