Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Contents -- Figures and Tables -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1 Why the Theory and Practice of Intersectionality Matter to Health Research and Policy -- Part 1: Theoretical and Methodological Innovations -- 2 Beyond Borders and Boundaries -- 3 A Cross-Cultural Quantitative Approach to Intersectionality and Health -- 4 Performing Intersectionality -- 5 Adding Religion to Gender, Race, and Class -- Part 2: Intersectionality Research across the Life Course -- 6 Navigating the Crossroads -- 7 Exploring Health and Identity through Photovoice, Intersectionality, and Transnational Feminisms -- 8 An Intersectional Understanding of Youth Cultural Identities and Psychosocial Integration -- 9 Adopting an Intersectionality Perspective in the Study of the Healthy Immigrant Effect in Mid- to Later Life -- 10 Intersectionality in the Context of Later Life Experiences of Dementia -- Part 3: Social Context, Policy, and Health -- 11 An Intersectional Lens on Various Facets of Violence -- 12 Place, Health, and Home -- 13 Preventing and Managing Diabetes -- 14 Intersectionality Model of Trauma and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder -- Part 4: Disrupting Power and Health Inequities -- 15 Addressing Trauma, Violence, and Pain -- 16 Intersectional Frameworks in Mental Health -- 17 Intersectionality, Justice, and Influencing Policy -- 18 Intersectional Feminist Frameworks in Practice -- Afterword -- Contributors -- Index.

Intro -- Contents -- Preface and Acknowledgments -- Social Policy and the Ethic of Care -- Introduction -- 1 First-Generation Care Theorists and Liberal Assessments of Care -- 2 Second-Generation Care Theorists and the Moral Principles of Care -- 3 The Interpretation of Equality: A Study of Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- 4 Therapeutic Jurisprudence: A Care- Informed Approach for Compensating Victims of Institutional Abuse -- 5 Economic Costing in Social Policy: The Ethics of Quantifying Intangible Losses -- 6 Caregiving: Reconceptualizing the Public/ Private Divide -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index.

This article contributes to current debates and discussions in critical social theory about diversity, inclusion/exclusion, power, and social justice by exploring intersectionality as an important theoretical resource to further develop and advance care ethics. Using intersectionality as a critical reference point, the investigation highlights two key shortcomings of care ethics which stem from this ethics' prioritization of gender and gendered power relations: inadequate conceptualizations of diversity and power. The article draws on concrete examples related to migrant domestic work to illustrate how an intersectionality lens can advance new theoretical insights for understanding caring practices (or lack of them), and generate new methodological and practical strategies for confronting and transforming the deeply entrenched interlocking power inequities that undermine the realization of care in an increasingly complex context of national and international policy and politics.

In the last 15 years, much debate has ensued at the international level regarding gender mainstreaming (GM), its efficacy and future utility. In Canada, similar discussions have taken place where GM has largely been operationalized in the form of gender-based analysis (GBA). However, there has been a lack of clarity regarding the ways in which GBA as a conceptual framework compares to other approaches available for working towards equality in public policy, namely gender and diversity analysis (GDA) and intersectionality-based analysis (IBA). As a result, the potential of these models to respond to diversity and inequality, especially GBA and GDA, are often overstated and/or conflated. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the similarities and differences between GBA, GDA, and IBA. This analysis illuminates the strengths and limitations of these types of approaches, especially in terms of how each conceptualizes and is able to address a wide variety of diversities among the Canadian population. This paper argues that only IBA is flexible enough to capture the multidimensional nature of oppression and discrimination because it disrupts the systematic prioritization of gender as a starting place for assessing experiences of inequality.

Although gender mainstreaming (GM) has been the international norm for working toward gender equality in policies and practices since the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing 1995, its impact has been uneven. The lack of substantive results has led to debate surrounding GM's capacity for engendering meaningful policy change. This article synthesizes the input of key GM stakeholders (within government, academia, and nongovernmental organizations) across Canada, Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Ukraine. It discusses national approaches to mainstreaming gender, identifies key factors inhibiting and/or promoting GM, and proposes how current strategies can be modified, strengthened and/or replaced by alternative approaches. Central to the analysis is the question as to whether GM in current or expanded versions has the potential to addresses the wide variety of diversities among nation state populations.Related Media
. 2013. "." http://www.eldis.org/go/topics/resource‐guides/gender/gender‐mainstreaming#.Ud7nzaz9zTo


. 2012. "." Gender Equality. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender‐equality/

Although gender mainstreaming (GM) has been endorsed officially at the international level since 1995, the efficacy of this strategy is being increasingly questioned. More research is focusing on understanding the progress and impact of various mainstreaming strategies across jurisdictions and in a comparative context. This article contributes to the literature in the GM field by examining the role and experiences of three key sectors in GM advancement and implementation in Canada and Australia: institutional machineries, women's movements and feminist and gender research within academe. Drawing on policy documents, textual materials and interviews with 30 key stakeholders in each country, the investigation illuminates the historic development and current situation of GM. Significantly, the research highlights common challenges and shortcomings of GM in Canada and Australia and in the final analysis, provides suggestions for future mainstreaming strategies.

Abstract.This paper considers why gender mainstreaming (GM), a strategy that many have claimed holds promise for transforming public policy and working towards social justice, is inherently limited and flawed. The paper begins with a brief overview of GM, specifically focusing on the Canadian context, and highlights current discussions in the literature regarding issues of implementation and best practices. It then moves on to reveal that a critical but overlooked dimension of GM is its theoretical foundation. In contextualizing GM within a contemporary feminist theory framework, the paper seeks to illuminate the problematic relationship that currently exists between GM and feminist theory and, moreover, demonstrates why the theoretical premises of GM need significant reworking. The argument put forward is that if insights of recent feminist theorizing are taken seriously, it becomes clear that GM should be replaced by an alternative and broader strategy of diversity mainstreaming. Through the use of practical examples, the paper illustrates how diversity mainstreaming is able to better capture, articulate and make visible the relationship between simultaneously interlocking forms of oppressions that include but are not limited to gender.Résumé.Cet article étudie pourquoi l'intégration d'une perspective de genre (IPG), une stratégie dans laquelle beaucoup ont vu la promesse d'une transformation de la politique publique et d'un progrès vers la justice sociale, est en soi limitée et défectueuse. L'article débute par un bref exposé sur l'IPG, s'intéressant principalement au contexte canadien, et il met en évidence les discussions actuelles dans la littérature au sujet de problèmes de mise en oeuvre et de pratiques exemplaires. Il révèle ensuite qu'une dimension critique mais négligée de l'IPG est son fondement théorique. En contextualisant l'IPG dans un cadre de théorie féministe contemporaine, l'article cherche à éclairer la relation problématique qui existe actuellement entre l'IPG et la théorie féministe et, de surcroît, démontre pourquoi les prémisses théoriques de l'IPG nécessitent une révision significative. L'argument avancé est que, si l'on prend au sérieux les conclusions des théories féministes récentes, il semble évident que l'IPG devrait être remplacée par une stratégie plus vaste d'intégration d'une perspective de diversité. S'appuyant sur des exemples pratiques, l'article montre que l'intégration d'une perspective de diversité réussit à mieux capturer, mettre en rapport et rendre visible la relation entre des formes d'oppression qui s'entrecroisent simultanément et qui incluent mais ne se limitent pas au genre.