第三种选择:理解和评估美国的非二元性别政策

Q1 Social Sciences Administrative Theory and Praxis Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI:10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046
Nicole M. Elias, R. Colvin
{"title":"第三种选择:理解和评估美国的非二元性别政策","authors":"Nicole M. Elias, R. Colvin","doi":"10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our fundamental understandings and treatments of gender and gender identity within the United States are evolving. Recently, a few countries and several U.S. states have moved away from the binary categories of male and female to include a non-binary gender option for official state documents. This third, gender-neutral option, is usually represented as “X” where “M” for male and “F” for female traditionally appeared. The purpose of this study is twofold; first, to utilize Iris Marion Young’s theory of oppression to help contextualize the historical oppression of non-binary gender identity recognition by the State, and second, to analyze recent efforts by U.S. states to include non-binary gender categories. Using Young’s theory for normative explanation along with the Open Society Foundations’ (OSF) practical recommendations, we present a simple administrative framework for comparing proposed, adopted, and enacted non-binary gender policies across the United States. Tying each OSF best practice to one of Young’s faces of oppression, we are able to assess each law or policies’ effectiveness in dismantling the oppressive binary constructs of society.","PeriodicalId":37205,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Theory and Praxis","volume":"42 1","pages":"191 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Third Option: Understanding and Assessing Non-binary Gender Policies in the United States\",\"authors\":\"Nicole M. Elias, R. Colvin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Our fundamental understandings and treatments of gender and gender identity within the United States are evolving. Recently, a few countries and several U.S. states have moved away from the binary categories of male and female to include a non-binary gender option for official state documents. This third, gender-neutral option, is usually represented as “X” where “M” for male and “F” for female traditionally appeared. The purpose of this study is twofold; first, to utilize Iris Marion Young’s theory of oppression to help contextualize the historical oppression of non-binary gender identity recognition by the State, and second, to analyze recent efforts by U.S. states to include non-binary gender categories. Using Young’s theory for normative explanation along with the Open Society Foundations’ (OSF) practical recommendations, we present a simple administrative framework for comparing proposed, adopted, and enacted non-binary gender policies across the United States. Tying each OSF best practice to one of Young’s faces of oppression, we are able to assess each law or policies’ effectiveness in dismantling the oppressive binary constructs of society.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Theory and Praxis\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"191 - 211\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Theory and Praxis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Theory and Praxis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2019.1659046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

我们在美国对性别和性别认同的基本理解和处理方式正在演变。最近,一些国家和美国几个州已经放弃了男性和女性的二元分类,在官方国家文件中加入了非二元性别选项。第三种是中性选项,通常表示为“X”,其中“M”代表男性,“F”代表女性。这项研究的目的是双重的;首先,利用Iris Marion Young的压迫理论,帮助将国家承认非二元性别认同的历史压迫置于情境中,其次,分析美国各州最近将非二元性类别纳入其中的努力。利用杨的理论进行规范性解释,并结合开放社会基金会(OSF)的实践建议,我们提出了一个简单的行政框架,用于比较美国各地提出、通过和颁布的非二元性别政策。将每一个OSF的最佳实践与杨的一个压迫面孔联系起来,我们能够评估每一项法律或政策在拆除压迫性的二元社会结构方面的有效性。
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 Third Option: Understanding and Assessing Non-binary Gender Policies in the United States
Our fundamental understandings and treatments of gender and gender identity within the United States are evolving. Recently, a few countries and several U.S. states have moved away from the binary categories of male and female to include a non-binary gender option for official state documents. This third, gender-neutral option, is usually represented as “X” where “M” for male and “F” for female traditionally appeared. The purpose of this study is twofold; first, to utilize Iris Marion Young’s theory of oppression to help contextualize the historical oppression of non-binary gender identity recognition by the State, and second, to analyze recent efforts by U.S. states to include non-binary gender categories. Using Young’s theory for normative explanation along with the Open Society Foundations’ (OSF) practical recommendations, we present a simple administrative framework for comparing proposed, adopted, and enacted non-binary gender policies across the United States. Tying each OSF best practice to one of Young’s faces of oppression, we are able to assess each law or policies’ effectiveness in dismantling the oppressive binary constructs of society.
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
Administrative Theory and Praxis
Administrative Theory and Praxis Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Farewell, and thanks for the memories Reckoning with theoretical research: A heuristic for gauging and writing public administration theory Meaningful knowledge about public administration: Epistemological and methodological antecedents Theory and practice in dis-harmony? Toward a praxis ecosystem approach to the public administration and management discipline and profession ATP celebrates 45 years: A dialogue series
×
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