Producing and Responding to <i>-isms</i> in Interaction

Whitehead, Kevin A.; Stokoe, Elizabeth

doi:10.1177/0261927x15586432

Cited by 28 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In doing so, they significantly advance our understanding of "how participants 'do' (anti)racism, (anti)sexism, and so on, in situated interactions" (Whitehead & Stokoe, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Responding to -isms

Speer

2015

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In doing so, they significantly advance our understanding of "how participants 'do' (anti)racism, (anti)sexism, and so on, in situated interactions" (Whitehead & Stokoe, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Responding to -isms

Speer

2015

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Informed by discursive perspectives, we investigated sexism as sexist discourse . Sexist discourse can be defined as “‘language in use,’ either spoken words or written texts, which stereotypes or discriminates against a person or group of people based on their gender” (McPhillips & Speer, , p. 1; Whitehead & Stokoe, ). From a discursive perspective, discourse constitutes the primary site for grasping how sexist ideas are socially re‐produced (Speer, ).…”

Section: Objectives and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, the meaning of an utterance (e.g., sexist or not) does not “reside” in this utterance or manifest uniformly across contexts; rather, it is fluid, context‐dependent, and jointly produced by people in interaction (McPhillips & Speer, ). Discursive scholars avoid “the use of decontextualized statements and a priori definitions” of sexism and instead focus on how participants orient (or not) to their own and others’ talk as sexist, racist, or heterosexist (Speer & Potter, , p. 547; Whitehead & Stokoe, ). Discursive scholars have identified a range of practices speakers may use to deflect negative attributions and protect their identity, including disclaimers ( I am not sexist but… ) or denials and mitigations of prejudiced claims ( I am not saying women don't have a right to choose, but… ).…”

Section: Objectives and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Sexism in Couple Therapy: A Discursive Analysis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The persistence of gender inequality in postindustrial societies is puzzling in light of a plethora of changes that destabilize it, including shifts in economy, legislation, and the proliferation of feminist politics. In family relations, such persistence manifests as a disconnect between couples aspiring to be more egalitarian yet continuing to enact traditional gender roles and hierarchies. There is an emerging consensus that gender inequality persists because of people's continued reliance on sexist ideology or gendered assumptions that constitute women as innately distinct from and inferior to men. Sexist ideology changes its form to accommodate to changing socio-economic conditions. Contemporary forms of sexism are old ways of legitimizing male power articulated in new and creative ways, often by incorporating feminist arguments. To effectively recognize and address "new sexism," scholars and practitioners require new, innovative research frameworks. Our objective in writing this article is two-fold. First, we seek to advance discursive (i.e., focused on language in use) approaches to the study of sexism. Second, we present the results of a discursive analysis of "new" sexist discourse in the context of couple therapy. The study provides preliminary evidence that, despite endorsing egalitarian norms, couples studied continue to rely on gender binaries and remain entrenched in old-fashioned patterns of gender inequality. Implications of these results for the practice of couple therapy and for future research are discussed.

show abstract

“…208) illustrates the social functions that racist discourses may serve in particular historical periods; Richardson and Wodak's (2009) The forms of data analyzed in these studies typically consist of one or more of a wide range of texts -including materials that are produced from the outset in textual format (e.g., newspaper 8 articles, educational textbooks, and so on), talk that has been converted into textual format through institutional processes occurring prior to the researchers' use of them (e.g., official written records of parliamentary speeches and debates), talk that is converted into text during the course of the research process, and visual materials that are analytically treated as texts. As a result, although they allow for consideration of some of the gross content and audience-oriented or interactional features of the discourse(s) at hand, these materials do not lend themselves to fine-grained attention to potentially significant features of the spoken production of racial discourse, including their immediate uptake by their audiences (e.g., Verkuyten, 1998;Whitehead & Stokoe, 2015).…”

Section: "Elite" Texts and Talkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discursive Approaches to Race and Racism

Whitehead¹

2017

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryIn the wake of what has been called the "discursive turn" or "linguistic turn" in the social sciences, research at the intersection of language and communication and race and racism shifted from being largely dominated by quantitative and experimental methods to include qualitative and particularly discursive approaches. While the term "discursive" potentially encompasses a wide range of modes of discourse analysis, discursive approaches share in common a focus on language use as social action, and as a constitutive feature of actions, events and situations, rather than as merely a passive means of describing or transmitting information about them.When applied to the study of race and racism, such approaches have examined ways in which language functions to construct, maintain and legitimate as well as subvert or resist racial and/or racist ideologies and social structures.Research in these areas has made use of a range of empirical materials, including "elite" texts and talk (media texts, parliamentary debates, academic texts, etc.), individual interviews, focus groups and group discussions, "naturally occurring" talk-in-interaction from conversational and institutional settings, and text-based online interactions. Although these different data types should not be seen as strictly mutually exclusive, each of them serves to foreground particular features of racial or racist discourse(s), thus facilitating or constraining particular sorts of discourse analytic findings. Thus, different data sources respectively tend to foreground ideological features of racial discourse(s) and their intersection with power and domination, 2 including examination of "new" racisms and the production and management of accusations and denials of racism; discursive processes involved in the construction and uses of racial subjectivities and identities; interactional processes through which prejudice and racism are constructed and contested; and the everyday interactional reproduction of systems of racial categories, independently of whether the talk in which they occur can or should be considered "racist".

show abstract

Producing and Responding to -isms in Interaction

Cited by 28 publications

References 24 publications

Responding to -isms

Responding to -isms

New Sexism in Couple Therapy: A Discursive Analysis

Discursive Approaches to Race and Racism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About