“I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender
This article examines three divergent constructions about the salience of legal gender in lay people’s everyday lives and readiness to decertify gender. In our interviews (and survey data), generally participants minimised the importance of legal gender. The central argument in this article is that...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Feminist legal studies 2023-04, Vol.31 (1), p.121-143 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 143 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 121 |
| container_title | Feminist legal studies |
| container_volume | 31 |
| creator | Peel, Elizabeth Newman, Hannah J. H. |
| description | This article examines three divergent constructions about the salience of legal gender in lay people’s everyday lives and readiness to decertify gender. In our interviews (and survey data), generally participants minimised the importance of
legal
gender. The central argument in this article is that feminist socio-legal scholars applying legal consciousness studies to legal reform topics should find scrutinizing the construction of interview talk useful. We illustrate this argument by adapting and applying Ewick and Silbey’s (1998) ‘
The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life'
, ‘before’, ‘with’ and ‘against’ typology to interview talk about legal gender, and critique their cognitivist approach by offering a constructionist alternative. In our analysis, we offer a detailed discursive explication of three key legal consciousness themes. These themes offer a balanced representation of a dataset problematically ‘skewed’ towards sex-based rights feminist perspectives, namely that ‘before’ legal gender is an anti-decertification account, decertification would be risky for natal females; a ‘with’ legal gender construction is neither for nor against decertification per se, though the impact of decertification is produced in accounts as limited and unimportant; and ‘against’ legal gender is a pro-decertification classification, as not abolished legal gender is constructed as harmful to already marginalised groups. In concluding, we explore the reasoning for the lack of readiness for decertification currently, and return to the value of examining the construction of lay discourse about legal matters as talk is a form of social action. We suggest that applying discursive analysis to themes in legal consciousness studies enables a refocusing on the
how
rather than purely the
what
of divergent legal consciousnesses, and that this approach is a fruitful addition to feminist socio-legal studies. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2797451038</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2797451038</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-c2b90b28b7d19fb24729fd7036be3fb566688091efe8dd16e8cc037f62bdf9c13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UU1vEzEQtVCRCKV_oCdLPS-M7aw_uKUflEiRiiCcLe_uON12sw72bqXc8jdA8OfySzBJJW69zOjNvPdmpEfIOYP3DEB9SAykYQVwXoApQRfiFZmwUvFCT8vyhEzASFkIyfkb8jalBwAwqtQT8mu_-z2n16Hf734OdHnf9o-5uiHDRL-FNQ55tKLzjJ-Q3jxhzOswru4HOqvCONCv6LpuSy_Rh4j73Z-PdJYZuHZDW9PrNtVjTG2WznrXbVObaPB04bb0C4ZNh4czS9c9UndwW-DKdfQW-wbjO_Lauy7h2XM_Jd8_3SyvPheLu9v51WxR1EKKoah5ZaDiulINM77iU8WNbxQIWaHwVSml1BoMQ4-6aZhEXdcglJe8arypmTglF0ffTQw_RkyDfQhjzO8my5VR05KB0JnFj6w6hpQieruJ7drFrWVg_2VgjxnYnIE9ZGBFFomjKGVyv8L43_oF1V_bwY_x</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2797451038</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>“I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><creator>Peel, Elizabeth ; Newman, Hannah J. H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Peel, Elizabeth ; Newman, Hannah J. H.</creatorcontrib><description>This article examines three divergent constructions about the salience of legal gender in lay people’s everyday lives and readiness to decertify gender. In our interviews (and survey data), generally participants minimised the importance of
legal
gender. The central argument in this article is that feminist socio-legal scholars applying legal consciousness studies to legal reform topics should find scrutinizing the construction of interview talk useful. We illustrate this argument by adapting and applying Ewick and Silbey’s (1998) ‘
The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life'
, ‘before’, ‘with’ and ‘against’ typology to interview talk about legal gender, and critique their cognitivist approach by offering a constructionist alternative. In our analysis, we offer a detailed discursive explication of three key legal consciousness themes. These themes offer a balanced representation of a dataset problematically ‘skewed’ towards sex-based rights feminist perspectives, namely that ‘before’ legal gender is an anti-decertification account, decertification would be risky for natal females; a ‘with’ legal gender construction is neither for nor against decertification per se, though the impact of decertification is produced in accounts as limited and unimportant; and ‘against’ legal gender is a pro-decertification classification, as not abolished legal gender is constructed as harmful to already marginalised groups. In concluding, we explore the reasoning for the lack of readiness for decertification currently, and return to the value of examining the construction of lay discourse about legal matters as talk is a form of social action. We suggest that applying discursive analysis to themes in legal consciousness studies enables a refocusing on the
how
rather than purely the
what
of divergent legal consciousnesses, and that this approach is a fruitful addition to feminist socio-legal studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0966-3622</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-8455</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Consciousness ; Constructionism ; Debates ; Decertification ; Discourse analysis ; Everyday life ; Feminism ; Gender ; Gender Studies ; Human Rights ; Interviews ; Laity ; Law ; Law and Criminolgy ; Lay people ; Legal reform ; Legal studies ; Marginality ; Political Theory ; Public International Law ; Social action ; Sociology of law</subject><ispartof>Feminist legal studies, 2023-04, Vol.31 (1), p.121-143</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-c2b90b28b7d19fb24729fd7036be3fb566688091efe8dd16e8cc037f62bdf9c13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-c2b90b28b7d19fb24729fd7036be3fb566688091efe8dd16e8cc037f62bdf9c13</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0017-1024</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27321,27901,27902,33751,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Peel, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newman, Hannah J. H.</creatorcontrib><title>“I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender</title><title>Feminist legal studies</title><addtitle>Fem Leg Stud</addtitle><description>This article examines three divergent constructions about the salience of legal gender in lay people’s everyday lives and readiness to decertify gender. In our interviews (and survey data), generally participants minimised the importance of
legal
gender. The central argument in this article is that feminist socio-legal scholars applying legal consciousness studies to legal reform topics should find scrutinizing the construction of interview talk useful. We illustrate this argument by adapting and applying Ewick and Silbey’s (1998) ‘
The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life'
, ‘before’, ‘with’ and ‘against’ typology to interview talk about legal gender, and critique their cognitivist approach by offering a constructionist alternative. In our analysis, we offer a detailed discursive explication of three key legal consciousness themes. These themes offer a balanced representation of a dataset problematically ‘skewed’ towards sex-based rights feminist perspectives, namely that ‘before’ legal gender is an anti-decertification account, decertification would be risky for natal females; a ‘with’ legal gender construction is neither for nor against decertification per se, though the impact of decertification is produced in accounts as limited and unimportant; and ‘against’ legal gender is a pro-decertification classification, as not abolished legal gender is constructed as harmful to already marginalised groups. In concluding, we explore the reasoning for the lack of readiness for decertification currently, and return to the value of examining the construction of lay discourse about legal matters as talk is a form of social action. We suggest that applying discursive analysis to themes in legal consciousness studies enables a refocusing on the
how
rather than purely the
what
of divergent legal consciousnesses, and that this approach is a fruitful addition to feminist socio-legal studies.</description><subject>Consciousness</subject><subject>Constructionism</subject><subject>Debates</subject><subject>Decertification</subject><subject>Discourse analysis</subject><subject>Everyday life</subject><subject>Feminism</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Gender Studies</subject><subject>Human Rights</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Laity</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Law and Criminolgy</subject><subject>Lay people</subject><subject>Legal reform</subject><subject>Legal studies</subject><subject>Marginality</subject><subject>Political Theory</subject><subject>Public International Law</subject><subject>Social action</subject><subject>Sociology of law</subject><issn>0966-3622</issn><issn>1572-8455</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>QXPDG</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UU1vEzEQtVCRCKV_oCdLPS-M7aw_uKUflEiRiiCcLe_uON12sw72bqXc8jdA8OfySzBJJW69zOjNvPdmpEfIOYP3DEB9SAykYQVwXoApQRfiFZmwUvFCT8vyhEzASFkIyfkb8jalBwAwqtQT8mu_-z2n16Hf734OdHnf9o-5uiHDRL-FNQ55tKLzjJ-Q3jxhzOswru4HOqvCONCv6LpuSy_Rh4j73Z-PdJYZuHZDW9PrNtVjTG2WznrXbVObaPB04bb0C4ZNh4czS9c9UndwW-DKdfQW-wbjO_Lauy7h2XM_Jd8_3SyvPheLu9v51WxR1EKKoah5ZaDiulINM77iU8WNbxQIWaHwVSml1BoMQ4-6aZhEXdcglJe8arypmTglF0ffTQw_RkyDfQhjzO8my5VR05KB0JnFj6w6hpQieruJ7drFrWVg_2VgjxnYnIE9ZGBFFomjKGVyv8L43_oF1V_bwY_x</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Peel, Elizabeth</creator><creator>Newman, Hannah J. H.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7R6</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>888</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PMKZF</scope><scope>POGQB</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGEN</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PRQQA</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>QXPDG</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0017-1024</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>“I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender</title><author>Peel, Elizabeth ; Newman, Hannah J. H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-c2b90b28b7d19fb24729fd7036be3fb566688091efe8dd16e8cc037f62bdf9c13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Consciousness</topic><topic>Constructionism</topic><topic>Debates</topic><topic>Decertification</topic><topic>Discourse analysis</topic><topic>Everyday life</topic><topic>Feminism</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Gender Studies</topic><topic>Human Rights</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Laity</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Law and Criminolgy</topic><topic>Lay people</topic><topic>Legal reform</topic><topic>Legal studies</topic><topic>Marginality</topic><topic>Political Theory</topic><topic>Public International Law</topic><topic>Social action</topic><topic>Sociology of law</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Peel, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newman, Hannah J. H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>GenderWatch</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>GenderWatch (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Digital Collections</collection><collection>ProQuest Sociology & Social Sciences Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest Women's & Gender Studies</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Diversity Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Feminist legal studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Peel, Elizabeth</au><au>Newman, Hannah J. H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>“I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender</atitle><jtitle>Feminist legal studies</jtitle><stitle>Fem Leg Stud</stitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>121</spage><epage>143</epage><pages>121-143</pages><issn>0966-3622</issn><eissn>1572-8455</eissn><abstract>This article examines three divergent constructions about the salience of legal gender in lay people’s everyday lives and readiness to decertify gender. In our interviews (and survey data), generally participants minimised the importance of
legal
gender. The central argument in this article is that feminist socio-legal scholars applying legal consciousness studies to legal reform topics should find scrutinizing the construction of interview talk useful. We illustrate this argument by adapting and applying Ewick and Silbey’s (1998) ‘
The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life'
, ‘before’, ‘with’ and ‘against’ typology to interview talk about legal gender, and critique their cognitivist approach by offering a constructionist alternative. In our analysis, we offer a detailed discursive explication of three key legal consciousness themes. These themes offer a balanced representation of a dataset problematically ‘skewed’ towards sex-based rights feminist perspectives, namely that ‘before’ legal gender is an anti-decertification account, decertification would be risky for natal females; a ‘with’ legal gender construction is neither for nor against decertification per se, though the impact of decertification is produced in accounts as limited and unimportant; and ‘against’ legal gender is a pro-decertification classification, as not abolished legal gender is constructed as harmful to already marginalised groups. In concluding, we explore the reasoning for the lack of readiness for decertification currently, and return to the value of examining the construction of lay discourse about legal matters as talk is a form of social action. We suggest that applying discursive analysis to themes in legal consciousness studies enables a refocusing on the
how
rather than purely the
what
of divergent legal consciousnesses, and that this approach is a fruitful addition to feminist socio-legal studies.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0017-1024</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0966-3622 |
| ispartof | Feminist legal studies, 2023-04, Vol.31 (1), p.121-143 |
| issn | 0966-3622 1572-8455 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2797451038 |
| source | Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Sociological Abstracts |
| subjects | Consciousness Constructionism Debates Decertification Discourse analysis Everyday life Feminism Gender Gender Studies Human Rights Interviews Laity Law Law and Criminolgy Lay people Legal reform Legal studies Marginality Political Theory Public International Law Social action Sociology of law |
| title | “I Don’t Think That’s Something I’ve Ever Thought About Really Before”: A Thematic Discursive Analysis of Lay People’s Talk about Legal Gender |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T22%3A44%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=%E2%80%9CI%20Don%E2%80%99t%20Think%20That%E2%80%99s%20Something%20I%E2%80%99ve%20Ever%20Thought%20About%20Really%20Before%E2%80%9D:%20A%20Thematic%20Discursive%20Analysis%20of%20Lay%20People%E2%80%99s%20Talk%20about%20Legal%20Gender&rft.jtitle=Feminist%20legal%20studies&rft.au=Peel,%20Elizabeth&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=121&rft.epage=143&rft.pages=121-143&rft.issn=0966-3622&rft.eissn=1572-8455&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10691-022-09508-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2797451038%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2797451038&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |