Which of the following theorist propose strengthening social institutions to combat gender inequality?

The Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) is a cross-country measure of discrimination against women in social institutions. Discriminatory social institutions intersect across all stages of girls’ and women’s life, restricting their access to justice, rights and empowerment opportunities and undermining their agency and decision-making authority over their life choices. As underlying drivers of gender inequalities, discriminatory social institutions perpetuate gender gaps in development areas, such as education, employment and health, and hinder progress towards rights-based social transformation that benefits both women and men. The SIGI covers the following dimensions of discriminatory social institutions:

• Discriminatory family code,

• Restricted physical integrity,

• Restricted resources and assets,

• Restricted civil liberty

The index presents scores ranging from 0 to 1, with 0 meaning there is no discrimination against women and 1 meaning indicating there is a very high level of discrimination against women.

This is a preview. Log in through your library.

Abstract

This article encourages sociologists to study gender as a social institution. Noting that scholars apply the institution concept to highly disparate phenomena, it reviews the history of the concept in twentieth-century sociology. The defining characteristic most commonly attributed to social institution is endurance (or persistence over time) while contemporary uses highlight practices, conflict, identity, power, and change. I identify twelve criteria for deciding whether any phenomenon is a social institution. I conclude that treating gender as an institution will improve gender scholarship and social theory generally, increase awareness of gender's profound sociality, offer a means of linking diverse theoretical and empirical work, and make gender's invisible dynamics and complex intersections with other institutions more apparent and subject to critical analysis and change.

Journal Information

Social Forces is a journal of social research highlighting sociological inquiry but also exploring realms shared with social psychology, anthropology, political science, history, and economics. The journal's intended academic readers include sociologists, social psychologists, criminologists, economists, political scientists, anthropologists, and students of urban studies, race/ethnic relations, and religious studies.

Publisher Information

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Social Forces
Request Permissions

This is a preview. Log in through your library.

Abstract

In this article I argue that evolutionary theorizing can help sociologists and feminists better understand gender inequality. Evolutionary theory explains why control of the sexuality of young women is a priority across most human societies both past and present. Evolutionary psychology has extended our understanding of male violence against women. Here I add to these theories and present a sexual selection argument to postulate possible evolved predispositions that promote young female deference to adult males in interaction and the converse, lack of male deference to young females. According to this argument, the pattern of greater female deference disappears when the women involved are past menopause. Put together, these ideas form an evolutionary account of gender inequality that complements and extends traditional sociological and feminist theories.

Journal Information

Social Forces is a journal of social research highlighting sociological inquiry but also exploring realms shared with social psychology, anthropology, political science, history, and economics. The journal's intended academic readers include sociologists, social psychologists, criminologists, economists, political scientists, anthropologists, and students of urban studies, race/ethnic relations, and religious studies.

Publisher Information

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Social Forces
Request Permissions

Which of the following theorist proposed strengthening social institutions to combat gender inequality?

What are the theories of gender inequality?

Which of the following describes the conflict perspective to gender inequality?

What is gender inequality in sociology?