Self-Definition and Evaluation of the Term “Childfree” Among Hong Kong Women
Clicks: 39
ID: 280853
2023
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
11.4
/100
39 views
17 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #49 of 55 articles by views in SAGE Open
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The term “childless” is highly problematic. Attempts to split it into “voluntary” and “involuntary” may appear to give more detail on context, but the differentiation can be misleading. The condition of “-less” has negative connotations and implies “missing” something; possibly something which is “natural.” The term “childfree” has been employed as an alternative expression which denotes active choice, freedom, and emancipation. Few studies, however, have explored how individuals refer to themselves , or how they interpret—or even care—about these distinctions. Such existing studies only explore the use of these English expressions among speakers of English as their primary language. This exploratory qualitative study explores how women without children define themselves in their native language in an Asian setting—Cantonese in Hong Kong. It also explores how such women interpret the various terms developed in English to describe their circumstances. Respondents refer to themselves in neutral, factual terms—literally “without children.” Others make an explicit link between being unmarried and childless status. While respondents find the English expression of “childfree” positive, they do not express a strong need to either deploy it in English, nor “develop” a Cantonese equivalent. The study provides further evidence that “labels” generated and applied by academics in one context and in one language may not be universally applicable.
| Reference Key |
gietelbasten2023selfdefinitionsage
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Gietel-Basten, S. |
| Journal | SAGE Open |
| Year | 2023 |
| DOI |
10.1177/21582440231198994
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.