Search results

Over the past decade, legal recognition of trans, non-binary, and intersex individuals has occurred in a number of countries with diverse relationships to gender categorization and (settler) colonialism. This attention to trans and non-binary rights has translated into the addition of a third option for declaring gender: X. Heralded by some as a sign of progress and recognition of non-binary individuals by the state, the development of the X marker may also be interpreted as facilitating state regulation of gender-diverse individuals. Drawing on scholarship in trans studies and legal studies, this chapter critically examines the X marker as an intervention that works within and simultaneously resists state recognition of non-binary identities. By analyzing data gathered through semi-structured interviews with trans, non-binary, and genderqueer individuals who have obtained – or are in the process of electing – an X marker in legal documents, this chapter critically explores the tensions and complexities of the X and mobilizes the concept of opacity to demonstrate how individuals graft their own meanings onto this non-binary marker. While acknowledging the problematic use of identification documents as biopolitical instruments, this chapter asks if we can nonetheless use them as tools of resistance and radical self-determination to transgress the controlling power of the state.

Purpose: To consider the extent to which the legal recognition of non-binary gender has the potential to disrupt the gender binary.

Methodology/Approach: This chapter will employ case study as method, focusing on recent changes to Australian law and policy, which introduce a third gender category. I rely on the work of queer theorists on normativity and recognition as a theoretical framework and on the work of social scientists on transgender people as evidence.

Findings: This chapter finds that while there is much to be celebrated about increasing alternatives to the dominant categories of male and female, the legal recognition of non-binary gender may in fact serve to conceptually purge the dominant gender categories of non-conforming elements while simultaneously masking the ways in which institutions of regulatory power continue to demand conformity with normative standards of gender.

Research Limitations: Since few non-binary individuals in Australia have adopted the X marker the implications laid out in this paper are speculative. The experiences of non-binary individuals present an important avenue for further research.

Practical Implications: I recommend, as an alternative to further gender classifications, that we should seek to minimize the degree to which membership of a particular gender category is used to distribute rights and privileges.

Originality/Value of Paper: This chapter advances the literature on non-binary gender, contributes to existing queer and feminist analyses of the gender binary and extends work on normativity to legal recognition of alternative genders.

Nowadays, the speech emotion recognition (SER) model has enhanced as the main research topic in various fields including human–computer interaction as well as speech processing. Generally, it focuses on utilizing the models of machine learning for predicting the exact emotional status from speech. The advanced SER applications go successful in affective computing and human–computer interaction, which is making as the main component of computer system's next generation. This is because the natural human machine interface could grant the automatic service provisions, which need a better appreciation of user's emotional states.

This paper implements a new SER model that incorporates both gender and emotion recognition. Certain features are extracted and subjected for classification of emotions. For this, this paper uses deep belief network DBN model.

Through the performance analysis, it is observed that the developed method attains high accuracy rate (for best case) when compared to other methods, and it is 1.02% superior to whale optimization algorithm (WOA), 0.32% better from firefly (FF), 23.45% superior to particle swarm optimization (PSO) and 23.41% superior to genetic algorithm (GA). In case of worst scenario, the mean update of particle swarm and whale optimization (MUPW) in terms of accuracy is 15.63, 15.98, 16.06% and 16.03% superior to WOA, FF, PSO and GA, respectively. Under the mean case, the performance of MUPW is high, and it is 16.67, 10.38, 22.30 and 22.47% better from existing methods like WOA, FF, PSO, as well as GA, respectively.

This paper presents a new model for SER that aids both gender and emotion recognition. For the classification purpose, DBN is used and the weight of DBN is used and this is the first work uses MUPW algorithm for finding the optimal weight of DBN model.

The incarceration of transgender people is described as a “double punishment” based on lack of gender recognition and ability to gender affirm, and with their experiences and conditions in prison tantamount to torture. The purpose of this study is to illustrate the continued “double punishment” of incarcerated transgender people (in particular trans-women) and identify and describe breaches in human and gender rights and minimum standards of care.

There is limited global data on the numbers of incarcerated transgender people, an identified vulnerable prison group. There are inherent difficulties for prison authorities regarding placement, security aspects and management of transgender persons. While the concerns apply to all transgender prisoners, the current literature focusses mainly on transgender women and this commentary reflects this present bias. A socio-legal approach describes and evaluates international human rights’ conventions and human rights’ law, soft law instruments mandating non-discriminatory provisions in the prison setting and relevant European and domestic case law.

Transgender prisoners experience an amplification of trauma underpinned by lack of legal gender recognition, inability to gender-affirm, discrimination, transphobia, gender maltreatment and violence by other prisoners and prison staff. Despite obligations and recommendations in international human rights’ instruments and standard operating procedures at the prison level, very few countries are able to fully uphold the human rights of and meet the needs of transgender people in prison.

This study is important as it highlights the dearth of knowledge exploring human rights discourses and concerns related to the phenomenon of incarcerated transgender persons. It uniquely focusses on European and domestic law and illustrates the inherent tensions between human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity rights and security considerations regarding transgender issues in prisons. Rights assurances centre on the principles of equality, dignity, freedom of expression, dignified detention and the prohibition of inhumane treatment or punishment.

Gender is a defining feature of informal/precarious work in the twenty-first century, yet studies rarely adopt a gendered lens when examining collective efforts to challenge informality and precarity. This chapter foregrounds the gendered dimensions of informal/precarious workers’ struggles as a crucial starting point for re-theorizing the future of global labor movements. Drawing upon the findings of the volume’s six chapters spanning five countries (the United States, Canada, South Korea, Mexico, and India) and two gender-typed sectors (domestic work and construction), this chapter explores how gender is intertwined into informal/precarious workers’ movements, why gender is addressed, and to what end. Across countries and sectors, informal/precarious worker organizations are on the front lines of challenging the multiple forms of gendered inequalities that shape contemporary practices of accumulation and labor regulation. They expose the forgotten reality that class structures not only represent classification struggles around work, but also around social identities, such as gender, race, and migration status. However, these organizing efforts are not fighting to transform the gendered division of labor or embarking on revolutionary struggles to overturn private ownership and liberalized markets. Nonetheless, these struggles are making major transformations in terms of increasing women’s leadership and membership in labor movements and exposing how gender interacts with other ascriptive identities to shape work. They are also radicalizing hegemonic scripts of capitalist accumulation, development, and even gender to attain recognition for female-dominated occupations and reproductive needs for the first time ever. These outcomes are crucial as sources of emancipatory transformations at a time when state and public support for labor and social protection is facing a deep assault stemming from the pressures of transnational production and globalizing markets.

Purpose/approach: This introduction provides an overview of the themes and chapters of this volume.

Research implications: The chapters in this volume present original research employing empirical and textual methods illustrating the complex responses and policy challenges posed by contemporary understandings and misunderstandings of the nature of gender. Various forms of gender panic and responses to it within individuals, institutions, national states, and the world society are explored.

Practical and social implications: Research demonstrates that gender panic can lead to potentially harmful reactions and fruitless policies that reinforce rather than dismantle the gender binary, thereby, impacting vulnerable members of societies.

Value of the chapter: The chapter and the volume are intended to illustrate the nature of current gender panics and related policies and to encourage further scholarship with the goal of promoting greater understanding as well as developing constructive solutions to issues raised.

This study aims to explore gender equality in school textbooks in Georgia.

The research had the following questions: To what extent are women and men visible and represented equally in school textbooks? How do school textbooks promote gender socialization of boys and girls to be treated equally in terms of power and privileges, superiority and inferiority? Do school textbooks promote critical thinking and analysis of gender issues and problems? The content analysis of the qualitative research method was used to answer the research questions.

The research revealed that males remain more visible in school textbooks; however, the authors mainly attempt to balance the gender representation in textbooks quantitatively. The textbooks do not socialize girls and boys as equals in power, privileges, superiority and inferiority. The textbooks do not provide room for discussing gender and social justice issues.

The study is an original work. The study contributes to the development of the field of multicultural education, as it develops the three levels model of gender socialization based on the empirical research data. The first, detection level, implies the visibility of both boys and girls equally in school textbooks. The second, the recognition level of gender socialization, acknowledges gender equality in occupations, activities and power and privileges. The third, the affirmation level, develops a critical understanding of gender issues and gender equality in society.

Why do women’s ambitions wane? After an historic 50-year climb to unprecedented educational and career heights, many best-selling books, viral articles, and research studies are telling us that the aspirations and confidence of today’s women often abate. These readings offer explanations such as workplace biases and family responsibilities for the ebb of ambition; yet, all fail to identify the underlying unifying problem that explains choices women make to step off the upward fast tracks in favor of different work and life paths. The problem is that the workplace is not a reliable site of recognition for women. Without the positive feedback of appropriate recognition from an appreciative community, women’s ambitions and the intensity with which they are pursued tilt elsewhere. Women’s movement into and embrace of entrepreneurship provide a clear illustration of one way women are designing the workplace to support the maintenance of their ambitions.

Systematic oppression and marginalization of queer (sometimes also referred to as LGBTQ) people has affected all aspects of U.S. society, including education at all levels. Despite the heavy policing of queer sexuality and gender both inside and outside higher education, these aspects of identity have been overlooked in educational policy. This paper discusses federal educational policy that affects queer students, faculty, and staff in higher education.

Discussion in this paper is informed by three guiding tenets: sexuality is both central and marginal to queer identities; trans* identities are both inclusive of and beyond those who are in the process of confirming their gender identity through hormones and/or surgery; discussion of educational policy must acknowledge queer theory’s utility and nonutility.

The status of queer people in colleges and universities is reviewed first. Then, challenges of developing policy to address queer issues are acknowledged, while also illustrating recent policy changes and judicial rulings that have positive implications for queer people in higher education.

The paper concludes by identifying remaining gaps and recommendations for future policy development, including the need for federal nondiscrimination laws that cover sexual and gender minorities and restructuring policies for queer inclusion.

Gender equality plans (GEPs) are currently the preferred approach to initiate structural change towards gender equality in research organisations. In order to achieve structural change, GEPs have to be more than just a formally adopted institutional policy. Effective GEPs lead to a transformation of gendered practices and thus to structural change. This chapter presents the innovative approach developed for an H2020 structural change project and its theoretical background. We argue that due to the dual logic, which characterises academic organisations, the organisational logic and the academic logic, change is a complex endeavour. To deal with this complexity, one of the main functions of a GEP is to provide space and initiate reflexivity at an individual as well as at an institutional level. A theory of change approach supports reflexivity in all stages of a GEP as it ensures that basic assumptions of the institutional change process are questioned and reflected on by the different stakeholder groups involved in the implementation.