The family culture of negotiation—a result of changing parent‐child relationships

Case studies of parent‐child relations in three different European regions—West Germany, East Germany and the Netherlands—offer material for the comparative analysis of the ongoing intra‐familial process of modernization and civilization in post‐war West European societies. The data are drawn from extended narrative interviews with twelve‐year‐olds and from parallel but separate semi‐structured ‘mirrored’ interviews with the same children and their parents. The results of the analysis show that family relations in general, and parent‐child relations in particular, are increasingly marked by a familial ‘culture of negotiation’. This suggests that the balance of intergenerational power relations is currently in the process of change. To a greater or lesser extent, contemporary family relations are characterized by situationally grounded processes of negotiation between parents and children.     

The family structures are changing—but what about the idea of the family?

In contemporary societies, stepfamilies usually emerge following divorce and remarriage. This family form has become more prevalent in Finland during the 1980s. The present article focuses on the public discourse surrounding the stepfamily as this is reflected in family and women's magazines. This discourse reveals the still prevailing strong cultural norms regarding family life: living in a family is defined as the normal way of living, with bonds of belonging together and biological ties defined as primary. The stepfamily is expected to fulfil these expectations. The ideology governing the stepfamily is therefore very similar to that of the traditional nuclear family unit.     

The right to be different: Multiculturalism and the racialization of scandinavian welfare politics; The case of Denmark

‘Multiculturalism’ as an influential ideology for structuring ethnic relations has become exposed to increasing critique also in the Scandinavian context. The paper discusses a racialized political debate, legislation, and institutional practices, taking Denmark as the prime example. An increasingly ‘dual welfare’ is becoming legitimized through a hegemonic culturalized language, consistently interpreting ‘the right to be different’ as ‘being different’, and ‘being different’ as being ‘non‐integrated’. In a society where public debate on ethnic and racial discrimination is less than rudimentary, tolerant claims of multiculturalist relativism are effectively turned upside down in the service of neo‐racism, the preachings of which are imperceptibly becoming adopted as the conventional wisdom. This calls for a discussion on ‘politics of recognition’ which brings the debate on the universalism and particularity out of the abstract, while focusing on the vicissitudes of contemporary democracy in a changing welfare state.     

The Turkish alevis

The Alevi comprise a specific ethnic group in Turkey of especial interest. In presenting a case study of an Alevi community in Ankara that arose out of internal urban migration, the present paper delineates the way in which the Alevis have moved away from constituting a counterculture during the period of the Ottoman period to comprising a working class subculture of great organizational and political potential in contemporary Turkey. The paper also describes the ethnic markedness of the Alevi community and the problems that arise out of this markedness.     

Keeping open by re‐imagining laughter and fear

Speaking to the debate on the nature of critique, this article is about the struggle to produce an account when listening to and retelling stories. It begins with the disconcertment over listening to a coherent story that emerges in interviews about the development of performance indicators for Dutch hospital care. The indicators are presented as solutions to the problem of unruliness in the healthcare world. Drawing on Helen Verran's work on generative critique I slow down the ‘problem‐solution‐found’ plot. Instead of contrasting the apparently coherent stories with the complexities of an ‘underlying’ practice of healthcare, I hold on to my initial disconcertment so that ‘fleetingly subtle’ interruptions become entry points for generative critique. Taking Eduardo Viveiros de Castro's understanding of the relation that fear and laughter have to alterity, I show how fear and laughter permit generative critique within seemingly coherent stories. In the case of indicator development, the interviewees ‘laugh away’ what they consider alter from quality and safety in healthcare: having no control over what is going on, polyglotism instead of a common language, and inaction as opposed to taking one's time. Paying attention to disconcerting interruptions generates sensitivity and questions rather than yet another set of (critical) problem‐solution‐found answers. How can ridiculed (laughed away) subjectivity be acknowledged as important entry points for including alterity in supervision? And how to position the acknowledgement, not as an antidote, but as a way of rendering the fear of alterity generative? Nurturing sensitivities is crucial for keeping open, which means resisting both the sticky tendency of normalizing accounts and the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. I conclude that keeping open by re‐imagining critique resonates with the creativity of collective life in actual times and places. Thereby it offers a promising potential for doing worlds differently.     

A Sociological Account of the Persistence of Invalidated Anorexic Identities

Most versions of identity theory have had difficulty explaining the persistence of invalidated identities. Drawing from data on anorexic identity transactions, we identify three dimensions that contribute to understanding this persistence. Two dimensions, size and control, are shown to be the locus of identity invalidation; the third, desirability, is shown to be the locus of validation. Confirmation of one's sense of being desirable, we propose, contributes to anorexics continuing to appropriate identities invalidated by others. We argue that the concepts “master identity,” “fictionalized identity,” and what we term “discordant awareness context” are more useful for theorizing the persistence of invalidated identities, such as anorexia, than those focusing on the degree of consensus over the person as a social object found in conventional identity theory.