2013
DOI: 10.1080/14733285.2013.743285
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constructions of rural childhood: challenging dominant perspectives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
25
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The relationship between rurality, gender and education is complex not least because it is often viewed through the lens of urban realities or through hegemonic gender discourses that privilege interpretations from the Global North (Arnot and Fennell 2008). Empirical research on gender and rurality, for example, is often focused on advanced economies such as New Zealand (Powell, Taylor, and Smith 2013), Australia (Pini, Price, and McDonald 2010) and Norway (Haugen and Lysgård 2006). From such perspectives, not only are rural families in the Global South seen as the most disadvantaged but, from a gender perspective, they are often portrayed as the most hidebound by oppressive patriarchal traditions (Kenway, Kraack, and Hickey Moodey 2006;Connell 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The relationship between rurality, gender and education is complex not least because it is often viewed through the lens of urban realities or through hegemonic gender discourses that privilege interpretations from the Global North (Arnot and Fennell 2008). Empirical research on gender and rurality, for example, is often focused on advanced economies such as New Zealand (Powell, Taylor, and Smith 2013), Australia (Pini, Price, and McDonald 2010) and Norway (Haugen and Lysgård 2006). From such perspectives, not only are rural families in the Global South seen as the most disadvantaged but, from a gender perspective, they are often portrayed as the most hidebound by oppressive patriarchal traditions (Kenway, Kraack, and Hickey Moodey 2006;Connell 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Rural family habitus and masculine domination: a Bourdieusian framework In the absence of a proper generative theory of rurality (Balfour, Mitchell, and Moletsane 2008, 97), there is a danger of accepting or using models of 'the rural' which Powell, Taylor, and Smith (2013) have rightly challenged as inadequate. On the one hand, the dominant model uses a romanticised notion of the 'rural-idyll' (126) which was characterised as 'better and safer for the family, with greater freedom for children, supportive communities and the benefits of being closer to nature' (127).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Morojele 2013;Powell, Taylor, and Smith 2013); geographies of rural youth (Pini and Morris, forthcoming); rural masculinities (Pini 2008) and; rural sexualities/queer rurals (Gorman-Murray, Pini, and Bryant 2013;Keller, forthcoming).…”
Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The collective perception of a rural childhood as an ideal way of growing up is well reflected in literature (Valentine 1997;Powell et al 2013) and is linked to the cultural concept of the rural idyll (Rapport & Overing 2000, p. 315-321;Woods 2011). To Klára and other female informants, the ideal of a rural childhood manifests itself particularly in accounts of the life phase when their children were very young.…”
Section: Mobility Constraints Spatial Injustice and Strategies Of Bmentioning
confidence: 99%