Search

Families in the United States are rapidly changing, and the normative familial model of two married, monogamous, heterosexual parents with children no longer reflects the majority of U.S. families. Nonetheless, state incentive-based policies and discriminatory family laws continue to enforce heteronormative monogamy. Recent changes to the U.S. legal landscape have produced limited formal recognition and protections for same-sex couples and LGBTQ parents, and even these narrow rights are withheld from other diverse familial configurations including families with polyamorous parents. This article uses the concept of sexual citizenship to frame the analysis of U.S. family courts' normative construction of family, identifying striking parallels between family courts' historical and contemporary prejudicial treatment of LGBTQ parents and the institution's similar delegitimization and denigration of polyamorous parents today. This paper reviews polyamorous parents' efforts towards achieving legal and societal legitimatization, finding significant parallels with legal strategies LGBTQ parents utilized to seek legal recognition and protection prior to federal recognition of same-sex marriage. This paper highlights the inadequacies of such a formal sexual citizenship approach, finding that a limited strategy of accumulating specific sexual rights fails to address non-monogamy's more radical cultural presence as well as the (non-legal) informal aspects of belonging needed to improve the livability of polyamorous parents' and their children's lives. This paper concludes with recommendations for improving the treatment of non-traditional families including LGBTQ, polyamorous, and other blended families, both within and outside the legal institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: This study examines how social information is utilized in processes of bilingual speech perception. Specifically, we investigate whether racialized expectations of native language background trigger language-specific processing strategies in early or simultaneous Spanish–English bilinguals. Methodology: We coupled a visually-primed phoneme categorization task with a social evaluation questionnaire to test whether Spanish–English bilingual adults living in the United States (n = 30) drew on racialized ideologies about what speakers of certain languages look like during speech perception. We predicted that, if participants drew on these ideologies during the phoneme categorization task, they would cue an expectation of what language was being spoken and, consequently, a shift in the identification boundary. Data and analysis: Mixed logistic regression was used to investigate the effects of photograph (the visual prime) and voice on how participants categorized the continua while paired, two-tailed t -tests were used to compare how participants socially evaluated the two speakers. Findings: Raciolinguistic evaluations appeared to influence bilingual speech perception, significantly affecting how the continua were categorized, but they did not work the same way for every voice. Originality: Prior work has posited that interactional context influences bilingual language control (e.g., Grosjean, 2001); the ideological nature of this context has, however, been understudied. This paper offers insight into how ideologies related to race may shape language perception and use in bilinguals. Implications: The findings provide evidence for the role of social information in bilingual speech perception, suggest that multiple cues (acoustic and social) integrate to determine the interactional context, and indicate that the influence of raciolinguistic ideologies is neither straightforward nor homogeneous but rather contingent on complex aspects of the perceived speaker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to decenter the academy as the gatekeeper of knowledge, while presenting a critique of 'public sociology' and 'public-facing' scholarship. I argue that public sociology's aim to make research more 'accessible to a wider audience' presupposes that the university has something to offer to this audience in the first place. This not-so-tacit arrogance only further privileges the university as the primary site of knowledge production, while rendering invisible the many knowledge producers outside the academy. As public sociology continues to curry favor with mainstream media, politics, and policy institutes, it reveals a steadfast faith in the state and capital, while obscuring radical alternatives. In turn, public sociology functions as a counterinsurgency tool via professionalization. Conversely, a counter-public sociology refuses to comply with oppressive state protocols. Instead, it seeks to dismantle them. A counter-public sociology aims not to affirm the university, but to insist that this current academic enterprise remains untenable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, as in most of the Global North, disability has historically been regarded as a deficit, requiring clinical intervention, professional oversight, and special schooling. This ideology, referred to as ableism, is linked with settler colonialism and the matrix of oppression that upholds racial capitalism. The aims of this paper are twofold: First, we examine the correlation among normative whiteness, racialized exploitation, and the depiction of disabled Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) as disposable others. Second, we employ a joint biopolitical and settler colonial analysis to re-examine US special education drawing on our experiences as disabled, critical disability studies scholars—two of whom are negatively racialized and two of whom are queer. Finally, we draw upon the principles of Disability Justice and Access-Centered Pedagogy to formulate recommendations for an alternative to segregated education for all students, centering the experiences of those disproportionately impacted by systemic oppression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past decade, the Home Owners' Loan Corporation's (HOLC) so-called 'redlining' maps have gone from a niche corner of urban historical scholarship to the centre of mainstream narratives about racism in the United States. In this paper, I map this journey and trace the contours of the ongoing debates that have emerged, identifying two competing camps I call 'HOLC Culpablism' and 'HOLC Scepticism'. Finding these perspectives to have run up against their self-imposed limitations, I outline a research agenda that breaks from the debate's narrow confines by envisioning HOLC's mapping materials anew. My proposed approach recasts the maps and their accompanying field notes as windows into the governing racial–spatial ideology of 20th-century US real estate capital. In doing so, it invites researchers to reimagine the map grades as dynamic categories reflecting a particular spatiotemporal conception of value that is highly contingent on an area's estimated racial trajectory. This reformulation, I argue, not only opens new possibilities for studying the HOLC mapping programme but suggests that the power of these maps has almost certainly been underestimated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Hearing Voices Approach, a community-based peer-led support group model, is generating interest as a novel way to engage with psychosis. Hearing Voices (HV) groups are run by peers, 'experts-by-experience', and emphasize group ownership and community-building rather than adherence to a therapist-led, predetermined structure. Diverse beliefs about experiences are respected and viewed as potentially meaningful. Groups work within each individual's explanatory framework to reframe understandings. Aims: This paper describes the effects of participation in Veteran Voices and Visions (VVV) groups, an adaptation of the HV approach, co-led by clinicians and Veteran peer support specialists, adapted for Veterans who have experienced psychosis and receive care at the VA, a large public health system in the United States. Method: This mixed methods pilot study has a convergent parallel design, integrating quantitative and qualitative data from participants in pre-intervention and post-intervention assessments. Results: Over 16 weeks, quantitative analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in distress, due to auditory hallucinations, as measured by the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS). The Beliefs about Voices Questionnaire- Revised (BAVQ-R) results showed a reduction in malevolence and omnipotence and an increase in benevolence related to auditory hallucinations, but no change in resistance. Engagement showed a trend-level reduction. Qualitative data from midpoint (Week 8) and endpoint (Week 16) interviews revealed several perceived benefits from groups: 1) normalization and camaraderie, 2) increased hope and confidence, 3) self-understanding and reframing of experiences, and 4) building relationships outside of groups. Overall, VVV groups reduced distress due to voices, negative beliefs about voices, and perceived power of voices. Conclusions: Study findings contribute to a growing body of literature indicating HV groups support those who have experienced psychosis by reducing social isolation and fostering community, which may facilitate social integration. Overall, our findings highlight the potential benefits of adapting HV groups to health systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]