宗教职业道德与父权制精神:1977 - 2018年为自己工作的宗教性与性别差异

IF 2.7 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Science Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.15195/v9.a4
Landon Schnabel, C. Schleifer, Eman Abdelhadi, Samuel L. Perry
{"title":"宗教职业道德与父权制精神:1977 - 2018年为自己工作的宗教性与性别差异","authors":"Landon Schnabel, C. Schleifer, Eman Abdelhadi, Samuel L. Perry","doi":"10.15195/v9.a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Societal beliefs about women’s work have long been a metric for gender equality, with recent scholarship focusing on trends in these attitudes to assess the progress (or stalling) of the gender revolution. Moving beyond widely critiqued gender attitude questions thought to be the only available items for measuring change over time, this article considers women’s and men’s views toward their own work over the last half century. Traditional gender scripts frame women’s labor force participation as less than ideal, something to do if financially necessary but not because work is intrinsically rewarding. Historically, this gender frame was reinforced by religion. We examine the gender gap in working for its own sake over time and whether and how religious involvement moderates these trends. Overall, the gender gap has declined to the point where it is now virtually nonexistent. However, religious involvement acts as a countervailing influence, bolstering the gap such that frequently attending men and women have not yet converged in their desire to work. Although the most religious Americans have not yet converged, men’s dropping desire to work and women’s rising desire to work are society-wide trends, and even the most religious Americans could be expected to converge at some point in the future. Traditionalist institutions contribute to unevenness in the gender revolution, but preferences cannot explain the persistent society-wide precarity of women’s work: Women now prefer to work for work’s sake at the same rate men do.","PeriodicalId":22029,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Science","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Religious Work Ethic and the Spirit of Patriarchy: Religiosity and the Gender Gap in Working for Its Own Sake, 1977 to 2018\",\"authors\":\"Landon Schnabel, C. Schleifer, Eman Abdelhadi, Samuel L. Perry\",\"doi\":\"10.15195/v9.a4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Societal beliefs about women’s work have long been a metric for gender equality, with recent scholarship focusing on trends in these attitudes to assess the progress (or stalling) of the gender revolution. Moving beyond widely critiqued gender attitude questions thought to be the only available items for measuring change over time, this article considers women’s and men’s views toward their own work over the last half century. Traditional gender scripts frame women’s labor force participation as less than ideal, something to do if financially necessary but not because work is intrinsically rewarding. Historically, this gender frame was reinforced by religion. We examine the gender gap in working for its own sake over time and whether and how religious involvement moderates these trends. Overall, the gender gap has declined to the point where it is now virtually nonexistent. However, religious involvement acts as a countervailing influence, bolstering the gap such that frequently attending men and women have not yet converged in their desire to work. Although the most religious Americans have not yet converged, men’s dropping desire to work and women’s rising desire to work are society-wide trends, and even the most religious Americans could be expected to converge at some point in the future. Traditionalist institutions contribute to unevenness in the gender revolution, but preferences cannot explain the persistent society-wide precarity of women’s work: Women now prefer to work for work’s sake at the same rate men do.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Science\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15195/v9.a4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15195/v9.a4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

长期以来,社会对女性工作的看法一直是衡量性别平等的一个指标,最近的学术研究关注这些态度的趋势,以评估性别革命的进展(或停滞)。除了被广泛批评的性别态度问题之外,这篇文章还考虑了过去半个世纪以来女性和男性对自己工作的看法。传统的性别脚本将女性的劳动参与率定义为不太理想的,如果经济上有必要,那么就可以这样做,而不是因为工作本身就有回报。从历史上看,宗教强化了这种性别框架。我们研究了长期以来为工作而工作的性别差异,以及宗教参与是否以及如何缓和了这些趋势。总的来说,性别差距已经缩小到现在几乎不存在的程度。然而,宗教的参与起到了一种抵消作用,扩大了差距,以至于经常参加的男性和女性在工作的愿望上还没有趋同。尽管最虔诚的美国人尚未趋同,但男性工作欲望的下降和女性工作欲望的上升是全社会的趋势,甚至最虔诚的美国人也有望在未来的某个时候趋同。传统主义制度助长了性别革命中的不平等,但偏好并不能解释女性工作在全社会持续存在的不稳定性:现在女性更愿意为工作而工作,其比例与男性相同。
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
The Religious Work Ethic and the Spirit of Patriarchy: Religiosity and the Gender Gap in Working for Its Own Sake, 1977 to 2018
Societal beliefs about women’s work have long been a metric for gender equality, with recent scholarship focusing on trends in these attitudes to assess the progress (or stalling) of the gender revolution. Moving beyond widely critiqued gender attitude questions thought to be the only available items for measuring change over time, this article considers women’s and men’s views toward their own work over the last half century. Traditional gender scripts frame women’s labor force participation as less than ideal, something to do if financially necessary but not because work is intrinsically rewarding. Historically, this gender frame was reinforced by religion. We examine the gender gap in working for its own sake over time and whether and how religious involvement moderates these trends. Overall, the gender gap has declined to the point where it is now virtually nonexistent. However, religious involvement acts as a countervailing influence, bolstering the gap such that frequently attending men and women have not yet converged in their desire to work. Although the most religious Americans have not yet converged, men’s dropping desire to work and women’s rising desire to work are society-wide trends, and even the most religious Americans could be expected to converge at some point in the future. Traditionalist institutions contribute to unevenness in the gender revolution, but preferences cannot explain the persistent society-wide precarity of women’s work: Women now prefer to work for work’s sake at the same rate men do.
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
Sociological Science
Sociological Science Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
2.90%
发文量
13
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Sociological Science is an open-access, online, peer-reviewed, international journal for social scientists committed to advancing a general understanding of social processes. Sociological Science welcomes original research and commentary from all subfields of sociology, and does not privilege any particular theoretical or methodological approach.
期刊最新文献
Inequality and Total Effect Summary Measures for Nominal and Ordinal Variables Invalidating Factorial Survey Experiments Using Invalid Comparisons Is Bad Practice: Learning from Forster and Neugebauer (2024) Validating Factorial Survey Experiments: Response to Comment The Genetics of Partnership Dissolution Straight Jacket: The Implications of Multidimensional Sexuality for Relationship Quality and Stability
×
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