去邊緣的學術思考：非主流團體在休閒場域中的重新呈現

De-Marginalization: The Re-Presentation of Alternative Groups in Leisure-Related Study

10.6223/qcpe.2603.201209.1513

王曉雯(Hsiao-Wen Wang)；陳渝苓(Yu-Ling Chen)

休閒議題 ； 休閒研究觀點 ； 邊緣團體 ； 抵制與賦權 ； leisure issues ； marginal groups ； resistant and empowerment

中華體育季刊

26卷3期（2012 / 09 / 01）

379 - 386

繁體中文

在複雜的社會體系之中，一元化與單一價值觀的思考邏輯依舊扮演著支配的角色，透過社會階級、性別、年齡、種族、族群、性向等概念為基礎，在社會場域中呈現出持久不平等的分配現象。然而，基於後現代社會所形成的概念變遷，學術上也對休閒本身的概念提出了批判，認為在社會變化的狀態中，目前的休閒領域應傾向以更寬廣的視角來擴大休閒與社會體系的研究領域，社會研究者必須因應時代來進行研究調查，重新著眼於之前研究命題所忽視的人與物。在研究方向上也更應順應後現代社會的型式，拋開過去一元化的論調及擁護主流的思維，擁抱多元化的觀點、注重邊緣文化與個人能動性的貢獻與探討。基於此一脈絡，研究者藉由國、內外在休閒與運動領域中具代表性的期刊，以資料分析的方式採取內容分析法，針對每篇研究之主題與研究對象做出深層比對與歸納整理。並將所得之文獻所探討的研究對象與議題進行分類比對，以了解目前學者如何呈現並詮釋後現代脈絡中的休閒意義，並希望透過分析了解目前學者所關切的研究議題，使休閒發展的新型本質得以再現。

In a complex social system, many of the fields still use unified and single value of logic to discuss a dominant role. In the social field, base on the social class, gender, age, race, ethnicity and sexual group, it shows the distribution phenomenon of perspective inequality. Base on the view of thinking leisure, it must recognize the concept of traditional sport and leisure meaning and cannot explain every individual in the modern society. This research employed the index of both the domestic and international researches in representative journals in the field of leisure and sport, and took content analysis as major method to compare subject and object for each study in-depth. From deducting and reviewing of the subjects and issues classification, in order to understand the how the scholars present and interpret the significance of leisure in the modern context. Also by analyzing the concerning issues in this field, in order to understand the meaning of new leisure as well as how it can be development and reproduce in the future.

1. 張淑涵、陳渝苓(2011)。臺灣新移民的休閒參與─社會排斥理論的觀點。大專體育，114，13-19。
   連結：
2. 陳渝苓、徐譽桓(2008)。「當身體成為權力的戰場」從身體的學術觀點探討運動場域中父權與賦權概念之具象化與衝突。大專體育學刊，10(3)，1-13。
   連結：
3. 陳渝苓、陳瑾葶(2010)。「不公平的起跑線」：從性別觀點探討女性運動員的雙重汙名現象。中華體育季刊，24(1)，108-123。
   連結：
4. Huizinga, J. (1938). Homo ludens. London: Routledge.
5. Allan, J.(1999).Actively seeking inclusion: Pupils with special needs in mainstream schools.London:Falmer.
6. Anderson, E.(2011).Openly gay athletes: contesting hegemonic masculinity in a homophobia environment.Sociology of sport,London:
7. Blackshaw, T.(2010).Leisure.New York:Routledge.
8. Choi, S. A.(2000).Labour unions and gender politics.S.K. Cho Seoul:Labour and Feminism, Ewha Womans'University.
9. Coakley, J. J.(2007).Sports in society: Issues and controversies.New York:McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
10. Collins, M.,Kay, T.(2003).Sport and social exclusion.London:Routledge.
11. Dattilo, J.,Murphy, W. D.(1991).Leisure Eduction Program Planning-A systematic Approach.State College, PA:Venture.
12. Foucault, M.(1979).Power, truth, strategy.Sydney:Feral.
13. Genoe, M. R.(2010).Leisure as resistance within the context of dementia.Leisure Studies,29(3),303-320.
14. Giulianotti, R.(2005).Sports spectators and the social Consequences of Commodification: Critical Perspectives from Scottish Football.Journal of Sport and Social Issues,29(4),386-410.
15. Giulianotti, R.(2011).Introduction: Social division and conflicts in sport.Sociology of sport,London:
16. Henderson, K. A.(2010).Leisure studies in the 21st century: The sky is falling?.Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal,32(4),391-400.
17. Henderson, K. A.(1996).One size doesn't fit all: The meaning a of women's leisure.Joumat of Leisure Research,29(3),139-154.
18. Henderson, K. A.,Ainsworth, B. E.(2001).Sedentary and busy: Physical activity and older women of color.In women's leisure experiences: Ages, stages and roles,Eastbourne:
19. Jackson, E. L.,Henderson, K. A.(1995).Gender-based analysis of leisure constraints.Leisure Sciences,17(1),31-51.
20. Johnson, A. G.(1997).The forest and the trees: Sociology as life, practice, and promise.Philadelphia:Temple University Press.
21. Kelly, J. R.(1983).Leisure identities and interactions.London:Allen & Unwin.
22. Kelly, J. R.(1996).Leisure.Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
23. Lashua, B. D.(2010).Crossing the line': Addressing youth leisure, violence and socio-geographic exclusion through documentary film-making.Leisure Studies,29(2),193-206.
24. Livengood, J. S.,Stodolska, M.(2004).The effects of discrimination and constraints negotiation on leisure behavior of American Muslims in the post-September 11 America.Journal of Leisure Research,36(2),183-208.
25. Mies, M.(1998).Patriarchy and acumulationon aworld scale.London:Zed Books.
26. Pfister, G.(2011).Women in sport - gender relations and future perspectives.Sociology of Sport,London:
27. Raisborough, J.,Bhatti, M.(2007).Women's Leisure and Auto/Biography: Empowerment and Resistance in the Garden.Joumat of Leisure Research,39(3),459-476.
28. Richmond, L. P.,Johnson, C. W.(2009)."It's a race war:" Race and leisure experiences in california state prison.Journal of Leisure Research,41(4),565-580.
29. Rojek, C.(1995).Decentring leisure: Rethinking leisure theory.London:SAGE.
30. Rojek, C.(2010).The labour of leisure: The culture of free time.London:SAGE.
31. Shaw, S. M.(2001).Conceptualizing resistance: Women's leisure as political practice.Journal of Leisure Research,33(2),186-201.
32. Skowron, M. A.,Stodolska, M.,Shinew, K. J.(2008).Determinants of leisure time physical activity participation among latina women.Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal,30(5),429-447.
33. Stewart, W.,Parry, D. C.,Glover, T. D.(2008).Writing leisure: Challenges to dominant discourse.Journal of Leisure Research,40(3),360-384.
34. Walseth, K.,Fasting, K.(2011).Islam's view on physical activity and sport: Egyptian women interpreting Islam.Sociology of Sport,London:
35. Wearing, B.(1995).Leisure and resistance in an ageing society.Leisure Studies,14,263-279.
36. 周錦宏、程士航、張正霖(2007)。休閒社會學。臺北市:華立。
37. 萬育維(2007)。社會福利服務：理論與實踐。臺北市:三民。
38. 詹前龍(2010)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中市，國立臺灣體育運動大學。
39. 劉維公(2006)。風格社會。臺北:天下雜誌。
40. 羅世宏譯、Barker, C.(2004)。文化研究：理論與實踐。臺北市:五南。