Gender & Society

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to learn more

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by KENNELLY, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Gender & Society, Vol. 13, No. 2, 168-192 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/089124399013002002
© 1999 Sociologists for Women in Society

"THAT SINGLE-MOTHER ELEMENT"

How White Employers Typify Black Women

IVY KENNELLY

University of Georgia

Many employers assess their workforces with gendered and racialized imagery that can put groups of workers and applicants at a disadvantage in the labor market. Based on 78 interviews with white employers in Atlanta, the author reveals that some employers use a complex but widely shared stereo-type of Black working-class women as single mothers to typify members of this group. These employers use this single-mother image to explain why they think Black women are poor workers, why they think Black women are reliable workers, and why they think Blacks are poorly prepared for the labor market. In focusing on these white employers' claims, the author concentrates not on the well-documented out-comes of labor market discrimination, such as differential rates of pay and promotion, but on how employers construct and use the images that may from the basis of it. This is especially relevant amid current attacks on affirmative action programs.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Research on AgingHome page
J. L. Cummings and P. Braboy Jackson
Race, Gender, and SES Disparities in Self-Assessed Health, 1974-2004
Research on Aging, March 1, 2008; 30(2): 137 - 167.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Gender SocietyHome page
R. Glauber
Race and Gender in Families and at Work: The Fatherhood Wage Premium
Gender Society, February 1, 2008; 22(1): 8 - 30.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Gender SocietyHome page
A. C. Steinbugler, J. E. Press, and J. J. Dias
Gender, Race, and Affirmative Action: Operationalizing Intersectionality in Survey Research
Gender Society, December 1, 2006; 20(6): 805 - 825.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Gender SocietyHome page
I. KENNELLY
"I Would Never Be a Secretary": Reinforcing Gender in Segregated and Integrated Occupations
Gender Society, October 1, 2002; 16(5): 603 - 624.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Gender SocietyHome page
Y. D. NEWSOME and F. N.-A. DODOO
Reversal of Fortune: Explaining the Decline in Black Women's Earnings
Gender Society, August 1, 2002; 16(4): 442 - 464.
[Abstract] [PDF]