Although accountability lies at the heart of the “doing gender” perspective, it has received surprisingly little attention from gender scholars. In this article, I analyze the different ways that scholars have conceptualized accountability. I propose a synthesis of these various understandings, and demonstrate the utility of this conceptualization with examples from my research on feminist self-defense training. This analysis sheds light on both the workings of accountability and the process of change in gender expectations and practices. I conclude by considering the implications of this reconceptualization of accountability.
FenstermakerS.WestC.ZimmermanD. H.2002[1991]. Gender inequality: New conceptual terrain. In Doing gender, doing difference: Inequality, power, and institutional change, edited by FenstermakerS.WestC.New York: Routledge.
9.
HeritageJ.1984. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
10.
HollanderJ. A.2009. The roots of resistance to women’s self-defense. Violence Against Women15:574-94.
11.
HollanderJ. A.2010. Why do women take self-defense classes?Violence Against Women16:459-78.
12.
HollanderJ. A.2012. Changing interaction, changing gender: Self-defense training and gender transformation. Unpublished manuscript.
13.
HollanderJ. A.Forthcoming. Does self-defense training prevent sexual violence against women?Violence Against Women.
14.
JonesN.2010. Between good and ghetto: African American girls and inner-city violence. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
15.
KaneE. W.2009. “I wanted a soul mate”: Gendered anticipation and frameworks of accountability in parents’ preferences for sons and daughters. Symbolic Interaction32:372-89.
16.
LorberJ.2005. Breaking the bowls: Degendering and feminist change. New York: Norton.
17.
LucalB.1999. What it means to be gendered me: Life on the boundaries of a dichotomous gender system. Gender & Society13:781-97.
18.
MartinP. Y.2004. Gender as a social institution. Social Forces82:1249-73.
19.
MartinP. Y.2006. Practising gender at work: Further thoughts on reflexivity. Gender, Work & Organization13:254-76.
20.
MesserschmidtJ.2004. Flesh and blood: Adolescent gender diversity and violence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
21.
MooreV. A.2001. “Doing” racialized and gendered age to organize peer relations: Observing kids in summer camp. Gender & Society15:835-58.
22.
MurrayS. B.1996. “We all love Charles”: Men in child care and the social construction of gender. Gender & Society10:368-85.
PascoeC. J.2007. Dude, you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
RismanB. J.2009. From doing to undoing: Gender as we know it. Gender & Society23:81-84.
26.
SchwalbeM.2000. The elements of inequality. Contemporary Sociology29:775-81.
27.
SchwalbeM.2005. Identity stakes, manhood acts, and the dynamics of accountability. Studies in Symbolic Interaction28:65-81.
28.
SearlesP.BergerR. J.1987. The feminist self-defense movement: A case study. Gender & Society1:61-84.
29.
SkrypnekB. J.SnyderM.1982. On the self-perpetuating nature of stereotypes about men and women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology18:277-91.
30.
SnyderM.KleinO.2005. Construing and constructing others: On the reality and the generality of the behavioral confirmation scenario. Interaction Studies6:53-67.
31.
WalzerS.2008. Redoing gender through divorce. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships25:5-21.
32.
WalzerS.OlesT. P.2003. Accounting for divorce: Gender and uncoupling narratives. Qualitative Sociology26:331-49.
WestC.FenstermakerS.2002. Accountability in action: The accomplishment of gender, race, and class in a meeting of the University of California Board of Regents. Discourse & Society13:537-63.
WestC.ZimmermanD. H.2009. Accounting for doing gender. Gender & Society23:112-22.
37.
WickesR.EmmisonM.2007. They are all “doing gender” but are they all passing? A case study of the appropriation of a sociological concept. The Sociological Review55:311-30.
