IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/polsoc/v29y2001i2p297-330.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender Frames and Collective Action: Configurations of Masculinity in the Pittston Coal Strike

Author

Listed:
  • KAREN BECKWITH

Abstract

This article develops the concept of gender frame for understanding major transformations in the collective action repertoires of social movements. Focusing on the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) strike against the Pittston Coal Group (1989-90), the article discusses the UMWA's traditional collective action repertoire and its innovation of nonviolent protest, widely employed during the strike. Interviews with major activists and UMWA staff and officers illustrate how the UMWA employed a gender frame of mining masculinities to initiate the new nonviolent strike action. The article concludes by suggesting how collective action repertoires and framing are linked and encouraging future research on gender frames in social movements.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Beckwith, 2001. "Gender Frames and Collective Action: Configurations of Masculinity in the Pittston Coal Strike," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(2), pages 297-330, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:polsoc:v:29:y:2001:i:2:p:297-330
    DOI: 10.1177/0032329201029002006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0032329201029002006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0032329201029002006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Gahan & Andreas Pekarek, 2013. "Social Movement Theory, Collective Action Frames and Union Theory: A Critique and Extension," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(4), pages 754-776, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:polsoc:v:29:y:2001:i:2:p:297-330. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.