|
on Gender |
| By: | Fei Jiun Kik (Tunku Abdul Rahman University College) |
| Abstract: | This is a comparative study to look into cinematic feminism between English-speaking blockbuster and non-blockbuster films that screening from 2012 to 2015. This study will choose films that led by female character(s) and to explore, compare, and justify the feminism qualities that reflected through the female characters and storylines. In this study, six female-led films are selected: The Hunger Games, Mad Max: The Fury Road, Cinderella, Gone Girl, Brooklyn, and Carol. This study assumes that modern high budget productions are portraying feminism conventionally through unrealistic characters and masculine domination stories; while the non-blockbuster productions are portraying feminism progressively through reflective characters and self-determination stories. Blockbuster films? actresses are commonly created as recognisable female superheroes with strong masculine traits but living in a men-ruled world, or princesses that living in fairy tales. The cinematic feminism is superficial and ambiguous in blockbuster commercial films. Hence, non-blockbuster films? actresses are characterised with conservative and realistic images but given more chances to deal with alternatives, decisions, and progressions throughout the development of the story. Non-blockbuster films? characters and stories are less emphasizing on masculine feminism but more focusing on subtle yet significant feminism expressions. To achieve the objectives and hypotheses, this paper uses two methods ? quantitative method with a designed coding sheet in content analysis; and a qualitative method with film reviews for textual analysis. These two methods are expected to test out and evaluate the cinematic feminism through on-screen characters? gender representations and the storyline?s interpretations in selected films. |
| Keywords: | films, feminism, cinema, blockbuster, storyline, gender, portrayals. |
| Date: | 2019–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sek:iacpro:9110632&r=all |
| By: | Bindler, Anna (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Hjalmarsson, Randi (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University) |
| Abstract: | We document persistent gender gaps favoring females in jury convictions and judge sentences in nearly 200 years of London trials, which are unexplained by case characteristics. We find that three sharp changes in punishment severity locally affected the size and nature of the gaps, but were generally not strong enough to offset their persistence. These local effects suggest a mechanism of taste-based discrimination (paternalism) where the all-male judiciary protected females from the harshest available punishment. |
| Keywords: | gender; gender gap; crime; verdict; sentencing; discrimination; history |
| JEL: | J16 K14 K40 N33 |
| Date: | 2019–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0780&r=all |
| By: | Eckbo, B. Espen (Tuck School of Business at Darthmouth College); Ødegaard, Bernt Arne (University of Stavanger) |
| Abstract: | We test for systematic gender-differences in trading propensity and performance using the population of primary insiders on the Oslo Stock Exchange (OSE), 1986--2016. We use Norway's 2005 board gender quota law, which nearly tripled the population of female directors, as an exogenous shock to female directors' access to information through the expanded director network. Moreover, we use differences in trading activity following the exogenous increase in trading risk caused by the 2008 financial crisis to identify gender-based differences in risk aversion. We find no significant gender-based difference in insider trading performance, whether before or after the mandatory board gender-balancing. However, we find that female insiders are significantly more likely to buy shares during the financial crisis, which is consistent with female directors and executives exhibiting less (not more) risk aversion than their male counterparts. |
| Keywords: | Insider trading; gender; risk aversion; portfolio performance; director network; board gender- balancing |
| JEL: | G14 M14 |
| Date: | 2019–10–24 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:stavef:2019_002&r=all |
| By: | Congdon Fors, Heather (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Lindskog, Annika (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University) |
| Abstract: | We investigate the impact of son preferences in India on gender inequalities in educational performance and investment. Son preferences can create gender inequalities through two channels: preferential treatment of boys within the families and gender-biased fertility strategies (gender-specific fertility stopping rules and sex-selective abortions). We distinguish the impact of direct favoritism towards sons in general and towards eldest sons from the impact of fertility strategies. Our empirical strategy relies on dividing families based on the gender of the first-born, and employing family fixed effects. In short, our results suggest strong favoritism towards boys in general. In comparison to the advantage that boys have over girls within the family, the extra advantage of the eldest son is small and only statistically significant for pecuniary investment. The advantage of boys over girls within the family that can be attributed to gender-biased fertility strategies is also small in comparison to the advantage that can be attributed to favoritism of sons. We further document systematic differences between the families that girls and boys live in due to gender-biased fertility strategies, with implications for education investment and performance. Again, the resulting gender inequalities are smaller than the inequalities due to families’ favoritism of sons over daughters. Regardless of the reason behind favoritism, the consequence is inequality of opportunities between girls and boys. |
| Keywords: | Son preferences; Gender; Sex-selection; Fertility-stopping rules; Human Capital; Education; Birth order |
| JEL: | D13 I20 J16 O15 |
| Date: | 2019–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0781&r=all |