Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T10:11:39.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Women's Movement Institutionalization: The Need for New Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2010

Merrindahl Andrew
Merrindahl Andrew
Affiliation:
Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The social movements that first flourished in the 1960s and 1970s were initially characterized by protest activity against the state and against dominant norms, and by their only loosely organized structures. Over time, however, these social movements, including feminism, have become partially institutionalized in government and nongovernment bodies, and in policies, practices, and social norms.

Type
Critical Perspectives on Gender and Politics
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 609 - 616
Copyright
Copyright © The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrew, Merrindahl. 2008. Social Movements and the Limits of Strategy: How Australian Feminists Formed Positions on Work and Care. Ph.D. diss. Australian National University. http://thesis.anu.edu.au/public/adt-ANU20090508.155410/Google Scholar
Bacchi, Carol. 1999. “Rolling Back the State? Feminism, Theory and Policy.” In Women, Public Policy and the State, ed. Hancock, Linda. Melbourne: Macmillan Education, 54–69.Google Scholar
Banaszak, Lee Ann. 2009. The Women's Movement Inside and Outside the State. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chappell, Louise A. 2002. Gendering Government: Feminist Engagement with the State in Australia and Canada. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Hester. 1996. Inside Agitators: Australian Femocrats and the State. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Franzway, Suzanne, Court, Diane, and Connell, R. W.. 1989. Staking a Claim: Feminism, Bureaucracy and the State. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Kulawik, Teresa. 2009. “Staking the Frame of a Feminist Discursive Institutionalism.” Politics & Gender 5 (June): 262–71.Google Scholar
Mackay, Fiona, Monro, Surya, and Waylen, Georgina. 2009. “The Feminist Potential of Sociological Institutionalism.” Politics & Gender 5 (June): 253–62.Google Scholar
Maddison, Sarah, and Partridge, Emma. 2007. How Well Does Australian Democracy Serve Australian Women? Democratic Audit of Australia Focused Audit no. 8. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Magarey, Susan. 2004. “The Sex Discrimination Act 1984.” Australian Feminist Law Journal 20: 127–34.Google Scholar
McAdam, Doug, Sampson, Robert J., Weffer, Simon, and MacIndoe, Heather. 2005. “‘There Will be Fighting in the Streets’: The Distorting Lens of Social Movement Theory.” Mobilization 10 (1): 1–18.Google Scholar
McClurg Mueller, Carol, and McCarthy, John D.. 2003. “Cultural Continuity and Structural Change: The Logic of Adaption by Radical, Liberal, and Socialist Feminists to State Reconfiguration.” In Women's Movements Facing the Reconfigured State, ed. Banaszak, Lee Ann, Beckwith, Karen, and Rucht, Dieter. New York: Cambridge University Press, 219–41.Google Scholar
Meyer, David S. 1993. “Institutionalizing Dissent: The United States Structure of Political Opportunity and the End of the Nuclear Freeze Movement.” Sociological Forum 8 (2): 157–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, David S., and Tarrow, Sidney G.. 1998. “A Movement Society: Contentious Politics for a New Century.” In The Social Movement Society: Contentious Politics for a New Century, ed. Meyer, David S. and Tarrow, Sidney G.. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1–28.Google Scholar
Murray, Suellen. 2005. “An Impossibly Ambitious Plan? Australian Policy and the Elimination of Domestic Violence” Just Policy 38 (December): 28–33.Google Scholar
Olsen, Johan P. 2007. “Understanding Institutions and Logics of Appropriateness: Introductory Essay.” Working Paper No. 13, Arena Centre for European Studies, University of Oslo, August. http://www.arena.uio.no (Accessed May 30, 2009).Google Scholar
Sawer, Marian. 1990. Sisters in Suits: Women and Public Policy in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Sawer, Marian. 2007. “Australia: The Fall of the Femocrat.” In Changing State Feminism, ed. Outshoorn, Joyce and Kantola, Johanna. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 20–40.Google Scholar
Teghtsoonian, Katherine, and Chappell, Louise A.. 2008. “The Rise and Decline of Women's Policy Machinery in British Columbia and New South Wales: A Cautionary Tale.” International Political Science Review 29 (1): 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wainer, Jo, and Peck, Nancy. 1995. “By Women for Women: Australia's National Women's Health Policy.” Reproductive Health Matters 6 (November): 114–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, Wendy. 1996. “Feminist Women's Services Within the Non-Profit Sector: Some Australian Experience.” Third Sector Review 2: 57–73.Google Scholar