<p>The object of the essay was to investigate the argumentation in the bill, the comments from unions and the authorities, among others and the motions concerning the bill. To analysis this argumentation I have been using feminist theory, specifically Carole Lee Bacchis ”What’s the problem”-aproach. I also used Maud Eduards and Diane Sainsbury to complete my theory. They describe men as the norm of the society and women as deviant. The questions I have been investigating in the texts are</p><p>- What’s the problem?</p><p>- Who or what caused the problem?</p><p>- Who or what is responsible for the problem?</p><p>- Who has the responsibility to change the problem?</p><p>- What problem is not mentioned?</p><p>- Are men mentioned as a gender and a group?</p><p>- Are women mentioned as a gender and a group?</p><p>- How are men and women described?</p><p>The investigation found that the problems that was presented in the theory was very mush present in the text that I investigated. Women are seen as passive and as willingness victims of their employers. Men on the other hand are active and are mentioned as the opposite of these women. The results however varied depending on which text was studied, but the main picture remained the same.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA/oai:DiVA.org:oru-2127 |
| Date | January 2008 |
| Creators | Unander-Scharin, Teresia |
| Publisher | Örebro University, Department of Social and Political Sciences |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, text |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds