previous writings in order to explore ideas about groupishness (Bion, 1961), membership and participation and to raise questions about how better to understand our social and collective apprehension about those who take up their membership of the world by refusing to join in (Scanlon and Adlam, 2008, 2011a, 2012). Our assumption is that these issues are of concern to us all, because if ‘they’ do not join in, then there cannot be a meaningfully cohesive ‘we’ for any of ‘us’ to join in with. Our specific focus will be on ‘the homeless, the dangerous and the
The state is increasingly experienced as both intrusive and neglectful, particularly by those living in poverty, leading to loss of trust and widespread feelings of alienation and disconnection.
Against this tense background, this innovative book argues that child protection policies and practices have become part of the problem, rather than ensuring children’s well-being and safety.
Building on the ideas in the best-selling Re-imagining child protection and drawing together a wide range of social theorists and disciplines, the book:
• Challenges existing notions of child protection, revealing their limits;
• Ensures that the harms children and families experience are explored in a way that acknowledges the social and economic contexts in which they live;
• Explains how the protective capacities within families and communities can be mobilised and practices of co-production adopted;
• Places ethics and human rights at the centre of everyday conversations and practices.
This book focuses on the changing terrain of ethnic disadvantage in Britain, drawing on up-to-date sources. It goes further than texts that merely describe ethnic inequalities to explore and explain their dynamic nature. It suggests that the increasing diversity of experience among different ethnic groups is a key to understanding continuing and emerging tensions and conflicts.
Explaining ethnic differences: provides up to date data and analysis of ethnic diversity and changing patterns of disadvantage in Britain;
· covers key areas of social life, including demographic trends, education, employment, housing, health, gender, and policing and community disorder;
· is written by leading experts in the field;
· addresses issues of urgent public importance in the context of recent community disorder and the resurgence of the far right.
· The book is essential reading for policy makers in central and local government; academics, postgraduate students and advanced undergraduates in the social sciences; social work, health, education and housing professionals; and criminal justice personnel.
This original edited collection explores the value of public engagement in a wider social science context. Its main themes range from the dialogic character of social science to the pragmatic responses to the managerial policies underpinning the restructuring of Higher Education. The book is organised in three parts: the first encourages the reader to reflect upon the different social and political inflections of public engagement and offers one university example of a social science café in Bristol. The following sections are based upon talks given in the café and are linked by a concern with public engagement and the contribution of social science to a reflexive understanding of the dilemmas and practices of daily life. This highly topical book will be of interest to academics, practitioners and students interested in critical social issues as they impact on their everyday lives.
location for this group-ish disturbance becomes a murmuring symptom of what cannot be articulated ( Foulkes, 1948/1983 ). For Craib (1994) this existential disappointment is also about needing to, and failing to , recognise the frailty and vulnerability of our- and others’-selves, and to grieve and mourn these cumulative losses in socio-political matrices where disappointment, like all other psycho-social/material resources, is not equally distributed. A world which, at its roots and branches, is characterised by the marked socio-economic differentials between
argue, populist humour is a strong mobilising force due to how it favours confirmation bias and feelings of group superiority by denigrating others’ views. This type of toxic groupishness is also explored by Sara Graça da Silva in Chapter 7. In this essay, the author shows how smell is connected to emotions and morality, bringing to light how our evolutionarily developed tendency to negatively appraise unfamiliar smells further entrenches prejudiced moral outlooks on migrants. In Chapter 2, Laura Luz Silva persuasively argues against the commonly held belief (for
contributing to 163 what Jonathan Haidt (2012) has called ‘groupish righteousness’, thus entrenching divisions between people who all care deeply about the protection of children but are stuck in often very oppositional silos about what that means and, moreover, convinced that they have a monopoly on the morally correct way to proceed. We are anxious not to add to this although it is inevitable that we will do so to some extent. Talking with those who experience services Families have gained skills in dealing with substantive issues, for example in parenting in
’ in the world of fashion, or of ethnic cuisine, are only two relatively trivial examples of the way white British people are apt to see ethnicity as an attribute only of others – something that distinguishes ‘them’ from ‘us’. Moreover, this apparent denial of their own ethnicity also seems to be associated with a distinctively individualistic world-view in which they see themselves as individuals while others are members of groups. The greater the degree of apparent difference between themselves and others, the more likely British people are to see ‘groupishness
latter point. He is a social psychologist with a speciality in the psychology of morality and moral emotions. He too counsels against assumptions that relaying the facts or evidence will be enough to change people’s minds. He argues that moral judgements arise not from reason but from intuition. He argues that human minds are designed for ‘groupish righteousness’ and this makes it difficult but not impossible to connect with others who live in other matrices. He challenges those on the ‘progressive’ side to engage with conservative conceptions of morality. He
