Self-care rhetoric and institutional culpability: Theorizing the academy and intellectual labor

4Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Self-care, a ubiquitous concept commonly touted as the solution to an array of modern-day problems, implies unapologetic selfishness aimed at preserving mental, emotional, and physical health. The overtly individualistic framing in its most common usage—the centering of oneself for the sake of oneself—obscures power relations and structural/institutional inequalities that create the need for self-care. To deal with difficult work or family lives, taking up a hobby or some kind of diversion offers an escape that feels good; self-care serves as a kind of coping mechanism, but not a solution to a social problem. It also lets society, or more specifically, managers and administrators in organizations, off the hook because it places the onus on individuals to deal with challenges on their own rather than situating them as social problems. We critique shortcomings in self-care rhetoric employed by organizations—and specifically university administrators—to their members, by extending Hochschild's economy of gratitude framework.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cabaniss, E. R., Davis, S. N., & Parrotta, K. L. (2025). Self-care rhetoric and institutional culpability: Theorizing the academy and intellectual labor. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 17(1), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12567

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free