سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات158
تعداد شماره‌ها6,228
تعداد مقالات67,752
تعداد مشاهده مقاله115,087,296
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله89,827,639
شفیعی, زینب. (1400). «برای عشق، پول یا هر دو؟» مطالعه‌ کیفی منفعت‌طلبی زنانه در پارادایم جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی جدید. , (), 1-43. doi: 10.22059/jsr.2022.86520
زینب شفیعی. "«برای عشق، پول یا هر دو؟» مطالعه‌ کیفی منفعت‌طلبی زنانه در پارادایم جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی جدید". , , , 1400, 1-43. doi: 10.22059/jsr.2022.86520
شفیعی, زینب. (1400). '«برای عشق، پول یا هر دو؟» مطالعه‌ کیفی منفعت‌طلبی زنانه در پارادایم جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی جدید', , (), pp. 1-43. doi: 10.22059/jsr.2022.86520
شفیعی, زینب. «برای عشق، پول یا هر دو؟» مطالعه‌ کیفی منفعت‌طلبی زنانه در پارادایم جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی جدید. , 1400; (): 1-43. doi: 10.22059/jsr.2022.86520

«برای عشق، پول یا هر دو؟» مطالعه‌ کیفی منفعت‌طلبی زنانه در پارادایم جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی جدید

مطالعات جامعه شناختی (نامه علوم اجتماعی سابق)
مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده، انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 19 اسفند 1400    اصل مقاله (1.11 M)
نوع مقاله: علمی وپزوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jsr.2022.86520
نویسنده
زینب شفیعی*
استادیار،جامعه‌شناسیی، گروه علوم‌اجتماعی، دانشکده علوم‌اجتماعی و اقتصاد، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران
چکیده
منفعت مفهومی غنی است که می‌تواند در حوزه­ها و پارادایم­های گوناگون به کار رود. اما اقتصاددانان با تقلیل­گرایی تنگ­نظرانه­ای همواره به نوع خاصی از منفعت(یعنی منفعت اقتصادی) اشاره دارند. در حالی که جامعه­شناسان بر روی انواع مختلف منافع تاکید می‌کنند. این مقاله قصد دارد فراتر از رویکرد جریان اصلی عمل اقتصاد، به کمک رویکرد جامعه­شناسی اقتصادی جدید، ویژگی­های منفعت زنانه را در حوزه صنایع‌دستی مدرن در عصر دیجیتال کشف کند. این پژوهش کیفی_اکتشافی به این پرسش اساسی پاسخ خواهد داد که آیا زنان در کنش کارآفرینانه خود در حوزه صنایع­دستی مدرن به دنبال کسب یک نوع منفعت(عمدتا اقتصادی) هستند یا انواع منافع؟ و از خلال پاسخ به این پرسش به ابعاد گوناگون منفعت­طلبی زنانه نیز پرداخته خواهد شد. بنابراین مطالعه حاضر نشان می­دهد که زنان سازنده در این حوزه، نه به دلیل محرومیت و استیصال اقتصادی، بلکه برای کسب انواع منفعت(شامل منفعت استقلال طلبی، منفعت عاطفی، منفعت خودشکوفایی و منفعت شبکه­ای)دست به کارآفرینی زده‌اند. همچنین آنها انواع منافع را از طریق ایجاد ارتباطات شبکه‌ای در بستر شبکه­های مجازی تقویت کرده و از این طریق، پیامدهای حاصل از گفتمان زنانه را در بین اجتماع سازندگان صنایع‌دستی گسترش می­دهند. بر این مبنا کارآفرینی برای زنان یک نیاز برآمده از استیصال و اضطرار نیست بلکه یک انتخاب آگاهانه برای استقلال و تاییدی بر سوژه‌گی زنان در جامعه معاصر است. کارآفرینی فرصت تلاقی وفاداری به حوزه خصوصی از یک سو و مشارکت در حوزه عمومی از سوی دیگر را فراهم می‌سازد و همزمان منفعت فردی و جمعی را برای زنان به ارمغان آورده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی؛ منفعت؛ کارآفرینی زنان؛ کنش اقتصادی؛ منفعت زنانه
عنوان مقاله [English]
."For love, money or both?" A qualitative study of female utilitarianism in the paradigm of the new economic sociology
نویسندگان [English]
zeinab shafiei
alzahra university
چکیده [English]
"For love, money or both?" A qualitative study of female intrests in the paradigm of the new economic sociology
Interest is a rich concept that can be applied to a variety of areas and paradigms. But economists with narrow-minded reductionism always refer to a certain kind of benefit(ie, economic benefit). Sociologists, on the other hand, emphasize different types of interests. In this article, I intend to explore the characteristics of women's utility in the field of modern handicrafts in the digital age, beyond the mainstream approach of economic practice, with the help of the new economic sociology approach. In this qualitative-exploratory research, I will answer the fundamental question of whether women in their entrepreneurial action in the field of modern handicrafts seek to gain a kind of benefit (mainly economic) or a variety of benefits?And by answering this question, I will also address the various dimensions of female utilitarianism.Thus, the present study shows that productive women in this field have started entrepreneurship not for economic deprivation and desperation, but for various interests (including independence, emotional interest, self-fulfillment interest and network interest).They also reinforce a variety of interests through networking in the context of virtual networks, thereby spreading the implications of women's discourse among the craft community. Accordingly, entrepreneurship for women is not a need arising from despair and urgency, but a conscious choice for independence and affirmation of the subjectivity of women in contemporary society.Entrepreneurship provides an opportunity for intersection of loyalty to the private sphere on the one hand and participation in the public sphere on the other, while at the same time bringing individual and collective interests to women.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Economic Sociology, Interest, Women's Entrepreneurship, Economic Action, Women's Interests
مراجع
  • انگلس، فردریک (1399). منشا خانواده مالکیت خصوصی و دولت، مترجم: خسرو پارسا، ناشر: طلایه پرسو.
  • زارتسکی، ایلای (1398) سرمایه‌داری خانواده و زندگی شخصی، مترجم: منیژه نجم عراقی، ناشر: نشر نی.
  • سوئدبرگ، ریچارد (1393)، جامعه‌شناسی کارآفرینی، ترجمه: شهلا باقری و سیده اطهر میرعابدینی، انتشارات بهمن برنا.
  • سوئدبرگ، ریچارد (1395)، جامعه‌شناسی اقتصادی، ترجمه: علی اصغر سعیدی، انتشارات تیسا.
  • کرسول، جان دبلیو (1396) طرح پژوهش (رویکردهای کمی کیفی و شیوه ترکیبی)، مترجم: حسن دانایی فرد - علی صالحی، ناشر: مهربان.
  • مارکس، کارل (1398). سرمایه (نقد اقتصاد سیاسی)، مترجم: حسن مرتضوی، ناشر: لاهیتا.
  • نگری، آنتونیو؛ هارت، مایکل (1399). امپراتوری، مترجم: رضا نجف‌زاده، ناشر: قصیده‌سرا.
  • هیرشمن، آلبرت (1393). هواهای نفسانی و منافع (استدلال‌های سیاسی به طرفداری از سرمایه‌داری پیش از اوج‌گیری)، مترجم: محمد مالجو، ناشر: شیرازه.
  • وبر، ماکس (1392)، اقتصاد و جامعه، ترجمه: عباس منوچهری، مهرداد ترابی نژاد و مصطفی عماد زاده، انتشارات سمت.
 

  • Alexander, D. (1986). "Gendered Job Traits and Women's Occupations." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts.
  • Banks, M. (2006). “Moral Economy and Cultural Work” in Sociology. Vol. 40 (3). 455-472.
  • Batson C.D. (1998). “Altruism and prosocial behavior. In The Handbook of Social Psychology  (4th edn)”. Gilbert DT, Fiske ST, Lindzey G  (eds). McGraw-Hill: New York; 282–316.
  • Becker, G. S. )1976 (. "Altruism, Egotism and Genetic Fitness: Economics and Sociobiology".Journal of Economic Literature 14 (September): 817-26.
  • Becker, G. S. )1981a (. "Altruism in the Family and Selfishness in the Market Place". Economica 48 (1): 1-15.
  • Belcourt, M, Burket, R.J., Lee-Gosselin, H. (1991) “The Glass Box: Women Business Owners in Canada”. Background paper published by the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
  • Benenson, H. (1984). "Victorian Sexual Ideology and Marx's Theory of the Working Class".International Labor and Working Class History 25  (Spring): 1-23.
  • Bentley, T. (1999). “The Creative Age”. London: Demos.
  • Berard, J, & Brown, D (1994). “Services to women Entrepreneurs: The Western Canadian Case”. Manitoba office, Western Economic Diversification Canada.
  • Bergmann, B. (1981). "The Economic Risks of Being a Housewife." American Economic Review 1  (May): 81-6.
  • Blau, F. D., & Marianne A. Ferber. (1986). The Economics of Women and Work. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
  • Charest, M (1995). “CEO examines the quality of life for women in today’s environment”. Excerpts from keynote address to the Concordia Women and Work Symposium. Reprinted in Women in Management, 5  (4), 1-3.
  • Dalla Costa, M. & James, S. (1973) “The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community”. Bristol: Falling Wall Press.
  • Das, M, (2000). “Women Entrepreneurs from India: Problems, Motivations and Success Factors”, Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship ,Volume 15,Issue 4.
  • Davies, M. W. (1982). Woman's Place Is at the Typewriter: Office Work and Office Workers, 1870-1930. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  • DiStefano, Christine. )1984 (. "In Search of the Missing Mother: Maternal Subtexts in Political Theory". Paper presented to the Eastern Division Fall Conference on the Society for Women in Philosophy, November 3-4.
  • Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Lowe, A. (1991). Management Research: An Introduction. London:Sage Publications.
  • Elster, Jon. )1979 (. “Ulysses and the Sirens: Studies in Rationality and Irrationality”.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Feiner, S., & Morgan. )1985 (. "Hidden by the Invisible Hand: Race and Gender in Introductory Economics Textbooks". Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Economic Association, December, New York.
  • Feldberg, R. L., and E. N. Glenn. (1979). "Male and Female: Job vs. Gender Models in the Sociology of Work." Social Problems 26 (5): 524-38.
  • Florida, R. (2004). “The Rise of the Creative Class: And how its transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life”, Paperback Edition. New York: Basic Books.
  • Folbre, N. & H. Hartmann. (1988) "The Rhetoric of Self-interest: Selfishness, Altruism, and Gender in Economic Theory". Consequences of EconomicBhetoric. Eds. Arjo Klamer, Donald McCloskey, and RobertSolow. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 184-206
  • Folbre, Nancy. )1982 (. "Exploitation Comes Home: A Critique of the Marxian Theory of Family Labour". Cambridge Journal of Economics 6 (4): 317-29.
  • Foner, P. (1979). Women and the American Labor Movement: From Colonial Times to the Eve of World War I. New York: Free Press.
  • Gauntlett, D. (2011). “Making is Connecting: the Social Meaning of Creativity, From DIY and Knitting to YouTube and Web 2.0”.Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Gill, R. and A. Pratt. (2008). “In the Social Factory?: Immaterial Labour, Precariousness and Cultural Work ”. in Theory Culture Society 2008, 25  (1). 1-30.
  • Gilman, C. P. )1966 (. Women and Economics. New York: Harper & Row. Originally published by Small, Maynard and Co., Boston, in 1898.
  • Goldin, C. )1985 (. "Understanding the Gender Gap: An Historical Perspective". National Bureau of Economic Research Discussion Paper.
  • Green, J. and H. Jenkins. (2009). “The Moral Economy of Web 2.0: Audience Research and Convergence Culture” in Holt, J. and A. Perren  (eds.) Media Industries: History, Theory and Method. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. 213-225
  • Gronau, R. )1980 (. "Home Production: A Forgotten Industry". Review of Economics and Statistics 62 (August): 408-16.
  • Haraway, D. (1991). “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”. In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge. 183-201.
  • Harding, S & B. Hintikka. (1983).  (eds.) “Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives on Epistemology, Metaphysics, Methodology and Philosophy of Science”. 2nd edition, 2003.
  • Harding, S. (1986). “The Science Question in Feminism”. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  • Harrison, J. )1973 (. "The Political Economy of Housework." Bulletin of the Conference of Socialist Economists 4 (1).
  • Hartmann, H. )1981 (. "The Family as the Locus of Gender, Class, and Political Struggle: The Example of Housework". Signs 6 (3): 366-394.
  • Hartsock, N. )1983 (. “Money, Sex and Power: Toward a Feminist Historical Materialism”. New York: Longman.
  • Henderson, H. (1991). “Paradigms in Progress: life beyond economics”. Indianapolis, IN: Knowledge Systems Inc.Henderson, L.  (2008). “Queer Relay” in GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 14 (4), September 2008. 569-597.
  • Himmelweit, S., & Simon Mohun. )1977 (. "Domestic Labour and Capita.". Cambridge Journal of Economics 1 (March): 15-31.
  • Hirshleifer, J. )1977 (. "Shakespeare v. Becker on Altruism: The Importance of Having the Last Word".Journal of Economic Literature 15 (2): 500-2.
  • Hochschild, A. (1983). The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: University of California.
  • Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The Managed Heart. University of California Press.
  • Horyn, C. (2012). 8 days a week. The New York Times Magazine, 26:18-25.
  • Jaggar, A. (1983). Feminist Politics and Human Nature. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Allanheld.
  • Jakob, D. (2013). “Crafting your way out of the recession? New craft entrepreneurs and the global economic downturn” in Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 2013,  (6). 127–140.
  • Jonasdottir, A. )1988 (. “On the Concept of Interest, Women’s Interest, and the Limitations of Interest Theory.” Pp. 33–65 in The Political Interests of Gender, edited by Kathleen B. Jones and Anna Jonasdottir. London: Sage.
  • Kessler-Harris, A. (1982). Out to Work: A History of Wage-Earning Women in the U.S. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Kozinets, R. V. 2010. Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Landes, J. )1982 (. "Hegel's Conception of the Family." In The Family in Political Thought, edited by Jean Bethke Elshtain. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
  • Larner W, Molloy M. )2009 (. Globalization, the `new economy’ and working women: Theorizing from the New Zealand designer fashion industry. Feminist Theory.10 (1):35-59. doi:10.1177/1464700108100391
  • Lavoie, D (1992) Women in business: A Collective Profile, A resource guide to selected research on women-owned businesses in Canada  (1975-1991). Federal Business Development Bank
  • Lazzarato, M. (1999). “Immaterial Labour”. Online. http://www.generationonline.org/immateriallabour3>.
  • McCloskey, D. (1985). The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
  • McElroy, M., & M. J. Horney. (1981). "Nash-bargained Household Decisions: Toward a Generalization of the Theory of Demand." International Economic Review 22 (June): 333-49.
  • McRobbie, A. (1998). "British fashion design: rag trade or image industry?”.London:
  • McRobbie, A. (2016), “Be Creative: Making a Living in the New Cultural Industries”, Cambridge and Malden: Polity.
  • A. (2010). “Reflections on Feminism, Immaterial Labour and Post-Fordist Regimes”. In New Formations 2010, Vol. 17. 60-76.
  • Miles, M. B., & M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Mill, J. )1825 (. "Article on Government." Reprinted in Women, the Family, and Freedom, edited by Susan Groag Bell and Karen M. Offen. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Mill, J. S.) 1867 (. “The Admission of Women to the Electoral Franchise 20 May, 1867.” Pp. 151–62 in vol. 28 of Collected Works, by John Stuart Mill. London: Routledge.
  • Mincer, J. )1980 (. "Labor Force Participation of Married Women: A Study of Labor Supply." In Economics of Women and Work, edited by Alice Amsden. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  • Mincer, J., & Polachek. )1978 (. "Family Investments in Human-Capital-Earnings of Women." Journal of Political Economy 82 (2): 76-108.
  • Nelson D, Bell J. 2004. Profi les in Entrepreneurship. South-Western: Cincinnati, OH.
  • Philips, A. & B. Taylor. (1980). "Sex and Skill: Notes Towards a Feminist Economics." Feminist Review 6: 79-88.
  • Piliavin J. A, Chang H. )1990 (. Altruism: a review of recent theory and research. American Sociological Review 16:27–65.
  • Pollak, Robert A. )1985 (. ''A Transaction Cost Approach to Families and Households.'' Journal of Economic Literature 23 (June): 581-608.
  • Pujol, M. A. (1992) .Feminism and Anti-Feminism in Early Economic Thought. New York: Edward Elgar.
  • Reisman, D. A. )1976 (. Adam Smith's Sociological Economics. New York: Barnes & Noble.
  • Remick, H., editor. (1984). Comparable Worth and Wage Discrimination: Technical Possibilities and Political Realities. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  • Reskin, B. , & Heidi Hartmann, editors. (1986). Women's Work, Men's Work. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  • Richardson, L. (1998). “Writing: A Method of Inquiry,” in Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln,  (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. 345-371.
  • Ross, A. (2004). “The Golden Children of Razorfish” in No-Collar: The Humane Workplace and Its Hidden Costs. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 55-86.
  • Rossman, G. B., & F. Rallis. )1998 (. Learning the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Schumpeter J. A. (1991). “Comments on Plan for the Study of Entrepreneurship”, In the Economic and sociology of capitalism. Princetion: Princeton university press. Pp. 406-28.
  • Seccombe, W. )1974 (. "The Housewife and Her Labour Under Capitalism." New Left Review 137. Harrison, J. 1973. "The Political Economy of Housework." Bulletin of the Conference of Socialist Economists 4 (1).
  • Sennett, R. (2006). The Culture of New Capitalism. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Smith, A. )1937 (. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. New York: Random House. Originally published 1776.
  • Sorensen, E. (1986). "Implementing Comparable Worth: A Survey of Recent Job Evaluation Studies." American Economic Review 76 (May): 364-7.
  • Swedberg, R. (2005). Can There Be a Sociological Concept of Interest? Theory and Society, 34 (4), 359-390. Retrieved July 10, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4501729.
  • Taylor, B. )1983 (. Eve and the New Jerusalem: Socialism and Feminism in the Nineteenth Century. New York: Pantheon.
  • Tilly, L., & Joan Scott. (1989). Women, Work, and Family. 2nd reprinted ed. New York: Routledge. Originally published 1978. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Virno, P. (2004). A Grammar of the Multitude, trans. Isabella Bertoletti, James Cascaito, and Andrea Casson. New York: Semiotext (e).
  • Weiner, J. )1985 (. "Women's History on Trial." The Nation (September 7, 1985), 175-80.
  • Weiss, R. S. (1984). "The Impact of Marital Dissolution on Income and Consumption in Single-Parent Households." Journal of Marriage and the Family 46  (February):115-27.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 235
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 243


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب