No abstract

In this paper we examine some ways in which members of subcultures make comparisons between and within subcultural groups and one function served by such comparisons. Specifically, we illustrate how social comparisons are used to achieve authenticity for the subcultural group and for the self as a member of that group. Our analysis focuses on the language through which such comparisons are made in people's talk. The data come from a series of informal interviews with punks, gothics and hippies. We analyse three types of comparison: the comparison of one or more groups with an external standard; the comparison of the subculture's past and present character; and the comparison between older and newer members. The implications of our findings for social identity theory are considered. Finally, we discuss an interesting and recurrent device for emphasising authenticity which lay in the construction of the descriptions of members' motivations for joining. This was related to the distinction between 'being' a member, or having the correct grounds for affiliation, and merely 'doing' or performing, aspects of the subculture.

In recent years the principle of equality of opportunity in employment has been widely promoted as a means of addressing the marginalization of various groups of workers, including older workers. Evidence suggests, however, that equal opportunities have not improved prospects for older workers. The present study employs discourse analysis to examine a variety of accounts of those responsible for employment within a number of organizations. Analysis shows that these accounts are rhetorically oriented towards potential attributions of age discrimination. As evidence of a non-discriminatory stance, participants attend to possible shortcomings in written policies by making explicit their organizations' equal opportunity practices. In describing their workforces as comprising predominantly younger employees, however, they make only implicit reference to practices involving older workers. When they account for the apparent age imbalances in their workforces, they attribute these imbalances to factors outwith their control so that the organization's practices become completely 'invisible'. The contrast between this 'invisibility' and explicit claims to be committed to equal opportunities allows participants to position themselves as non-discriminating employers and at the same time justifies the marginalization of older workers.

No abstract

No abstract