“…Overtime work has been the norm for men in full‐time, stable, salary‐based employment (Dasgupta, 2013) and this may be a reason that men in large elite firms or higher positions are less likely to have romantic partners than those in smaller establishments or lower‐ranks (Nakamura & Sato, 2010). In recent studies, however, men and women in low‐pay precarious employment are also observed to be overworked, unable to decline requests to take additional shifts beyond a fulltime load (Asahina, 2021; Cook, 2016c). In addition, because long‐hour work is strongly associated with hegemonic masculinity (e.g., Cook, 2016c; Dasgupta, 2013; Hidaka, 2010), women in career positions are often rejected by men as “unfeminine” or assumed to be uninterested in marriage (Nemoto, 2008; Yoshida, 2010a, 2011, 2017).…”
The increase in the number of never‐married and not‐cohabiting singles, or “effective singles,” was first observed in Japan and Southern Europe. In Northern and Western Europe and North America, increased singlehood was due largely to increased cohabitation. Existing sociological theories of singlehood, however, are formulated based on the observations of the latter, and fall short in explaining why more individuals remain unpartnered. The wealth of data from singlehood research in Japan suggest that many singles desire marriage yet drift into singlehood, facing structural, cultural barriers in a rapidly changing social context. The impact of gender inequality is salient, but existing theories focus on women's advancement and egalitarianism. This paper proposes an alternative theoretical framework for explaining causes of singlehood, incorporating sociological and feminist perspectives and Emile Durkheim's theory of anomie, and calls for shifting the center to observations from non‐Western societies for better theorization.
“…Overtime work has been the norm for men in full‐time, stable, salary‐based employment (Dasgupta, 2013) and this may be a reason that men in large elite firms or higher positions are less likely to have romantic partners than those in smaller establishments or lower‐ranks (Nakamura & Sato, 2010). In recent studies, however, men and women in low‐pay precarious employment are also observed to be overworked, unable to decline requests to take additional shifts beyond a fulltime load (Asahina, 2021; Cook, 2016c). In addition, because long‐hour work is strongly associated with hegemonic masculinity (e.g., Cook, 2016c; Dasgupta, 2013; Hidaka, 2010), women in career positions are often rejected by men as “unfeminine” or assumed to be uninterested in marriage (Nemoto, 2008; Yoshida, 2010a, 2011, 2017).…”
The increase in the number of never‐married and not‐cohabiting singles, or “effective singles,” was first observed in Japan and Southern Europe. In Northern and Western Europe and North America, increased singlehood was due largely to increased cohabitation. Existing sociological theories of singlehood, however, are formulated based on the observations of the latter, and fall short in explaining why more individuals remain unpartnered. The wealth of data from singlehood research in Japan suggest that many singles desire marriage yet drift into singlehood, facing structural, cultural barriers in a rapidly changing social context. The impact of gender inequality is salient, but existing theories focus on women's advancement and egalitarianism. This paper proposes an alternative theoretical framework for explaining causes of singlehood, incorporating sociological and feminist perspectives and Emile Durkheim's theory of anomie, and calls for shifting the center to observations from non‐Western societies for better theorization.
“…The situation is no different in media and communication companies (Bastos, 2014;Cobos, 2017;Matos, 2017;von Rimscha, 2016). In general and across all sectors, what is at stake is that the workforce, including the permanent staff, consents to more volatile work or pay circumstances as an a priori condition for continuity in employment, or as a prologue to achieving some kind of permanent worker status that is continually postponed by the organisational leadership, for example the case of recently graduated journalists, who are moving between different internships (Asahina, 2019;Örnebring, 2018).…”
Este artigo procura responder a uma das principais lacunas identificáveis no debate sobre descompetencialização profissional no jornalismo. Esta lacuna consiste numa dificuldade em isolar da restante polissemia conceptual este conceito que é crítico na interpretação dos desafios impostos ao jornalismo, que são múltiplos e que vão da erosão da dominação profissional às crises de valores, passando pela instabilidade de modelos de negócio com impacto acentuado na reconfiguração da divisão do trabalho jornalístico.Para tal, e com recurso a uma sistematização da literatura sobre descompetencialização profissional, chegamos a uma definição estruturada e maximalista deste conceito no jornalismo. Definição que resulta fundamentalmente da arrumação dos múltiplos significados em dois indutores principais: a despadronização do trabalho jornalístico e o imediatismo na produção jornalística. Uma descompetencialização na profissão de jornalista que, conclui-se, constitui um novo tipo de precariedade da prática, capaz de capturar a qualidade jornalística e que vai além das tradicionais e muito documentadas precariedades do emprego e do trabalho.Por fim, ensaiamos pistas futuras para continuar a acompanhar os ritmos de transformação profissional e a forma como estes continuarão a abalar competências jornalísticas e a qualidade da prática profissional, nomeadamente o fenómeno da automação digital no jornalismo com capacidade para ditar o regresso ao debate sobre descompetencialização profissional no jornalismo.
“…Globally, flexible labor market policy contributes to the rise of precarious works. Even drawing upon the case of Japan, under the current policy of labor market flexibility, inequality concerning job security exists not only between standard and nonstandard employment but also within standard employment arrangements (Asahina, 2019). A clearer explanation is highlighted in the study by the Asian Development Bank, which indicated that although labor reform was imperative, labor policies should not be viewed as the primary cause of escalating unemployment and underemployment in Asia (ADB, 2006).…”
The current study aims at finding evidence of the impacts of economic shocks on the labor markets in Indonesia. Based on the findings, the study would like to revisit the feasibility of the current labor markets policy in the country that is currently moving towards labor market flexibility. To study the topic, this study used a dataset from the 2021 Inter-Regional Input-Output Table for East Java Province, Indonesia. In the analysis, econometric techniques were employed to: (i) identify vulnerable economic sectors to the economic shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic, (ii) determine the economic losses resulting from the reduction of outputs, and (iii) determine the impacts on the labor markets that resulted from the reduction in the final demand of the economic sectors. The findings of this study reveal that the sectors that had been most affected by the economic shocks are those that make a significant contribution to the gross domestic product and are heavily dependent on labor. Upon simulating the impacts of economic shocks on the labor markets, the labor-intensive service sectors are the most impacted and succeeded by labor-intensive manufacturing sectors and capital-intensive sectors. Hence, in opposition to the current labor markets policy, the findings suggest policymakers to adopt appropriate labor market policies that promote decent work while sustaining economic growth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.