Repar tner ing: the r elevance of par enthood and gender to cohabitation and r emar r iage among the former ly mar r ied.[Pr e copy-editing ver sion: Febr uar y 1999] Repar tner ing: the r elevance of par enthood and gender to cohabitation and r emar r iage among the for mer ly mar r ied.This paper is an exploratory analysis of the impact of current and anticipated parenthood on cohabitation and remarriage among those formerly living in marriage-type relationships. The focus on children is embedded within a broader analysis of repartnering which takes account of other factors, including gender. Quantitative and qualitative analyses are used, with a multivariate analysis of repartnering patterns, using data from the General Household Survey, being complemented by in-depth interview data examining the attitudes of the formerly married to future relationships. The paper demonstrates that parenthood has a statistically significant effect on the likelihood of formerly married women repartnering, with a higher number of children being associated with a lower probability of repartnering. The presence of children can work against repartnering in a variety of ways. Children place demands on their parents and can deter or object to potential partners. Parents may see their parental role as more important than, and a barrier to, new relationships. However, mothers are typically looking for partners for themselves rather than fathers for their children. Among formerly married people without children, the desire to become a parent encourages repartnering. The paper concludes that parenthood should be a key consideration in analyses of repartnering.Abstract

No abstract

This paper focuses on sociology and the study of human nonhuman animal relations. Using as a catalyst referees' comments on a previous paper about experiments using nonhuman animal subjects, in this present paper three problematics are identified and discussed. These problematics centre on the 'acceptable' content of sociological inquiry, the 'permissibility' of advocacy-oriented sociology, and the 'admissibility' of nonhuman animal-advocacy to advocacy-oriented sociology. The three problematics are explored through the lens of reflexive and critical sociology. Two central questions are raised, firstly should sociology include the study of nonhuman animals and secondly can sociology advocate for nonhuman animals? The paper concludes with the affirmative to both of these questions. The paper ends by stressing that sociology has so much to offer the study of human nonhuman animal relations. Professional sociologists have a key role to play in enabling this work to move from margins to centre in published sociology.

In 2006 over three million experiments were performed on nonhuman animals. In making an argument against such experiments I contend that approval of nonhuman animal experimentation is rooted in acceptance of humans as having essential primacy over nonhuman animals and lies in the power relations associated with human primacy identity claims. To challenge essentialist notions of human identity and human primacy I utilise a performative conceptualisation of identity. Discourses used by Pro-Test, a lobby that promotes nonhuman animal experimentation, allows an exploration of justifications made for animal experimentation. In promoting such experiments, I argue, Pro-Test is engaging in a form of human primacy identity politics based in continued inequality and the sustained oppression of nonhuman animals. I conclude that discourses extolling scientific advancements for human benefits, made on the basis of experiments on nonhuman animals, reiterate an immoral human primacy identity that dissolutely exploits power relations to privilege the human.

This paper investigates women's perceptions of choice and risk in the field of pensions. It extends on a paper published in a recent edition of this journal in which Alan Aldridge applied Pierre Bourdieu's notions of cultural capital and habitus to the field of personal finance. Since the late 1980s the marketisation of pensions has resulted in an expansion of pension options. According to Anthony Giddens the expansion of choice is one of the positive aspects of living in a 'risk society'. However, the expansion of pension choice has passed pension risks onto consumers. Using qualitative interviews this paper investigates the perceptions of 45 employed women aged 40-59 of the risks associated with choosing a pension. At the theoretical level the paper seeks to demonstrate the need to qualify notions of reflexive decision-making put forward by Giddens by emphasising the role of habitual action in decision-making, as put forward by Bourdieu. The paper shows that material circumstances, cultural capital, extent and quality of pension information and habitus affect perceptions of pension choice and pension risks. The paper concludes that the expansion of pension choice has been negative rather than positive and thus is likely to lead to increasing poverty among women in later life.Which Pension?: Women, Risk and Pension Choice.