Should Women Count? A Context for the Debate*

Mattingly, Doreen J.; Falconer-Al-Hindi, Karen

doi:10.1111/j.0033-0124.1995.00427.x

Cited by 57 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…have emphasised that there should not be a separation between academic work challenging the marginalization of those who are facing exclusion and marginalization (Kesby 2000;Mattingly & Falconer-Al-Hindi 1995). Researchers examining young people should therefore take responsibility for addressing the politics of childhood (Valentine, 1996).…”

Section: Addressing the 'Politics Of Childhood'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Involving young people as researchers: uncovering multiple power relations among youths

Schäfer

Yarwood

2008

Children's Geographies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Addressing the 'Politics Of Childhood'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Involving young people as researchers: uncovering multiple power relations among youths

Schäfer

Yarwood

2008

Children's Geographies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In our view, this goal is also advanced by the increasing desire of feminist urban geographers to move beyond methodological dualisms and toward a pluralistic and pragmatic approach to methodology. In this perspective, both qualitative and quantitative methods have their placesometimes within the same research project (Pavlovskaya, 2002)-depending on the question being asked (D. Mattingly & Falconer Al-Hindi, 1995;Lawson, 1995), with each type of method providing contextual 'data' for the other (Kwan, 2002). The strong quantitative tradition in feminist urban geography, increasingly involving critical 're-envisionings' of GIS (Kwan, 2002), engages directly with the former by using a language understandable to knowledge brokers and offering up the 'evidence' to policy-makers (McLafferty, 1995), while also drawing attention to and helping to provide context for more intensive explorations of the latter.…”

Section: Gendering the Urban And Spatialising Gendermentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing gender, constructing the urban: A review of Anglo-American feminist urban geography

Bondi

Rose

2003

Gender, Place & Culture

173

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay explores the changing shape of Anglo-American feminist urban geography, through a discussion of material published in Gender, Place and Culture and elsewhere over the past decade. We contextualize this discussion in relation to the development of feminist urban studies since the 1970s, showing its enduring commitment to work across traditional analytical divides that obfuscate crucial aspects of the mutual constitution of gender and the urban. Focusing on two thematic areas-affective experiences of urban space, and the making of urban public spaces-we examine how this commitment is expressed in recent contributions to feminist urban geography. Both bodies of work successfully challenge a divide between scholarship that focuses on how cities constrain, disadvantage and oppress women, and scholarship that focuses on how cities liberate women. However, we are disturbed by a seeming bifurcation between work concerned with issues of recognition and work focusing on issues of redistribution, with the former being well represented in Gender, Place and Culture and the latter more likely to be aired in 'mainstream' journals. We conclude by reflecting on our lack of perspective on the trajectories of feminist urban geography outside of the Anglo-American context and ask whether the boundaries within which our review has been conducted are themselves gendered.

show abstract

“…Recently, some have argued for a return to quantitative methods on the grounds that they may -as their early practitioners had hoped -be useful for challenging inequality simply because they are the tools most widely acceptable to politicians and policy-makers (Mattingly and Falconer-Al-Hindi, 1995); others seek to increase the validity and purchase of quantitative techniques by using them alongside qualitative methods (McKendrick 1999); some distinguish quantitative methods from positivist approaches (see Kwan in Chapter 26) or uncouple quantitative approaches from masculinist versions of science by challenging the quantitative/qualitative dualism itself (Lawson, 1995). In short, quantitative social geography is alive, well, and could do more for us in the future than it has in the past.…”

Section: Methodological Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%