Search

The article presents the author's response to Martyn Hammersley's paper "On Feminist Mythology." Hammersley questions whether or not it is justifiable to privilege the significance of gender. What strikes me here is the assumption that gender is indeed privileged by feminists in a uniform way. The case for criticism is considerably weakened when Hammersley himself cites leading feminist writers who have not only questioned the privileging of gender over other factors such as race and class, but who presumably do not privilege gender in their work. Hammersley's references to methodological injunctions to explore women's experiences suggest a reading of feminist work which is limited to redressing the balance in theory, policy and research by focusing exclusively on women. The later part of his paper which focuses on the validity of experience as opposed to method is really making two claims: firstly, that in using experience as part of the approach to research then anything goes--critical awareness, rigour and so on are abandoned; secondly, that the recognition and inclusion of experience in knowledge or knowledge production does not automatically increase the validity of that knowledge. I have more sympathy with the second claim than with the first. Firstly, however, I do not believe that experience and method are polarized in quite the way, which Hammersley suggests. My view is that recent feminist debates have been about the role of experience in method rather than verses method.

The article presents instructions for contributors to the journal "Sociology." Contributions should be typed on quarto sheets, using double spacing, on one side of each page. Authors should submit the top copy and retain a carbon copy. The pages should be numbered serially. The title of the article, the author's name, and a biographical note on him should be typed on a flysheet which can readily be detached from the body of the article. A contributor should also supply an abstract of 100-200 words summarizing the article in such a way that the abstract can be read independently. Contributors are especially requested to ensure that all necessary details are provided in their references. Titles of journals and monograph series may be abbreviated according to the system used in International Bibliography of the Social Sciences. The notes should be typed on a separate page or pages from the text, as should the bibliography. Figures and maps should be drawn in opaque black ink on Bristol board, tracing film, or graph paper with faint blue ruling.

The dominant position on research methodology and methods among British sociologist has for many years been that of 'methodological pluralism'. However, concerns have lately been expressed about the lack of research involving quantitative methods, not least by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). A study of the four mainstream British journals over two years, tighter with associated sources, demonstrates national patterns of research methods used in published work, the topics tackled and variations between authors in the methods chosen. The findings suggest empirical support for the concerns recently expressed by the ESRC, and an argument, not for less qualitative research, but for more quantitative research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper traces relations between the study of work and the evolution of British sociology as an academic discipline. This reveals broad trajectories of marginalization, as the study of work becomes less central to Sociology as a discipline; increasing fragmentation of divergent approaches to the study of work; and -- as a consequence of both -- a narrowing of the sociological vision for the study of work. Our paper calls for constructive dialogue across different approaches to the study of work and a re-invigoration of sociological debate about work and -- on this basis -- for in-depth interdisciplinary engagement enabling us to build new approaches that will allow us to study work in all its diversity and complexity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper offers reflections on the author's working experience as an industrial sociologist from the 1960s. It seeks to contextualise this in more general considerations of the part played by industrial sociology in the development of sociology in the UK. This is evidenced in thematic concerns, the importance of historical perspectives as well as the use of case studies and the development of ethnographic work. It discusses the role which industrial sociology has played in bringing issues of power, authority, control and class into sharp focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the "Orders of Ordinary Action conference in 2001, discusses edited conference papers, and refers to an article "Garfinkel and his Ethnomethodological 'Bastards'" which is in volume 40(5) of this journal. A conversation with Kenneth Liberman, the author of "Husserl's Critique of Reason," is explained as an allusion to the production of emergent orders and social fact. The impact of Liberman's sociological philosophy in his book "Dialectical Practice in Tibetan Philosophical Culture" is mentioned.

Many manage risks of urban violence through constructing of no-go areas--not so the residents there. How do they manage risks of violence? This paper approaches this question through the concepts of risk and (dis)trust of Sztompka (1999) and within a framework of disadvantage in a 'matrix of oppression' (Collin 2000). Based on ethnography, the paper asks how people experience risks of 'street violence' and 'personal violence', how they manage them, and how their discourses about it relate to institutional discourses of how to solve problems of violence. I show that violence is being accepted and rejected in their specific relation to identity enhancement and respect within a context of intersecting forms of oppression along lines of race, class and gender. Through a discourse of fate, residents tell that violence concerns the wider context of stigmatization and exclusion--which does not match with the approach of local institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an introduction to the articles published in this issue that deal with sociology research on issues of gender.

The article discusses the vision and plans for the journal "Sociology," the flagship journal of the British Sociological Association. Aside from extending and developing the journal's international reach and appeal, its editorial team aims to increase its impact factor and actively encourage and extend high quality and diverse, interdisciplinary debate with "Sociology," as well as develop its online presence and features.

This article borrows the form and metre of Coleridge’s Rime of the Ancient Mariner to describe and analyse the social situation of the globalised mariner. The shipping industry is characterised by complex global value chains and an outsourced, casualised labour force. The paper aims to be a piece of ‘public sociology’ and (in seeking to appeal in as vivid a manner as possible) is written in a style that Wright Mills called ‘sociological poetry’, attempting a pastiche of perhaps the best known poem in English. The auditor in the poem is a late-modern consumer and the narration is shared between the mariner, an inspector of shipping and (to remind the reader and the auditor of the mariner’s partisanship) a Chorus of Greek Shippers. The narrative covers deficiencies in seafarer training, reductions in crew numbers, the consequent long hours and seafarer fatigue, and the failure of global governance of the industry. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]