Partners for success? Undergraduate women’s post-feminist constructions of intimate relationships

References

• Aapola, S., M. Gonick, and A. Harris. 2005. Young Femininity: Girlhood, Power and Social Change. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Apple, M. W. 2006. Educating the ‘Right’ Way: Markets, Standards, God, and Inequality. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arnett, J. J. 2004. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens Through the Twenties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, J. 2010a. “Claiming Volition and Evading Victimhood: Post-Feminist Obligations for Young Women.” Feminism & Psychology 20 (2): 186–204. doi: 10.1177/0959353509359142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, J. 2010b. “Great Expectations and Post-Feminist Accountability: Young Women Living up to the ‘Successful Girls’ Discourse.” Gender and Education 22 (1): 1–15. doi: 10.1080/09540250802612696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker Miller, J., and I. P. Stiver. 1997. The Healing Connection: How Women Form Relationships in Therapy and in Life. Boston: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, U. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, A. T. 1997. “The Past and Future of Cognitive Therapy.” The Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research 6 (4): 276–284.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Benjamin, B. C. 2010. “On Not Seeming Like You Want Anything: Privileged Girls’ Dilemmas of Ambition and Selflessness.” In Educating Elites: Class Privilege and Educational Advantage, edited by A. Howard and R. A. Gaztambide-Fernández, 173–193. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Education.
   Google Scholar
• Blackmore, J., and N. Sawers. 2015. “Executive Power and Scaled-up Gender Subtexts in Australian Entrepreneurial Universities.” Gender and Education 27 (3): 320–337. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2015.1027670
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogle, K. A. 2008. Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bound, J., B. Hershbein, and B. T. Long. 2009. Playing the Admissions Game: Student Reactions to Increasing College Competition (NBER Working Paper No. 15272). National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w15272
   Google Scholar
• Boyatzis, R. E. 1998. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, W. 2003. “Neo-liberalism and the End of Liberal Democracy.” Theory and Event 7 (1): 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Connell, R. 1987. Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Connell, R. 2011. Confronting Equality: Gender, Knowledge and Global Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cui, M., K. A. S. Wickrama, F. O. Lorenz, and R. D. Conger. 2011. “Linking Parental Divorce and Marital Discourse to the Timing of Emerging Adults’ Marriage and Cohabitation.” In Romantic Relationships in Emerging Adulthood, edited by F. D. Fincham and M. Cui, 123–141. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Demerath, P. 2009. Producing Success: The Culture of Personal Advancement in an American High School. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, C. D. 2004. “Cultural Models and Metaphors for Marriage: An Analysis of Discourse at Japanese Wedding Receptions.” Ethos 32 (3): 348–373. doi: 10.1525/eth.2004.32.3.348
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edley, M. 2001. “Analysing Masculinity: Interpretative Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject Positions.” In Discourse as Data: A Guide for Analysis, edited by M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, and S. Yates, 189–228. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• England, P. 2010. “The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled.” Gender and Society 24 (2): 149–166. doi: 10.1177/0891243210361475
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine, M. 1988. “Sexuality, Schooling, and Adolescent Females: The Missing Discourse of Desire.” Harvard Educational Review 58 (1): 29–54. doi: 10.17763/haer.58.1.u0468k1v2n2n8242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finn, K. 2015. Personal Life, Young Women and Higher Education: A Relational Approach to Student and Graduate Experiences. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 1980. Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and Self-identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1992. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, R. 2007. “Postfeminist Media Culture: Elements of a Sensibility.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 10 (2): 147–166. doi: 10.1177/1367549407075898
   Google Scholar
• Gilligan, C. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilmartin, S. K. 2005. “The Centrality and Costs of Heterosexual Romantic Love Among First-year College Women.” The Journal of Higher Education 76: 609–633. doi: 10.1080/00221546.2005.11772302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonick, M. 2006. “Between ‘Girl Power’ and ‘Reviving Ophelia’ Constituting the Neoliberal Girl Subject.” NWSA Journal 18 (2): 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Graf, N. L., and C. R. Schwartz. 2011. “The Uneven Pace of Change in Heterosexual Romantic Relationships: Comment on England.” Gender and Society 25 (1): 101–107. doi: 10.1177/0891243210390356
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hackstaff, K. B. 1999. Marriage in a Culture of Divorce. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, L., and E. Armstrong. 2009. “Gendered Sexuality in Young Adulthood: Double Binds and Flawed Options.” Gender and Society 23: 589–616. doi: 10.1177/0891243209345829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hekman, S. 1995. Moral Voices, Moral Selves: Carol Gilligan and Feminist Moral Theory. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holland, D., and M. Eisenhart. 1990. Educated in Romance: Women, Achievement, and College Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holland, D., W. Lachiotte, D. Skinner, and C. Cain. 1998. Identity and Agency in Cultural Worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hymowitz, K., J. S. Carroll, W. B. Wilcox, and K. Kaye. 2013. Knot Yet: The Benefits and Costs of Delayed Marriage in America. http://twentysomethingmarriage.org
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, S. 2001. “Happily Never After: Young Women’s Stories of Abuse in Heterosexual Love Relationships.” Feminism and Psychology 11: 305–321. doi: 10.1177/0959353501011003004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamieson, L. 1999. “Intimacy Transformed? A Critical Look at the ‘Pure Relationship’.” Sociology 33: 477–394.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, S. 2011. Privilege: The Making of an Adolescent Elite at St. Paul’s School. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Korobov, N., and A. Thorne. 2009. “The Negotiation of Compulsory Romance in Young Women Friends’ Stories About Romantic Heterosexual Experiences.” Feminism and Psychology 19 (1): 49–70. doi: 10.1177/0959353508098619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreissl, K., A. Striedinger, B. Sauer, and J. Hofbauer. 2015. “Will Gender Equality Ever Fit In? Contested Discursive Spaces of University Reform.” Gender and Education 27 (3): 221–238. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2015.1028903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb, S. 2010. “Feminist Ideals for a Healthy Female Adolescent Sexuality: A Critique.” Sex Roles 62: 294–306. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9698-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y., and E. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Livingston, G., and D. Cohn. 2010. The New Demography of American Motherhood. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Luttrell, W. 2010. “Introduction: The Promise of Qualitative Research in Education.” In Qualitative Educational Research: Readings in Reflexive Methodology and Transformative Practice, edited by W. Luttrell, 1–17. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Manning, W. D., M. A. Longmore, and P. C. Giordano. 2005. “Adolescents’ Involvement in non-Romantic Sexual Activity.” Social Science Quarterly 34: 384–407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell, J. 2005. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Maykut, P., and R Morehouse. 1994. Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and Practical Guide. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
   Google Scholar
• McCollum, C. 2002. “Relatedness and Self-definition: Two Dominant Themes in Middle-class American’s Life Stories.” Ethos 30: 113–139. doi: 10.1525/eth.2002.30.1-2.113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLeod, J., and R. Thomson. 2009. Researching Social Change: Qualitative Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• McLeod, J., and L. Yates. 2006. Making Modern Lives: Subjectivity, Schooling, and Social Change. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• McRobbie, A. 2007. “Top Girls? Young Women and the Post-feminist Sexual Contract.” Cultural Studies 21 (4–5): 718–737. doi: 10.1080/09502380701279044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosher, C., and S. Danoff-Burg. 2007. “College Students’ Life Priorities: The Influence of Gender and Gender-linked Personality Traits.” Gender Issues 24: 21–33. doi: 10.1007/s12147-007-9002-z
   Google Scholar
• NUS. 2013. That’s What She Said: Women Students’ Experiences of ‘Lad Culture’ in Higher Education. London: National Union of Students (NUS).
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, S., and R. Raby. 2011. “‘Oh, She’s So Smart’: Girls’ Complex Engagements with Post/Feminist Narratives of Academic Success.” Gender and Education 23 (5): 549–564. doi: 10.1080/09540253.2010.538014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, N. 1996. “Culture and Contradiction: The Case of Americans Reasoning About Marriage.” Ethos 24 (3): 391–425. doi: 10.1525/eth.1996.24.3.02a00010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn, N. 2005. Finding Culture in Talk: A Collection of Methods. New York: Palgrave MacMillian.
   Google Scholar
• Rich, A. 1980. “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5 (4): 631–660. doi: 10.1086/493756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J. 2007. “Successful Girls? Complicating Post-feminist, Neoliberal Discourses of Educational Achievement and Gender Equality.” Gender and Education 19 (4): 471–489. doi: 10.1080/09540250701442666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringrose, J. 2013. Postfeminist Education? Girls and the Sexual Politics of Schooling. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N. 1999. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sassler, S. 2010. “Partnering Across the Life Course: Sex, Relationships, and Mate Selection.” Journal of Marriage and Family 72: 557–575. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00718.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmookler, T., and K. Bursik. 2007. “The Value of Monogamy in Emerging Adulthood: A Gendered Perspective.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 24 (6): 819–835. doi: 10.1177/0265407507084185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seidman, I. 1998. Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, T. D., and S. A. Dillow. 2010. Digest of Education Statistics 2009 (NCES 2010-013). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Stanik, C.E., and P. C. Ellsworth. 2010. “Who Cares About Marrying a Rich man? Intelligence and Variation in Women’s Mate Preferences.” Human Nature 21: 203–217. doi: 10.1007/s12110-010-9089-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanley, S. M., G. K. Rhoades, and F. D. Fincham. 2011. “Understanding Romantic Relationships Among Emerging Adults: The Significant Roles of Cohabitation and Ambiguity.” In Romantic Relationships in Emerging Adulthood, edited by F. D. Fincham and M. Cui, 234–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stringer, R. 2014. Knowing Victims: Feminism, Agency and Victim Politics in Neoliberal Times. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Swidler, A. 2001. Talk of Love: How Culture Matters. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tappan, M. 2001. “Interpretive Psychology: Stories, Circles, and Understanding Lived Experience.” In From Subjects to Subjectivities: A Handbook of Interpretive and Participatory Methods, edited by D. Tolman and M. Brydon-Miller, 45–56. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tolman, D. 2002. Dilemmas of Desire: Teenage Girls Talk About Sexuality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tong, R. 2009. Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction. Boulder: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walkerdine, V., H. Lucey, and J. Melody. 2001. Growing Up Girl: Psychosocial Explorations of Gender and Class. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weis, L., and M. Fine. 2012. “Critical Bifocality and Circuits of Privilege: Expanding Critical Ethnographic Theory and Design.” Harvard Educational Review 82 (2): 173–201. doi: 10.17763/haer.82.2.v1jx34n441532242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetherell, M. 2001. “Part Three: Mind, Selves and Sense-making, Editor’s Introduction.” In Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader, edited by M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, and S. Yates, 186–197. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar