Understanding Dual Identities in Poland

'Parallel' divisions of identity in Poland are a thing of the past – and perhaps the future – but not the present. Yet contemporary Poles are still politically divided by identities – albeit by 'nested' Polish/European identities rather than by 'parallel' ethnic identities. They are not divided between Polish and European identities, however, but between exclusive and dual identities – in essence a division between parochial and cosmopolitan identities. Contrary to fears that Europeanism in Poland especially might be narrow, culturally restrictive, or even racist, our data show that dual identities reflect broader cosmopolitan perspectives as well as specifically European or Western sympathies. There is a real significant difference of values between exclusive and dual identifiers which extends well beyond attitudes to Europe – and far beyond attitudes to the EU in particular. To a considerable degree this is a difference – some have argued a conflict – between traditional and modern Poland, between secular and devout Poland, between educated and ignorant Poland, between young and old Poland, and between hopeful and fearful Poland.     

COLLUDING WITH OR CHALLENGING HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY?

Research about masculinities in schools often focuses on hegemonic masculinity. This can have the effect of reinforcing the privilege associated with hegemonic masculinity, as well as overlooking differences amongst boys and the plural practices individual boys engage in. Drawing on empirical research in two South Australian primary schools with students aged 6–7 and 11–13, this article examines the complex ways in which boys engaged in plural gender practices. Practices differing from a discourse of (local) hegemonic masculinity related to three key themes: displaying ‘intelligence’ and being studious; involvement in traditionally ‘feminine’ activities; and being caring, loving family and friends, and engaging in cross-gender friendships. This article utilises these themes to argue that practices could work alongside or present challenges to practices relating to a discourse of hegemonic masculinity. An examination of how age and masculinities interweave suggests that a divide between hegemonic and other masculinities and practices is not as distinct as has often been theorised.     

Making Child Protection Policy: The Crime and Misconduct Commission Inquiry into Abuse of Children in Foster Care in Queensland

Internationally as well as in Australia, public inquiries have become one of the dominant means of scrutinising child protection services. As such, inquiries have become a policy mechanism for defining the problem of child abuse, and developing possible solutions. This article examines the 2004 Crime and Misconduct Commission Inquiry into the Abuse of Children in Foster Care in Queensland. It discusses both the problems and potential of public inquiries in promoting positive change in a contested policy field like child protection.     

Points of departure: re-examining the discursive formation of the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990

Leung’s article re-examines the political and legislative history of the debates that led up to the passage of the 1990 Hate Crime Statistics Act, in particular the 1980 House committee hearing on Increasing Violence against Minorities and a 1983 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights report entitled Intimidation and Violence: Racial and Religious Bigotry in America. Both identify organized white supremacy as the cause of the nation’s epidemic of racial intimidation and violent bigotry in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Many significant recommendations were made, but data collection became the first piece of legislation to address the national problem of hate violence. Leung seeks to explain why. By analysing the relationship between committee hearings, the key report and the political context of the Reagan administration, he demonstrates how ‘hate crime’ became an object of knowledge, and how its definition had implications for policy development.     

FIFA’s Hegemony: Examples from World Cup Hosting Countries

The hegemonic power of FIFA over countries hosting its capstone World Cup tournament is worth examining in the context of hegemony theory in International Relations literature. To understand FIFA’s hegemonic role on the global stage, it is best to place it within the context of two major shifts in the international system—power transition and diffusion. This study provides an insight into the dispute between transnational and national law in sports, which FIFA has used to strengthen its hegemony. This has empirical support as seen in four World Cup cases: previous Cups in Brazil (2014) and South Africa (2010) and the forthcoming tournaments in Russia (2018) and Qatar (2022). These cases reveal FIFA’s hegemonic power both through the overruling of national law in favour of transnational law, and by the questionable bidding processes to host the games in Qatar and the Russian Federation. In addition, this study examines whether Switzerland is capable of regulating or restricting FIFA’s hegemonic power. While removing FIFA’s legal status as a non-profit organisation seems not to be an option, the executed amendment of the Swiss anti-corruption law is a step forward. Furthermore, FIFA needs to continue its recently initiated internal reforms.