In Born to Rebel 1997 [1996] and subsequent works Frank Sulloway asserts that laterborns are more supportive of radical rebellions than are firstborns. Failure to replicate his historical cases and lack of significant sibling differences in contemporary studies of personality have produced fierce debate and grave doubts about the theory. It has yet to find robust support from studies of contemporary rebellions. Using retrospective survey data on the 1960s radicalization from 1,246 former students at the University of Oslo, we find no effect of birth order on who became student radicals. What we find are strong effects on political orientation of conventional radicalizing factors: upbringing in an urban environment and in particular in a home with radical parents. Within the group of radicals, birth order did not increase the propensity for political protest activity such as demonstrations and civil disobedience. Laterborns moreover had no higher proclivity than firstborns to apolitical protest behavior such as using cannabis or letting males' hair grow. Coming on top of concerns about the empirical support for other parts of the theory, our findings indicate that Sulloway's contested claim about the extrafamilial effects of birth order is not viable.
Norway is often presented as a model country when it comes to gender equality, for its achievements in combining high birth rates with a high level of female work participation. This article investigates the relations between gender equality and childcare policy since the 1970s from a grassroots perspective. Generally initiatives in respect of childcare arrangements have come from women’s movements but there have been major disagreements regarding the issue. Publicly funded daycare and a part of the parental leave scheme reserved for fathers are two arrangements that relate childcare to gender equality and that have provoked political controversies between traditional equal value oriented women’s associations, on one hand, and equal rights and women’s liberation organizations, on the other.
SAMMENDRAGKvinner er fortsatt underrepresenterte i akademiske toppstillinger på Det juridiske fakultet ved Universitetet i Oslo, til tross for at kvinner har vaert i flertall blant studentene i 20 år. I artikkelen drøftes funnene fra en dybdeintervjuundersøkelse foretatt blant 48 jurister i faste vitenskapelige stillinger ved dette fakultetet i 2016, like mange kvinner som menn. Kjønnsbalansen her skiller seg ikke vesentlig fra den norske universitetssektoren for øvrig, i det 71 prosent av professorene er menn, og kvinner er relativt lite synlige som faglige autoriteter på pensum og som forelesere. Dekanatet består kun av menn, og miljøet har tradisjonelt vaert preget av hierarki, «revirtenkning» og bataljer mellom «alfahanner». I artikkelen forklares underrepresentasjonen av kvinner som resultat av et samspill mellom strukturelle og fagkulturelle forhold. Samtidig fokuseres det på endringer som har skjedd blant annet som følge av foryngelsen av ansattstaben og at fakultetet har drevet en forholdsvis aktiv politikk for å rekruttere kvinner de siste 10-12 årene, som har ført til at det nå framstår som en mer attraktiv arbeidsplass for kvinner. I undersøkelsen ble det avdekket likestillingsproblemer som kaller på videre forskning, deriblant spørsmålet om uønsket seksuell oppmerksomhet.
ABSTRACT
Law and Gender in Transition: Why Are There Still Few Female Law Professors?Women are still underrepresented in academic top positions at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, despite a majority of female students in the last 20 years. The article discusses findings from interviews conducted among 48 female and male lawyers employed in permanent academic positions at this faculty in 2016. The gender balance here does not differ significantly from the Norwegian university sector at large, as 71 % of professors are men and women are relatively invisible as academic authorities on the curriculum as well as lecturers. The elected leadership consists only of men, and the environment has traditionally been characterized by hierarchical «territorial thinking» and battles between «alpha males». The article explains the underrepresentation of women as a result of interactions between structural and cultural conditions. However, it also focusses on changes which have occurred over the past 10 to 12 years, partly as a result of the old staff being retired, partly as a result of the faculty's policies of recruiting women academics. The study also reveals gender equality issues that call for further research, including the problem of unwanted sexual attention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.