Body Size Estimations,Body Dissatisfaction,and Ideal Size Preferences in Children Six Through Thirteen

Results of the second year of a 3-year longitudinal study on children's body size estimations are reported. Participants were 216 male and female children age 6 through 13. Body size estimations were measured using a TV-video methodology. Three psychophysical procedures measured perceived body size, idealized size, and body dissatisfaction. Self-esteem, body esteem, birth order, number of siblings, and parents' socioeconomic status (SES) were measured. Children were accurate in estimating body size, with no gender, age, or ethnic differences. Individual estimations varied greatly over the 1-year test-retest interval. Children had a slight bias to report that their body size was distorted too wide. Both genders wanted to be thinner, with females wanting to be increasingly thinner as they became older. Females were also more dissatisfied with their body size. Taller and heavier children with high SES fathers wanted a thinner idealized body size. Taller, thinner children had less body size dissatisfaction. Children with a larger number of siblings who were one of the first born were more dissatisfied with their body size. Children who gained weight during the previous year without a concomitant growth in height were also more dissatisfied with their body and wanted to be thinner. Body size estimation is viewed as an important aspect of one's body image and is mediated by many different variables, each of which individually explains only a small part of the variance.     

Teaching Negotiation with a Feminist Perspective

Negotiation teachers encourage their students to be inventive,improve agreements, and push outward on the "pareto" frontier.Likewise, teachers can improve their practice by seeking value, sometimesin other disciplines. In general, negotiation is taught through acombination of lectures with simulation exercises and debriefings. Feministpedagogy enhances this normative model of teaching negotiation. Thisarticle links the traditional method of teaching negotiation with four keyprinciples of feminist pedagogy.     

Cognitive mediators of ego functioning in adolescence

It has often been assumed that a relationship exists between higher levels of cognitive functioning, particularly formal operations, and mature ego functioning in adolescence. This research examined the relationships between ego functioning and two domains of operational thinking: social interpersonal reasoning and physical-mathematical reasoning in 139 high school seniors. Subjects were given two measures of physical-mathematical reasoning, two measures of interpersonal reasoning, and the Sentence Completion Test of ego functioning, as well as a measure of verbal intelligence. Results indicated significant differences between males and females in patterns of correlations as well as in patterns of relationships in a causal analysis. Ego functioning was predicted by interpersonal reasoning for females and by physical-mathematical reasoning and verbal intelligence for males.This research represents a portion of the doctoral dissertation completed by the senior author in 1981. The research was supported by a grant to A. Petersen from the Spencer Foundation.Received Ph.D. from University of Illinois at Chicago. Current interests are sex-related differences in adolescent ego development and psychosocial variables in adolescent chronic illness.Received Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. Current interest is biopsychosocial development in adolescence, primarily early adolescence.Research Affiliate, Laboratory for Study of Adolescence, Michael Reese Hospital. Received Ph.D. from University of Chicago. Current interest is sex-related differences in the psychological effects of puberty.Research Associate, Laboratory for the Study of Adolescence, Michael Reese Hospital; Program Associate, Health Program, MacArthur Foundation. Received Ph.D. from Syracuse University. Current interest is sex-related differences in socialization.     

From Mrs. Burns To Mrs. Oxley: Do Co-habiting Women (Still) Need Marriage Law?

Following the U.K. Labour government commitment to marriage in the 1998 Green Paper ‘Supporting Families’, Barlow and Duncan produced a robust critique calling for ‘realism’ in recognising that many couples are now choosing not to marry, that too many do not make informed decisions as to whether to marry or not and that, on the basis of their survey, over 40% of respondents believed that some form of family law protection would be available to them, despite their lack of marital status. When added to a concern that economically vulnerable cohabiting women do not receive adequate protection in property law, it seemed all too obvious that the government commitment to marriage should be challenged. In fact, government policy does seem to have shifted somewhat when, partly as a tactical manoeuvre to help the passage of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 and specifically recognising concerns with the needs of economically vulnerable parties, the issue was referred to the Law Commission for England and Wales. This places the ‘realism’ arguments firmly within the reform agenda. However, this article argues that there is a need to look more closely at the arguments used by the ‘realists’, in particular at the evocation of the figure of Mrs. Burns. The more contemporary case of Oxley v. Hiscock is used to both raise questions about the socio-economic profiles of cohabitants, as well to question the presentation of property law as failing women (and family law as offering the protection they need). I argue that feminists should take a cautious approach in relation to the seemingly compelling argument that cohabitants will benefit from the extension of aspects of marriage law to cover property issues at the end of a relationship.     

Shock to Thought: An Encounter (of a Third Kind) with Legal Feminism

This paper takes a recently published text and, in examining it closely, argues that it exemplifies trends within feminist scholarship in law, which might be characterised asestablishing a form of orthodoxy. The paper explores some of the ways in which thiso rthodoxy is constructed and presented, and argues that it is characterised by a commitment both to `grand theory' and Hegelian dialectics. The adoption of this model of work seems to offer a chance to hold together the triangular figure of women/theory/law reform. The paper will argue that, whilst this model is clearly a valid choice, and attractive to feminist scholars in the promise it seems to hold, the model is not to be presumed but rather should be examined and considered in terms of its potential for feminist scholarship. Both within its own terms, and as part of the construction of an orthodoxy, the paper will argue that it is in fact problematic and that feminist scholarship would be better served by seeking an alternative theoretical model. An alternative is suggested, using the work of Deleuze, but it is acknowledged that this will require the acceptance of a very different theoretical configuration from that suggested by the triangular model of women/theory/lawreform.     

Determining ‘truth’ at the border: immigration interviews,Chinese marital migrants,and Taiwan's sovereignty dilemmas

As Taiwan transitions from an immigrant-sending to an immigrant-receiving country, it struggles to build an immigration bureaucracy while its status as a sovereign nation-state is not recognized by much of the international community. Taiwan's largest immigrant group, marital migrants from China, are perceived as posing the greatest challenges to border control due to longstanding political tensions between the two countries and governmental and societal suspicions about Chinese spouses' marital motives. Based on research conducted with immigration officials and during immigration interviews at the border, this article interrogates the status of ‘truth’ in official efforts to determine definitively immigrants' marital intentions. It analyzes such truth demands in relation to Taiwan's anxieties about its national standing and the ability of an immigration bureaucracy to generate ‘sovereignty effects’.