Opinions of Social Work Students on Gender: A Qualitative Research

Öz

The purpose of this study is to investigate the views of the students of the Department of Social Work at Hacettepe University regarding gender, based on focus group discussions. We found that the student participants did not discuss about gender within the framework of power and oppression mechanisms in society. They explained gender roles within the socialization process and traditional role expectations, not within the context of male domination and subordination of the female. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• gender,gender stereotypes,masculinity,femininity,social work education

SOSYAL HIZMET ÖĞRENCILERININ TOPLUMSAL CINSIYET HAKKINDAKI GÖRÜŞLERI: BIR NITELIKSEL ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Hizmet Bölümü öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyete ilişkin görüşlerini odak grup tartışmalarına dayanarak incelemektir. Araştırmada öğrencilerin toplumsal cinsiyeti, toplumdaki güç ve ezme mekanizmaları çerçevesinde tartışmadıkları bulunmuştur. Öğrenciler toplumsal cinsiyet rollerini, erkek baskınlığı ve kadının ikincilleştirilmesi yerine; sosyalleşme süreci ve geleneksel rol beklentileri  çerçevesinde açıklamışlardır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Toplumsal cinsiyet,toplumsal cinsiyet kalıpyargıları,erkeklik,kadınlık,sosyal hizmet eğitimi

Kaynakça

1. Anıl E., Berktay A. ve İlkkaracan P. (2002). The new legal status of women in Turkey, Women for Women Rights, www.wwhr.org/id-736.
2. Baber, K. M. (2000). Women’s sexualities. In M. Biaggio and M. Hersen (Eds.), Issues in the psychology of women. New York: Plenum Press.
3. Barns, A. (2003). Social work, young women and femininity. Affilia, 18(2), 148-164.
4. Bentley, K. J., Valentine, D. and Haskett, G. (1999). Women’s issues and social work accreditation: A status report, Affilia, 14, 344.
5. Berktay, A. (1998). Cumhuriyet’in 75 yıllık serüvenine kadınlar açısından bakmak, 75 Yılda Kadınlar ve Erkekler. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası ve Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.
6. Boratav, H. B. (2002). Kuştepe gençliği: penceremden gördüklerim. Kuştepe Gençlik Araştırması (ed. Kazgan, G.) İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
7. Carli, L. L. and Bukatko, D. (2000). Gender, communication, and social influence: A developmental perspective. In Eckes, T. and Trautner, H. M. (Eds.), The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering, psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. London: University of California Press.

9. Coltrane, S. (1998). Gender and families. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
10. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
11. Connell, R.W. (2002). Hegemonic masculinity and violence: Response to Jefferson and Hall. Theoretical Criminology, 6(1), 89-99.
12. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). USA: University of California Press.
13. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. CA: Thousand Oaks, Sage.
14. Dipboye, R. L. and Colella, A. (2005). Discrimination at work: The psychology and organizational bases. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Dominelli, L. (2002). Feminist social work theory and practice. Hampshire: Palgrave and Macmillan.
16. Featherstone, B. (2001). Why gender matters in child welfare and protection. Critical Social Policy, 26(2), 294-314.
17. Figueira-Mcdonough, J., Netting, E. F. and Nichols-Casebolt, A. (2001). Subjugated knowledge in gender-integrated social work education: Call for a dialogue. Affilia, 16(4), 411-431.
18. Grise- Owens, E. (2002). Sexism and the social work curriculum: A content analysis of the journal of social work education, Affilia, 17, 147-166.
19. Heiliger, A. and Constance E. (1995). Sexuelle gewalt mannliche sozialisation und potentielle taterschaft. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.
20. Ilkkaracan, I. and Seral, G. (2000). Sexual pleasure as a woman’s human right: Experiences from a grassroots training program in Turkey. In Ilkkaracan, P.(ed.), Women and sexuality in muslim societies, (187-197), Istanbul: WWHR and KHIP.
21. Ilkkaracan, I. (2001). Islam and women’s sexuality: A research report from Turkey. good sex: Feminist perspectives from the world’s religions. Hunt, M., Jung, P.B., Balakrishnan, R. (Eds.), New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
22. Kandiyoti, D. (2007). Cariyeler, bacılar, yurttaşlar (İkinci basım). İstanbul: Metis.
23. Khoromi, F. (2006). The nature of gender differences in sciences mathematics ve engineering education: A literature review of stereotype threat and its underlying mechanisms. San Diego: Alliant International University.
24. Krueger, R. A. and Casey, A. M. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research, USA: Sage.
25. Kulic, L. (2002). The impact of social background on gender-role ideology: Parents’ versus children’s attitudes, Journal of Family Issues, 23(1), 53-73.
26. Leung, L. C. (2007). The impact of feminism on social work students in Hong Kong. Journal of Women and Social Work, 22(2), 185-194.
27. Morgan, D. and Spanish, M. (1984). Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology (7), 253-270.
28. Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (4th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
29. Onur, H. ve Koyuncu, B. (2004). Hegemonik erkekliğin görünmeyen yüzü: Sosyalizasyon sürecinde erkeklik oluşumları ve krizleri üzerine düşünceler, Toplum ve Bilim (101), 31-50.
30. Orme, J. (2002). Feminist social work In R. Adams, Dominelli, L. ve M. Payne (eds). Social work: Themes, issues and critical debates (second ed.), Basing Stoke: Palgrave.
31. Orme, J. (2003). It’s feminist because I say so!: Feminism, social work and critical practice in the UK. Qualitative Social Work, 2, 131.
32. Pateman, C. (2001). The fraternal social contract. In R. Adams and D. Savran (Eds.), The Masculinity Studies Reader. US and UK: Blackwell. Payne, M. (1997). Modern social work theory (Second Edition). London: Macmillan Press.
33. Rubin A. and Babbie E. (1989). Research methods for social work. CA: Whadsworth.
34. Sancar, S. (2004). Otoriter Türk modernleşmesinin cinsiyet rejimi, Özel Sayı: İdeolojiler II, Doğu Batı Dergisi, 29.
35. Strauss, A. L. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of oualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. CA: Sage.
36. Trotter J., Brogatzki L., Duggan L., Foster, E. and Levie, J. (2006). Revealing disagreement and discomfort through auto-ethnography and personal narrative: Sexuality in social work education and practice, Qualitative Social Work, 5(3), 369-388.