"What's wrong with that?" Legitimating and contesting gender inequality

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorHastie, B.
dc.contributor.authorCosh, S.
dc.date.issued2013
dc.description.abstractWhile there are generally strong cultural norms against discrimination based on individual characteristics, there is a dearth of research on exactly how people understand a particular act to be an instance of (non)discrimination. This research examines 285 online posts discussing differential pricing of health insurance by gender to see how this is constructed, and disputed, as an instance of discrimination. Arguments legitimating differential pricing are based on statistical rhetoric and the invocation of a norm of differential pricing across insurance contexts. These arguments are contested by undermining the constructions of “risk” that statistics are based on, and disputing equivalence of insurance contexts. These findings suggest that straightforward claims about what is and what is not discrimination are difficult to make in practice. Highlighting the various ways that gender differentiated treatment can be legitimated and contested provides insight into the ways in which inequality is maintained and resisted within everyday situations.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityBrianne Hastie and Suzanne Cosh
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Language and Social Psychology, 2013; 32(4):369-389
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0261927X12473989
dc.identifier.issn0261-927X
dc.identifier.issn1552-6526
dc.identifier.orcidCosh, S. [0000-0002-8003-3704]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/81628
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSage Publications Inc
dc.rights© 2013 SAGE Publications.
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x12473989
dc.subjectdiscrimination
dc.subjectgender inequality
dc.subjectrisk
dc.subjectdiscourse analysis
dc.subjecthealth
dc.title"What's wrong with that?" Legitimating and contesting gender inequality
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Psychology publications