Social science has long fought shy of the natural sciences. Meanwhile, concerns with the environment, health and the new genetics are creating a need for systematic links to be made between these disciplines. This paper suggests a new way in which social theory can be linked to biology. Recent developments in biology point to the importance of considering organisms in relation to their environment. And work in epidemiology stresses the links between the infant-development, health in later life and the well-being of future generations. Complex combinations of genetically-determined predispositions and capitalist social relations are responsible for important features of contemporary social stratification and well-being. The paper is informed by critical realist epistemology and Marx's theory of the subsumption. Such a fusion leads to a key assertion. Capital tends to modify the powers of human biology in its own image.

Based on a content analysis of a hundred heterosexual dating advertisements, the paper, in part, seeks to build upon the findings of previous research emerging mainly from the disciplines of sociobiology and psychology, which shows that when selling the self, men market their financial and occupational resources, whereas women offer physical attractiveness and appealing body shape, consistent with traditional ‘sex-role’ stereotypes and mating selection strategies. The main focus of this paper, however, is on the repetitive and changing meanings of masculinity and femininity. Locating analyses in the context of a postmodern, consumer society, it shows that whilst consumer culture appears to provide men with a wide range of resources for the creation of identities, reflexive self-fashioning is more problematic for women. It argues that although what constitutes a ‘feminine’ identity has now diversified as men and women deal with a novel set of social conditions, women's subjectivities remain more fixed and stable than those of men. It concludes, therefore, that access to cultural resources for identity construction are not equally available to men and women.

In a recent article in this journal, Andrew Sayer has argued that much feminist research on the gendered nature of organisations, such as bureaucracy and the market, confuses a contingent association of gender and organisational forms with a stronger claim that they are intrinsically gendered. Sayer accepts that this research has shown that the empirically found, concrete forms of organisations are gendered. However, deeper theoretical reflection, he suggests, reveals that, when considered as ‘abstract realist models’, bureaucracy and the market are, in fact, identity-blind. He makes two claims, one concerned with explanation, the other concerned with the political consequences of social inquiry. The first is that the construction of abstract models, rather than the ‘associational’ thinking concerned with the delineation of empirical regularities, is necessary to the proper understanding of the operation of causal mechanisms and their mode of determination in social life. The second is that this will enable a more progressive and positive politics beyond a fatalism which he attributes to associational thinking. This paper takes issue with both claims arguing that the abstract theory he defends has no positive role in social inquiry and that his political critique is misplaced.

This article presents some preliminary results from a historical study of social mobility in Britain and Ireland, from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth century. The study is marked by a unique combination of features: (1) it follows families for up to Þve generations, through both maternal and paternal lines; (2) it uses a continuous measure of social position, rather than class categories; (3) this measure is derived from data on social interaction – correspondence analyses of cross-tabulations of the occupations for marriages taking place in the periods 1777–1866 and 1867–1913; (4) each individual's social position is summarised by a work-life trajectory, represented by his social location at ages 20 and 50. The analyses are based on twelve ten-year birth cohorts from 1790–99 to 1900–09. The results indicate a remarkable degree of stability of social processes of reproduction throughout this period, although there is an extremely slow shift towards a weakening of family influence. This process appears to have accelerated for those born in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, a period of both educational reform and major change in Britain's industrial organisation.

A significant minority of Westerners believe in reincarnation, even though they do not belong to religions that teach it. What is the relationship of their belief to personal identity? In areas of the world where reincarnation is accepted, one can identify three forms of pre-natal and/or post-mortem identity: the continuing self/soul, the dissolution of the self, and family identity. Comparable concepts within the contemporary West might be labelled modern, postmodern and kin-based. The article considers three forms of evidence from Britain: everyday conversation, the personal stories to be found in Reincarnation International magazine, and an interview study of thirty adults and twenty children. It is concluded that (1) the understanding of A as the reincarnation of close family member B, found in several American and African tribes and in popular Hinduism, may be unusual in Britain; (2) in so far as people play with past identities, this cannot easily be squared with postmodern theories of the self; (3) the past identities constructed bear strong resemblance to current identities, and may be considered part of the modernist project of the self.

This paper seeks to explore sociology as an imaginative pursuit. After a brief reconsideration of Mills's notion of 'the sociological imagination' I examine three areas illustrating the various imaginations within the discipline: the work of Robert K. Merton; ethnomethodology; and the diversities of feminist scholarship. Two particular case studies are explored: the sociology of the body and the use of autobiographical studies in sociology. I conclude with some suggestions for the encouragement of imaginative thought within the discipline.

This paper examines relations between ‘tinkers’, or ‘Travellers’, and settled society in Ireland since the late nineteenth century. It argues that the racialisation and defamation of Travellers then reached new heights with the development of a rural fundamentalist nationalism which fused with Social Darwinism and caused Travellers to be treated as social anachronisms in an increasingly settled and sanitised society. This in turn meant that Travellers were located outside the moral and political structures of the Irish state and placed at the ‘hostile’ end of a continuum running from tradition to modernity. As a result of renewed modernisation through industrialisation in the 1970s through to the 1990s, new strategies of social closure have emerged which are causing Travellers to be located at the outer edges of Irish society. The paper finally suggests that the constant structuring and restructuring of economy and space in Ireland have fostered ‘fortress’ mentalities here. This is aggravating divisions, both at national and local level, between subaltern Travellers and hegemonic sectors in Irish society.

This article draws upon data from an in-depth ethnographic study of 5 and 6 year old children in an English multi-ethnic, inner-city primary school. It focuses on the significance of ‘race’ within young girls' peer-group relations and the ways in which the social dynamics that underlie those relations provide the context for understanding the particular nature and form that racism takes among the girls. This is done through a focus on the experiences of South Asian girls within the group. Within this, the article has two main aims. First, it aims to contribute to the literature within the sociology of education by extending the existing research focus on racism within teacher/pupil interactions to include an understanding of racism as it manifests itself among the children's peer-group relations. Second, in adapting and applying Pierre Bourdieu's concepts of capital and field, the article also offers a contribution to the literature within the sociology of ‘race’ and ethnicity by suggesting one potentially fruitful way in which racism can be understood within specific social contexts.

This paper outlines and evaluates recent contributions by Nicos Mouzelis and Margaret Archer to the structure–agency debate. Mouzelis offers an internal reconstruction of Giddens’s structuration theory; Archer an external alternative. I show that, although representing an advance on Giddens’s position, Mouzelis’s account fails because he relies on the former’s definition of structure as comprising rules and resources. I then examine Archer’s solution to the problem. I argue that her definition of activity-dependence makes her account of the relationship between agents and structures unclear. I outline an alternative account in terms of supervenience, and argue that it contains the minimum ontological claim necessary for a realist understanding of the structure–agent relationship.

The purpose of this paper is to describe an integrated (meta)theoretical framework that I call anti-reductionist sociology: this entails a focus on agency, structure (the ‘conditions-of-action’), and social chance; micro–macro; and time–space. What follows allows only for a sketch of the framework; I have published fuller theoretical, methodological and policy-related accounts elsewhere. Anti-reductionist sociology is a sensitising theoretical perspective, not a body of substantive theory. This differentiation has an affinity with Mouzelis's (1993:684) distinction between methodological generalisations and substantive generalisations, the present paper being concerned with the former. In Cohen's terminology (1987:279–80) the approach outlined in the paper is ontologically flexible and in some sense eclectic: while explicitly excluding reductionist, essentialist, reified and teleological formulations, anti-reductionist sociology is a synthetic metatheoretical framework designed to encourage the development of substantive theories that are not necessarily tied to any particular paradigm.

Cultural trends shape the experience of marriage by forming expectations, entitlements and obligations. The self-development discourse generated by the therapeutic culture has been suggested as playing a part in such shaping. This paper examines how this particular discourse affects the way women experience their marital conversations and, more specifically, the extent to which they feel able to initiate change-directed negotiation within them. Twenty-eight professional women in England, selected to reflect different occupational exposures to the self-development discourse, were interviewed in order to examine their experiences of the marital conversation and possible changes within it. The analysis shows that specific feeling rules limit the possibility of women’s concerns entering the marital conversation, and that the self-development discourse can introduce alternative feeling rules with the potential to overcome such limitations. It is shown that women who are influenced by the ideological messages equating change with relationship improvement contained within this discourse are able to adopt its proposed feeling rules and to use them to introduce negotiation into their marital conversations. These women are able to use this increased negotiability within the marital conversation to become more powerful in shaping their marital experiences.

Trends in absolute rates of both career and intergenerational mobility in Britain since the 1950s are outlined and some of the cultural consequences of the resulting heterogeneity in class composition are briefly considered. It is argued that while supply-side factors – educational attainment, ability, etc. – may determine who has been mobile or not, aggregate rates and changes in aggregate rates are largely dictated by demand-side factors. But current trends in the composition of the working population are necessarily self-limiting. A forecast of the occupational structure in the first half of the twenty-first century together with the assumption of some continuity in the pattern of class advantages, indicates a ‘mobility transition’ in which trends are likely to reverse within the next thirty years or so. The long-run replacement of recruitment heterogeneity by homogeneity of social experience in the enlarged middle class suggests that, in contrast with present-day pluralism, there will emerge the structural conditions for a greater cultural uniformity and the onset of an era of orthodoxy.

This paper considers a particular debate in the scholarly literature on ethnicity in the United States regarding ethnic entrepreneurship which has come to be known as the ‘ethnic enclave economy hypothesis’. According to this hypothesis, ethnic enterprises and their workers benefit from clustering. The current consensus seems to be that the hypothesis is both redundant and misguided. In denying this critique, this paper draws on Lefebvre's theorisation of space and on industrial cluster and actor network theories to argue that the dominant interpretation of the notion of an enclave has been misconceived. Hence the need is to begin to theorise what ethnic enclave economies really are, beyond the spatial metaphor in which the hypothesis was first grounded, in order to interrogate generative processes of ethnic business formation.

In the following analysis I will focus on Bakhtin's concept of dialogical plurality, arguing that in spite of his position against the Þnalization of speech and his attack on monologistic, authoritarian unity, his dialogism is itself based on a supposition of wholeness. By insisting on dialogue as a remedy, Bakhtin's dialogism tends to oversimplify the instability and threat inherent in dialogue. The present study explores plurality as dependent on a shift into dialogue. The threshold of entrance and of exit which deÞnes the ‘betweenness’ of dialogue comes out as a rather problematic, torn link. It requires a constant making of a topic and is threatened and informed by forces of coercion, exclusion, break, strangeness and silence. Plurality becomes a critical trope in social theory that focuses on the very threshold of dialogue rather than on either a simpliÞed and smoothed version of the dialogic connection or on an exclusive version that splits between the dialogic and the monologic in an overstated ethics.

In a recent article in Sociology, Joe Bailey maps out some important recent developments in sociological theorising, which he represents as ‘the private’. In this he seeks to use ‘the private’ for one particular sociological purpose, but may be in danger of obscuring other purposes that may also be important. In his discussions he largely neglects the considerable body of feminist literature around public and private, drawing very heavily instead on recent writings by some prominent male sociological theorists. Most significantly, he subsumes family life within his category of intimacy, but this may obliterate some ideas about ‘families’. Furthermore, parent–child relationships are about a great deal more than intimacy, not least because there are real issues of power involved. Our own concerns with the concepts of public and private have been to illuminate different ways of being that are associated with different sorts of social spaces. We outline four main tensions that may become overlaid to create extensive differences in ways of being, including a tension around differing understandings of the individual. In particular, we point out the significance of childhood and children in these tensions around public and private social spaces, and their associated practices and orientations.

My article was a critique of what I termed associational thinking, illustrated by reference to examples concerning markets, bureaucracy and gender. I counterposed associational thinking, with its suspicion of abstraction, to counterfactual thinking, which is concerned not with what things happen to be associated together but with which social objects necessarily depend on one another and which do not. While it is clearly vitally important to know how social objects are associated with one another, and what consequences flow from this, it is also important – for practical and political, as well as academic, reasons – to know whether they have to be associated thus, or whether things could be otherwise. Thus, in response to phenomena which are widely found in association, such as capitalism and various forms of gender order, the counterfactual questions would be: is each a necessary condition of the existence of the other, or could one exist without the other? As a second theme of the paper, I argued that a modified version of the distinction between system and lifeworld was useful in understanding the particular associations under discussion.

The paper argues that the class legacy has had profoundly negative consequences for accounts of material gender inequality, and that even where gender theorists have attempted to move beyond class, they have been hampered by the fragments of class theory. It will be argued that whilst gender has posed a fundamental challenge to class analysis, the reconstructions which have been attempted have not escaped the central assumptions of class theory. The weakness of such reconstructions – hindered by flaws inherited from both the Marxian and neo-Weberian traditions of class analysis – has led some post-modern writers to question the very idea of a determinate, structural account of gender. At the time of writing, deconstruction – rather than reconstruction – is in the ascendent. However, whilst a structural account of gender can and should be defended, past attempts show that this cannot be achieved by clinging to the assumptions of class analysis, or by developing additive ‘class-plus-gender’ explanations. Only those approaches which reject the economistic assumptions of class, by placing emphasis on the social space as a differentiated and determinate social whole, can overcome the limitations of current accounts of gender.

‘Relevance’, ‘accountability’ and ‘users’ are now prominent terms in the policies of public research funding agencies. In countries such as the UK, the funding of research in social science and other subjects has become increasingly dependent on the perception that research will contribute towards the achievement of certain national goals. Despite renewed discussions surrounding the utility of social analysis, these are rarely informed by debates in academic communities about the meaning of ‘relevance’ or associated debates about the status of knowledge. However divergent policy and academic discussions about relevance may appear, they intersect in concerns over the identity of researchers, the practices of research, and the claims made on behalf of research. This article draws on a case study in an attempt to show the difficulties of reconciling competing demands for relevance. Preliminary reflections are offered on a strategy for creating a productive tension between policy and academic discussions.

This article deals with the claim that Scottish landowners' power is directly related to their status in law, by arguing that it is, in fact, much more to do with their (inter)relationship with particular cultural symbols that can be associated with the land. However, this presents a sociological problem, for the dominant sociological purchase on land is one which routinely interprets it as a social construction. The paper presented here differs, as it focuses on particular cultural symbols which have a socio-historical resonance in relation to land, and makes the argument that they maintain this presence because of their (inter)connection with particular social groupings, notably landowners. Therefore, it is simply not enough to identify landowners' status in law as the root cause of their power, but instead it should be seen as only one facet of it. I conclude by suggesting that just as important is the way in which landowners have appropriated cultural interpretations of the land to forefront their powers.

Though increasingly a focus of both political concern and academic research, ‘sex tourism’ is a difficult term to define. This article presents both quantitative and qualitative data on the sexual behaviour and attitudes of single and/or unaccompanied heterosexual female tourists in the Dominican Republic and Jamaica. In so doing it aims to contribute to the body of research evidence on the phenomenon, as well as to highlight some of the conceptual problems associated with existing analyses of both ‘sex tourism’ and ‘romance tourism’. It calls for the development of a theoretical model of sex tourism which can accommodate both the diversity of tourist-related sexual-economic exchanges which take place in economically underdeveloped countries and the complexity of the power relations that underpin them.