Suchergebnisse

The article is based on the first sociological study of the attitudes and preferences of Czech men who identify themselves as gay towards (gay) fatherhood, family, and parenthood. The main arguments of the study evolve around the themes of the (overwhelmingly positive) parental desires of the gay men participating in the study; their internalised moral dilemmas connected to gay fatherhood; the reproductive choices and limits that structure the attitudes of gay men towards parenthood and family; and gender stereotypes about family/parenting models and the roles these men occupy. The article is divided into two main parts. The fi rst part introduces the context and current state of sociological scholarship and research on gay fatherhood and homoparentality. The second part of the article discusses results, an interpretation, and an analysis of the empirical findings of the study.

The widest framework available for the treatment of language problems is offered by sociolinguistics. The author of the article begins by introducing sociolinguistics, & claims that one of its four basic thematic clusters, which he calls 'Sociolinguistics IV,' is fully devoted to language problems. Mainstream Sociolinguistics, a US-based social network that has made a fundamental contribution to sociolinguistics since the 1960s, developed a version of 'Sociolinguistics IV' that is known as Language Planning. It is in confrontation with Language Planning that the theory of Language Management grew in the 1980s & 1990s. This paper briefly discusses the contribution & problems characteristic of Language Planning & outlines the main features of the Language Management theory. Among these, special attention is paid to the process of language management, which develops out of deviations from norms, whereby some of the deviations are noted, some of the noted deviations are evaluated, & certain adjustment plans are considered & implemented. Finally, the paper suggests that the Language Management theory could perhaps make a valid contribution to other social science disciplines, such as sociology or political science.

First, the author examines European & world lessons for the study of Czech transformation. Then, he describes legacies of the (mostly communist) past & the risks of transformation: atomization, demoralization, & materialization. The main topic is the failure of the social sciences, which isolated themselves instead of engaging in the reform process, verbally governed by mainstream neoclassical economics. In particular, sociology failed to show the moral dimension & embeddedness of economic processes in the social structure. Most tasks have thus remained for the future, which will stream transformation research towards (1) multidisciplinarity & complexity, (2) the replacement of unidimensional & static conceptual apparatus with a multidimensional & dynamic one, & (3) the understanding of endogeneity of social research & the explicit acknowledgment of its policy dimension.