Gender Processes in Women’s Self-Help Movements: Taylor

Taylor, Verta. 1999. “Gender and Social Movements: Gender Processes in Women’s Self-Help Movements.” Gender and Society 13(1): 8-33

This article draws from the case study of the post-partum depression self help movement in the US.  Taylor utilizes gender theories and social movement theories to explain the gendering of social movements. She analyzes gender by examining gender at multiple levels of interaction, structure and culture in the post partum depression movement. She explains the emergence of the movement using the theoretical framework of political opportunities, mobilizing structures and frames.

In terms of the political and cultural context, the following was noted. The post partum depression self help movement emerged when the medical structures were being more receptive to critiques of cultural bias against women’s post partum conditions. The increasing number of women entering the medical establishments also led to more favourable voices within the structures.

In terms of mobilizing structures, Taylor notes that the post partum depression movement began through informal networks of two feminists, who suffered post-partum depression. The movement utilized face to face support networks and telephone support to women and their families. Through articles in magazines and television shows, the movement also sought to create solidarity among women suffering from post partum depression. They also encouraged “collective self-expression” among women giving space to an emotional culture, which is often seen as feminine.

In terms of frames, the author examines gender in two ways. 1) Gender as a collective action frame. 2) Gender as a collective identity. The movement, while addressing post partum depression among mothers, raised voices against gendered divison of work within traditional families, stating this isolation of women as a major cause of depression. Activists utilize the movement’s collective identity to help women deal with dominant cultural notions and expectations from motherhood.

In conclusion, the author states that it is important to examine how social movements contribute to the social construction of gender. Regarding the post partum movement, the author identifies a paradox in the movement: The movement’s collective identity gives space to modes of interaction among women which are usually considered to be feminine, but at the same time, considers women as helpless victims of the medical establishment. However, the collective action repertoire of the movement leaves scope for challenging the existing cultural notions of oppression, reinforced by the gender bias in the medical structures.

Thinking about Social Movements in Gendered Frames: Ferree and Merrill

Citation:

Ferree, Myra and David.A.Merrill. 2000. “Hot Movements, Cold Cognition:Thinking about Social Movements in Gendered Frames.” Contemporary Sociology 29(3):454-462

This article examines the gendered aspects in social movement literature regarding movement framing. The authors suggest that gender analyses and social movement research could enrich each other. Their arguments are based on reviews of social movement literature done by Oliver and Johnston(1999) and Benford(1997). Oliver and Johnston(1999) suggest that frames, framing and ideology should be differentiated. The authors of this paper, suggest on more distinct concept that is often considered within the overall literature of frames – discourse.

“Discourses are broad systems of communication that link concepts together in a web of relationships through an underlying logic…Gender discourses include debates about equality and power, rights and privileges, sameness and difference. Gender discourses  are thus inherently  political  discourses…”(Ferree and Merrill 2000: 455). Ideology is defined as “any system of meaning that couples assertions and theories about the nature of social life with values and norms relevant to  promoting or  resisting change” by Oliver and Johnston(1999:7). The authors, further expand this understanding, by stating that “ideologies always include values as well as ideas, and consequently imply feelings and actions, not only abstract thinking” (Ferree and Merrill 2000:456). The authors define frames as a “way of talking and thinking about things that links idea elements into packages” (Ferree and Merrill 2000:456). Moreover, they differentiate frames from the framing process. According to the authors, framing process is a strategic and a social mechanism by which discourses, frames and ideologies are interconnected.The article mainly focuses on the gender biases in each of these concepts.

The authors suggest that framing analysis had developed from a “cold cognition” approach which seeks to undermine the role of emotions in social movements. Emotions play an important role of converting ideas into motivations for action. They say, “emotions of social actors are aroused precisely because their understanding of events connects with particular values they possess, and values are formed in a process of experiencing emotional reactions such as attraction, revulsion, love, anger, and fear” (Ferree and Merril 2000: 457). Emotions are seen as opposite to rationality and rational is often seen as characteristic of a man, thus creating a gendered dichotomy. The authors criticize the separation of cognition from emotions and state that it is related to the separation of objectivity from values in social movement research.

By ignoring values within social movement research, researchers tend to disregard the complexities within ideolgies as well. In this case, the values of the researchers themselves, thus become important. It is in this context that the authors suggest that social movement research could take a leaf out of feminist theories of science to be “more honest and self-reflective  about their own values. Such a consciously  self-reflexive  theory of social movements would connect motivation with values, emotions and frames, as well as acknowledge the ties between activists and academics in all of these dimensions.”

The authors question the political discourse analyses which tend to separate the public from the private, institutions from grassroots activism and household. These separations are themselves gendered where the activities of men are often analyzed while those generally done by women are made invisible within social movement research.

The authors finally discuss a fourth dimension in social movement research namely, framing process. Framing process includes managing emotions in social movements,constructing coalitions for frame bridging and reframing movement frames. The authors say that the framing process is gendered work and that, making it more visible will enable a discussion on gender based oppression as part of a political culture rather than the current notion of gender oppression mainly as a private and domestic phenomenon.

The authors conclude that the current social movement research whose analysis is based only on frames, ignore  the “emotional color, value commitments, and institutional anchor” important for a movement. By being more cognizant of gendering of frames, the authors believe, social movement research can be further transformed.

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Benford Robert.  1997.  “An  Insider’s Critique  of  the Social Movement Framing Perspective.”
Sociological Inquiry 67: 409-30.

Oliver, Pamela E. and Hank Johnston 1999. “What a Good  Idea!  Frames and  Ideologies in  Social
Movement Research.’ Paper presented at  the annual meeting of  the  American Sociological Association. August 8, Chicago, IL.