Search results

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.

There is a gap in understanding with regards to the discrimination and prejudice experienced by gay entrepreneurs. To address this, an intersectional perspective is adopted to facilitate a better understanding of how lesbian and gay entrepreneurs may experience heterosexism.

This qualitative study uses semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences of 14 lesbian and gay entrepreneurs as they navigate homophobia and heterosexism.

The study contributes novel insights to the field of entrepreneurship, extending the study of lesbian and gay entrepreneurs to include gender and a fine-grained analysis of the experience of heterosexism. Its inclusion of an intersectional perspective of the lesbian-female entrepreneur expands the emerging body of literature examining intersectional identities of minority entrepreneurs.

The authors provide a more nuanced understanding of the impact of heterosexism on LGBT+ entrepreneurial activities. This is facilitated by the authors' adoption of an intersectional perspective which shows how the different axes of identity influenced gender identity performance in relation to the model of perceived neutrality in LGBT+ entrepreneurship. The authors also make an original contribution to minority stress literature through the authors' exploration of one facet of minority entrepreneurship, namely the impact of heterosexism on LGBT+ entrepreneurial activities.

In recent years, the use of dating and hook up apps has become an increasingly socially acceptable and commonly used method of seeking romantic and sexual partners. This has seen a corresponding rise in media and crime reports of sexual harms facilitated through these services, including sexual harassment, unsolicited sexual imagery, and sexual assault. Emerging empirical research shows that experiences of sexual harms in this context are common and predominantly impact women and girls. The aim of this chapter is to examine the sociocultural and sexual norms that underpin online dating and which perpetuate a “rape culture” within which sexual harms become both possible and normalized. This chapter also considers how the discourses that minimize and legitimize sexual harms are encoded within the responses undertaken by dating and hook up apps to sexual harms. It is argued that together these norms and discourses may act to facilitate and/or prevent sexual harms, and may normalize and excuse these harms when they occur.