There has been an increasing interest in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) issues in social science research in Croatia. Additionally, LGBTIQ people can be sampled in almost any research. However, it is usually assumed that all study participants are heterosexual and cisgender. In consequence, a limited number of categories for LGBTIQ individuals are typically included in questionnaires. Such an approach results in biased sample characteristics, which can both affect the interpretation of results and provoke LGBTIQ participants to refrain from providing answers to certain questions or refuse further participation. In addition, it represents a violation of the scientific research ethical principle of avoiding discrimination or privilege based on sex, gender identity, and expression or sexual orientation. In this paper, recommendations are offered for research that acknowledges LGBTIQ people by including different response options for sexual orientation, sex, and gender identity. These recommendations are based on an overview of different theoretical explanations and approaches in the measurement of gender, sex and sexual orientation in Croatian and international research, as well as on the authors’ experience in professional work with LGBTIQ people. As a possible step towards recognising LGBTIQ identities, introducing questions about sexual orientation and gender identity into research is recommended where those variables could be relevant for the studied subject. Also, since sex is a frequent research variable and commonly used response options “male” and “female” do not apply to a part of the population, adding a response option for self-identification or “something else” is recommended. In addition to item construction examples, explanations of the key concepts important for research including LGBTIQ people are provided.
{"title":"Kako pristupiti mjerenju seksualne orijentacije, spolnog i rodnog identiteta? Preporuke za istraživanja o temama koje se odnose na LGBTIQ osobe","authors":"Marina Milković, Marina Štambuk","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.7","url":null,"abstract":"There has been an increasing interest in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) issues in social science research in Croatia. Additionally, LGBTIQ people can be sampled in almost any research. However, it is usually assumed that all study participants are heterosexual and cisgender. In consequence, a limited number of categories for LGBTIQ individuals are typically included in questionnaires. Such an approach results in biased sample characteristics, which can both affect the interpretation of results and provoke LGBTIQ participants to refrain from providing answers to certain questions or refuse further participation. In addition, it represents a violation of the scientific research ethical principle of avoiding discrimination or privilege based on sex, gender identity, and expression or sexual orientation. In this paper, recommendations are offered for research that acknowledges LGBTIQ people by including different response options for sexual orientation, sex, and gender identity. These recommendations are based on an overview of different theoretical explanations and approaches in the measurement of gender, sex and sexual orientation in Croatian and international research, as well as on the authors’ experience in professional work with LGBTIQ people. As a possible step towards recognising LGBTIQ identities, introducing questions about sexual orientation and gender identity into research is recommended where those variables could be relevant for the studied subject. Also, since sex is a frequent research variable and commonly used response options “male” and “female” do not apply to a part of the population, adding a response option for self-identification or “something else” is recommended. In addition to item construction examples, explanations of the key concepts important for research including LGBTIQ people are provided.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.7","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43377563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A growing number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ1) people want to have or already have children (e.g. Goldberg and Allen, 2013; Pew Research survey, 2013). Scientific research published to date, including longitudinal and national probability studies, provides strong evidence that parental sexual orientation is not related to parenting effectiveness (adams and Light, 2015; Crouch et al., 2014; Goldberg and Allen, 2013; Manning, Fettro and Lamidi, 2014; Vučković Juroš, 2017). In other words, children growing up with LGBTIQ parents are similar to children living with heterosexual parents as concerns many relevant outcomes, including children’s wellbeing, academic achievement, cognitive development, social skills and mental health. Although societies differ in levels of formal or informal acknowledgement and in terms of the acceptance of LGBTIQ people, negative reactions are easily provoked when discussing LGBTIQ parenthood (Takács, Szalma and Bartus, 2016). Unlike families with heterosexual parents, families with LGBTIQ parents largely lack legal as well as social recognition and support (Takács and Szalma, 2011). They are also often exposed to stigmatization and discrimination (Takács, 2015). These negative experiences can have a broad negative impact on the wellbeing of LGBTIQ people and their children (Appell, 2003; Bos et al., 2004; Patterson, Fulcher and Wainright, 2002; Weber, 2010). Since the early 2000s, Croatian society has witnessed significant formal and societal changes in the direction of greater acceptance and acknowledgement of LGBTIQ people and their rights (Jurčić, 2018). Nonetheless, public discussions over the family lives of LGBTIQ people remain mostly negative and frequently do not move beyond expressions of personal attitudes and prejudice (Hodžić and Štulhofer, 2017). In general, public levels of recognition and knowledge about the families of LGBTIQ individuals are low (Kamenov, Huić and Jelić, 2017; Jugović and Ogresta, 2017). Furthermore, scientific studies on sexual orientation and gender identities are very rare within the Croatian context. While there are many in-
越来越多的女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人、双性人和酷儿(LGBTIQ1)想要或已经有了孩子(例如Goldberg和Allen, 2013;皮尤研究调查，2013年)。迄今为止发表的科学研究，包括纵向和国家概率研究，提供了强有力的证据，证明父母的性取向与育儿效果无关(adams and Light, 2015;Crouch et al.， 2014;Goldberg and Allen, 2013;曼宁，费特罗和拉米迪，2014;vu koviki jurosi, 2017)。换句话说，与LGBTIQ父母一起长大的孩子与与异性恋父母一起长大的孩子在许多相关结果上相似，包括孩子的幸福、学业成就、认知发展、社交技能和心理健康。尽管社会在正式或非正式承认的程度以及对LGBTIQ人群的接受程度上存在差异，但在讨论LGBTIQ父母身份时，很容易引发负面反应(Takács, Szalma和Bartus, 2016)。与异性恋父母的家庭不同，LGBTIQ父母的家庭在很大程度上缺乏法律和社会的认可和支持(Takács和Szalma, 2011)。他们也经常受到污名化和歧视(Takács, 2015)。这些负面的经历会对LGBTIQ人群和他们的孩子的健康产生广泛的负面影响(Appell, 2003;Bos et al.， 2004;Patterson, Fulcher和Wainright, 2002;韦伯,2010)。自21世纪初以来，克罗地亚社会见证了重大的正式和社会变化，更多地接受和承认LGBTIQ人群及其权利(jur iki, 2018)。尽管如此，公众对LGBTIQ人群家庭生活的讨论仍然大多是消极的，并且经常超出个人态度和偏见的表达(Hodžić和Štulhofer, 2017)。总体而言，公众对LGBTIQ个体家庭的认知和知识水平较低(Kamenov, huiki and jeliki, 2017;jugoviki and Ogresta, 2017)。此外，在克罗地亚范围内，关于性取向和性别认同的科学研究非常罕见。虽然有很多
{"title":"LGBTIQ Parenthood in Croatia: Experiences and Perceptions","authors":"M. Štambuk, M. Vujčić","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.1","url":null,"abstract":"A growing number of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ1) people want to have or already have children (e.g. Goldberg and Allen, 2013; Pew Research survey, 2013). Scientific research published to date, including longitudinal and national probability studies, provides strong evidence that parental sexual orientation is not related to parenting effectiveness (adams and Light, 2015; Crouch et al., 2014; Goldberg and Allen, 2013; Manning, Fettro and Lamidi, 2014; Vučković Juroš, 2017). In other words, children growing up with LGBTIQ parents are similar to children living with heterosexual parents as concerns many relevant outcomes, including children’s wellbeing, academic achievement, cognitive development, social skills and mental health. Although societies differ in levels of formal or informal acknowledgement and in terms of the acceptance of LGBTIQ people, negative reactions are easily provoked when discussing LGBTIQ parenthood (Takács, Szalma and Bartus, 2016). Unlike families with heterosexual parents, families with LGBTIQ parents largely lack legal as well as social recognition and support (Takács and Szalma, 2011). They are also often exposed to stigmatization and discrimination (Takács, 2015). These negative experiences can have a broad negative impact on the wellbeing of LGBTIQ people and their children (Appell, 2003; Bos et al., 2004; Patterson, Fulcher and Wainright, 2002; Weber, 2010). Since the early 2000s, Croatian society has witnessed significant formal and societal changes in the direction of greater acceptance and acknowledgement of LGBTIQ people and their rights (Jurčić, 2018). Nonetheless, public discussions over the family lives of LGBTIQ people remain mostly negative and frequently do not move beyond expressions of personal attitudes and prejudice (Hodžić and Štulhofer, 2017). In general, public levels of recognition and knowledge about the families of LGBTIQ individuals are low (Kamenov, Huić and Jelić, 2017; Jugović and Ogresta, 2017). Furthermore, scientific studies on sexual orientation and gender identities are very rare within the Croatian context. While there are many in-","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.1","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41400565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Parenting desires, intentions, and the underlying motivation for parenthood are well documented in the context of heterosexual couple parenthood, while among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people research is limited. The main goal of this study was to explore parenting desire and different reasons to become a parent or remain childfree among LGBTIQ people in Croatia. 486 childless LGBTIQ people participated in an on-line survey. In the quantitative part of the study, parenting desire and reasons for and against parenthood were measured, while the qualitative part analysed the answers to open-ended questions about additional reasons that influence the desire to want or not to want children. The results showed that 46% of the participants want to become parents, 35% did not know, and 19% reported they do not want to have children. The main reasons for parenthood among the participants who want children were internal – the desire to give love, share knowledge, and develop a special bond with a child. The participants who do not want to have children also stressed internal reasons against parenthood, such as restricted personal freedom, high responsibility, and the amount of workload they perceive as a part of parenthood. Several additional reasons for and against parenthood emerged from the qualitative data. Some reasons reflected universal issues unrelated to sexual orientation or gender identity, while others conveyed concerns related to social and legal barriers that LGBTIQ people face when it comes to parenthood.
{"title":"Motivation for Parenthood among LGBTIQ People in Croatia: Reasons for (not) Becoming a Parent","authors":"M. Štambuk, M. Milković, Anton Maričić","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.2","url":null,"abstract":"Parenting desires, intentions, and the underlying motivation for parenthood are well documented in the context of heterosexual couple parenthood, while among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people research is limited. The main goal of this study was to explore parenting desire and different reasons to become a parent or remain childfree among LGBTIQ people in Croatia. 486 childless LGBTIQ people participated in an on-line survey. In the quantitative part of the study, parenting desire and reasons for and against parenthood were measured, while the qualitative part analysed the answers to open-ended questions about additional reasons that influence the desire to want or not to want children. The results showed that 46% of the participants want to become parents, 35% did not know, and 19% reported they do not want to have children. The main reasons for parenthood among the participants who want children were internal – the desire to give love, share knowledge, and develop a special bond with a child. The participants who do not want to have children also stressed internal reasons against parenthood, such as restricted personal freedom, high responsibility, and the amount of workload they perceive as a part of parenthood. Several additional reasons for and against parenthood emerged from the qualitative data. Some reasons reflected universal issues unrelated to sexual orientation or gender identity, while others conveyed concerns related to social and legal barriers that LGBTIQ people face when it comes to parenthood.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.2","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49404467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mateo Štrbić, Tomislav Jeleković, Dora Popović, M. Brajković, Petra Žukina, M. Štambuk
Despite the decline in prejudice towards LGBT people, the issue of parenthood is still controversial with negative attitudes towards LGBT parents being openly expressed. This study aimed to examine attitudes towards parenting by same-sex couples using a vignette design. Parenting condition (parent’s negative vs positive reaction), active parent’s gender (mother vs father) and family composition (different-sex vs same-sex couple) were varied to test differences in the evaluations of parenting, child behaviour, family environment, social distance and willingness to grant rights. 392 heterosexual and cisgender students from the University of Zagreb (87% female, 13% male), aged 18 to 37, participated in an online study. After reading one of the eight vignettes, participants evaluated parenting, child behaviour, family environment, social distance and rights of the family described in the vignette. The results showed that parenting and family environment were evaluated as better, and participants were less convinced that the child’s behaviour is the result of parents’ relationship in the positive parenting condition than in the negative. Social distance was lower towards parents in the positive parenting condition than in the negative and – unexpectedly – towards same-sex in comparison to different-sex couples. Participants were more inclined to grant family rights to parents from the positive than to those from the negative parenting condition. Although other results suggested unbiased attitudes towards same-sex couples’ parenting, participants were less inclined to grant same-sex couples family rights in comparison to different-sex couples. The findings reflect an important mechanism underlying the stability of prejudice – a resistance towards generalising attitudes from individual cases to a group. This can be used in efforts to confront prejudice against parenting among LGBT people
尽管对LGBT人群的偏见有所减少，但为人父母的问题仍然存在争议，人们公开表达了对LGBT父母的负面态度。本研究旨在通过小插图的设计来检验同性伴侣对养育子女的态度。通过改变父母的教养条件(父母的消极反应与积极反应)、主动父母的性别(母亲与父亲)和家庭组成(异性与同性伴侣)来测试对父母教养、儿童行为、家庭环境、社会距离和授予权利意愿的评价差异。来自萨格勒布大学(University of Zagreb)的392名异性恋和异性恋学生(87%为女性，13%为男性)参加了一项在线研究，年龄在18至37岁之间。在阅读了八个小短文中的一个后，参与者评估了小短文中描述的育儿、孩子行为、家庭环境、社会距离和家庭权利。结果表明，父母教养和家庭环境的评价更好，参与者不太相信孩子的行为是父母关系的结果，在积极的父母教养条件下比在消极的父母教养条件下。与异性伴侣相比，在积极父母教养条件下，与父母的社会距离比在消极父母教养条件下更低，出乎意料的是，与同性伴侣相比，与同性伴侣的社会距离更低。参与者更倾向于给予父母积极的家庭权利，而不是消极的父母。尽管其他结果表明，人们对同性伴侣养育子女的态度是公正的，但与异性伴侣相比，参与者更不倾向于给予同性伴侣家庭权利。这些发现反映了偏见稳定性背后的一个重要机制——一种对从个体到群体的概括态度的抵制。这可以用来对抗LGBT人群对养育子女的偏见
{"title":"Evaluations of Parenting by Same-Sex vs Different-Sex Couples among Heterosexual University Students: Experimental Between-Subjects Vignette Design Study","authors":"Mateo Štrbić, Tomislav Jeleković, Dora Popović, M. Brajković, Petra Žukina, M. Štambuk","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.6","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the decline in prejudice towards LGBT people, the issue of parenthood is still controversial with negative attitudes towards LGBT parents being openly expressed. This study aimed to examine attitudes towards parenting by same-sex couples using a vignette design. Parenting condition (parent’s negative vs positive reaction), active parent’s gender (mother vs father) and family composition (different-sex vs same-sex couple) were varied to test differences in the evaluations of parenting, child behaviour, family environment, social distance and willingness to grant rights. 392 heterosexual and cisgender students from the University of Zagreb (87% female, 13% male), aged 18 to 37, participated in an online study. After reading one of the eight vignettes, participants evaluated parenting, child behaviour, family environment, social distance and rights of the family described in the vignette. The results showed that parenting and family environment were evaluated as better, and participants were less convinced that the child’s behaviour is the result of parents’ relationship in the positive parenting condition than in the negative. Social distance was lower towards parents in the positive parenting condition than in the negative and – unexpectedly – towards same-sex in comparison to different-sex couples. Participants were more inclined to grant family rights to parents from the positive than to those from the negative parenting condition. Although other results suggested unbiased attitudes towards same-sex couples’ parenting, participants were less inclined to grant same-sex couples family rights in comparison to different-sex couples. The findings reflect an important mechanism underlying the stability of prejudice – a resistance towards generalising attitudes from individual cases to a group. This can be used in efforts to confront prejudice against parenting among LGBT people","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.6","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48694477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Non-normative sexual orientations question the binary and hierarchically organised image of men–women relations. The main goal of this research was to explore the role of gender identity and gender-roles attitudes in predicting attitudes towards same-sex parenting. An additional goal was to assess whether socio-demographic variables such as age, education, religiosity and political preferences – which proved to be relevant in predicting homonegativity – would also predict attitudes towards same-sex parenting. Finally, the authors explored whether gender identity and gender-role attitudes bore an effect on attitudes towards same-sex parenting after controlling for the socio-demographic variables. An online survey with 992 heterosexual participants of both genders (70% women) aged 18 to 79 years was conducted in Croatia in 2014. Participants expressed less support for gay than for lesbian parenting, with female participants expressing more positive attitudes towards both gay and lesbian parenting than male ones. Expectedly, same-sex parenting was more supported by less religious and politically more left-oriented participants, as well as those who cohabitate compared to married participants. Age and education, but also gender identity, did not prove predictive. However, the expectations about the role of traditional gender norms were confirmed. Participants with more traditional gender-role attitudes, as well as those who are parents themselves, expressed more negative attitudes towards same-sex parenting.
{"title":"Attitudes towards Gay and Lesbian Parental Rights among Heterosexual Croatian Citizens: The Effect of Traditional Gender-Role Attitudes","authors":"Željka Kamenov, Aleksandra Huic, Margareta Jelić","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.5","url":null,"abstract":"Non-normative sexual orientations question the binary and hierarchically organised image of men–women relations. The main goal of this research was to explore the role of gender identity and gender-roles attitudes in predicting attitudes towards same-sex parenting. An additional goal was to assess whether socio-demographic variables such as age, education, religiosity and political preferences – which proved to be relevant in predicting homonegativity – would also predict attitudes towards same-sex parenting. Finally, the authors explored whether gender identity and gender-role attitudes bore an effect on attitudes towards same-sex parenting after controlling for the socio-demographic variables. An online survey with 992 heterosexual participants of both genders (70% women) aged 18 to 79 years was conducted in Croatia in 2014. Participants expressed less support for gay than for lesbian parenting, with female participants expressing more positive attitudes towards both gay and lesbian parenting than male ones. Expectedly, same-sex parenting was more supported by less religious and politically more left-oriented participants, as well as those who cohabitate compared to married participants. Age and education, but also gender identity, did not prove predictive. However, the expectations about the role of traditional gender norms were confirmed. Participants with more traditional gender-role attitudes, as well as those who are parents themselves, expressed more negative attitudes towards same-sex parenting.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.5","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44818139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The legal status and social acceptance of same-sex partners’ families vary to an astonishing degree, even within the European Union (EU). These differences are sharply reflected in the lives of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) migrants from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) residing in countries such as Belgium or the Netherlands, where same-sex partners can marry, access adoption and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) services, and acquire legal co-parenting rights. For this group, every visit to a CEE country of origin with a constitutional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, with limited or no access to adoption services, nor to ART or co-parenting rights, highlights the societal and institutional vulnerability of their families. Based on biographical narrative interviews (BNIM) with six LGB migrants from selected CEE countries of origin, raising children with a same-sex partner in Belgium or the Netherlands, this study analyses how differences in wider socio-institutional frameworks shape experiences of LGB parents relating to the formation, display, recognition and acceptance of their families. The findings highlight how the restrictive legal and institutional frameworks not only exclude LGB individuals from full citizenship, but also provide support for the individual-level discrimination of non-heterosexual families. In contrast, inclusive frameworks allow LGB individuals to realize life and family trajectories already accessible to others in society, while also discouraging the expression of individual prejudice. Therefore, the study concludes that the only way to ensure full equality and to protect LGB individuals and their children from stigmatization is to create a fully inclusive socio-institutional framework for non-heterosexual families in which individual prejudice is no longer supported.
{"title":"“Why is it that here we can be a family, and there we cannot?” How Wider Socio-Institutional Frameworks Shape Experiences of LGB Parenting","authors":"Tanja Vučković Juroš","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.4","url":null,"abstract":"The legal status and social acceptance of same-sex partners’ families vary to an astonishing degree, even within the European Union (EU). These differences are sharply reflected in the lives of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) migrants from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) residing in countries such as Belgium or the Netherlands, where same-sex partners can marry, access adoption and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) services, and acquire legal co-parenting rights. For this group, every visit to a CEE country of origin with a constitutional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, with limited or no access to adoption services, nor to ART or co-parenting rights, highlights the societal and institutional vulnerability of their families. Based on biographical narrative interviews (BNIM) with six LGB migrants from selected CEE countries of origin, raising children with a same-sex partner in Belgium or the Netherlands, this study analyses how differences in wider socio-institutional frameworks shape experiences of LGB parents relating to the formation, display, recognition and acceptance of their families. The findings highlight how the restrictive legal and institutional frameworks not only exclude LGB individuals from full citizenship, but also provide support for the individual-level discrimination of non-heterosexual families. In contrast, inclusive frameworks allow LGB individuals to realize life and family trajectories already accessible to others in society, while also discouraging the expression of individual prejudice. Therefore, the study concludes that the only way to ensure full equality and to protect LGB individuals and their children from stigmatization is to create a fully inclusive socio-institutional framework for non-heterosexual families in which individual prejudice is no longer supported.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.4","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49244172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people can become parents using various methods, but actual possibilities differ between countries depending on the legislation and social norms. The main goal of this study was to explore parenting desire and family formation methods among LGBTIQ people in Croatia. Differences in parenting desire based on sociodemographic characteristics, the frequency and use of family formation methods, as well as the importance of different sources of support for parenthood were analysed. 486 childless LGBTIQ people (aged 18 to 54) and 24 LGBTIQ people who were parents (aged 24 to 54) participated in an online survey. Childless participants who did not want children were on average older in comparison to those who wanted to have children. There were no significant differences in desire for parenthood based on education, income and relationship status, as well as between cis-females and cis-males and lesbians and gays. Most of the participants who were already parents had a child in a previous heterosexual relationship, while most of those who tried to become parents used an assisted reproductive technology. Among all the participants, the most preferred family formation methods were adoption and foster care, and partners were considered as the most important source of support for parenthood. Childless participants who wanted to have children perceived significantly more support from family, friends, and a significant other in comparison to those who did not want children. These results provide novel insights into the decision-making processes LGBTIQ people go through before family formation and indicate associations between the life context (e.g. age, social support) and parenting desire.
{"title":"Pathways to Parenthood among LGBTIQ People in Croatia: Who Wants to Become a Parent and How?","authors":"M. Štambuk, M. Vujčić, M. Milković, Anton Maričić","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.2.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.2.3","url":null,"abstract":"Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people can become parents using various methods, but actual possibilities differ between countries depending on the legislation and social norms. The main goal of this study was to explore parenting desire and family formation methods among LGBTIQ people in Croatia. Differences in parenting desire based on sociodemographic characteristics, the frequency and use of family formation methods, as well as the importance of different sources of support for parenthood were analysed. 486 childless LGBTIQ people (aged 18 to 54) and 24 LGBTIQ people who were parents (aged 24 to 54) participated in an online survey. Childless participants who did not want children were on average older in comparison to those who wanted to have children. There were no significant differences in desire for parenthood based on education, income and relationship status, as well as between cis-females and cis-males and lesbians and gays. Most of the participants who were already parents had a child in a previous heterosexual relationship, while most of those who tried to become parents used an assisted reproductive technology. Among all the participants, the most preferred family formation methods were adoption and foster care, and partners were considered as the most important source of support for parenthood. Childless participants who wanted to have children perceived significantly more support from family, friends, and a significant other in comparison to those who did not want children. These results provide novel insights into the decision-making processes LGBTIQ people go through before family formation and indicate associations between the life context (e.g. age, social support) and parenting desire.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/rzs.49.2.3","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49648558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Jadranka Švarc, Jasminka Lažnjak, Innovation Culture in Crony Capitalism: Does Hofstede’s Model Matter?","authors":"Zlatko Hinšt","doi":"10.5613/rzs.49.1.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.49.1.5","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70731845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The ageing of the population in Croatia and an increase in the number of elderly persons who retain their retirement status for a longer period call for more research on retirement adaptation. This study was focussed on providing a clearer insight into the relationship between socioeconomic characteristics and retirement adjustment, as well as the identification of factors that could increase a low level of retirement adjustment in older people. The research was conducted as a survey in spring 2018 in retirement homes in the Croatian town of Bjelovar and the city of Zagreb. It included 211 older people of both genders aged 65 and above. Retirement Adjustment Factor Questionnaire was used to assess Atchley’s Model of Retirement Adjustment. The results confirmed the conceptual hypotheses from earlier studies. The socioeconomic characteristics of the participants such as level of education, type of retirement, monthly income level, and type of occupation were associated with the success of retirement adjustment in the Pre-Retirement, Honeymoon, Routine, and Termination phases from Atchley’s Model of Retirement Adjustment, while the Honeymoon Phase was related only to retirement length. Aside from promoting academic and public discussions on the topic, the study findings have potential implications for creating social programmes to improve the quality of life of the elderly and provide a better understanding of how the older population living in retirement homes experience retirement.
{"title":"Socioeconomic Differences in Retirement Adjustment among the Elderly Residing in Retirement Homes","authors":"Želimir Bertić, Mirjana Telebuh, M. Havelka","doi":"10.5613/RZS.49.1.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/RZS.49.1.4","url":null,"abstract":"The ageing of the population in Croatia and an increase in the number of elderly persons who retain their retirement status for a longer period call for more research on retirement adaptation. This study was focussed on providing a clearer insight into the relationship between socioeconomic characteristics and retirement adjustment, as well as the identification of factors that could increase a low level of retirement adjustment in older people. The research was conducted as a survey in spring 2018 in retirement homes in the Croatian town of Bjelovar and the city of Zagreb. It included 211 older people of both genders aged 65 and above. Retirement Adjustment Factor Questionnaire was used to assess Atchley’s Model of Retirement Adjustment. The results confirmed the conceptual hypotheses from earlier studies. The socioeconomic characteristics of the participants such as level of education, type of retirement, monthly income level, and type of occupation were associated with the success of retirement adjustment in the Pre-Retirement, Honeymoon, Routine, and Termination phases from Atchley’s Model of Retirement Adjustment, while the Honeymoon Phase was related only to retirement length. Aside from promoting academic and public discussions on the topic, the study findings have potential implications for creating social programmes to improve the quality of life of the elderly and provide a better understanding of how the older population living in retirement homes experience retirement.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/RZS.49.1.4","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43003610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Existing empirical research has demonstrated that Croatian politics is dominated by political cleavages based on attitudes toward history and sociocultural values and by the absence of divisions between voters based on economic and distributive issues. However, the absence of political competition based on redistributive issues does not mean that a structure of attitudes related to economic issues does not exist and that these attitudes are not grounded in individuals’ positions within the social structure. Using survey data collected following the parliamentary elections of 2011, 2015 and 2016 on representative probabilistic national samples of 1,000 participants, the authors explored the structure of attitudes toward distributive issues in Croatia. Using the regression analysis and data collected in 2015 on a representative probabilistic national sample of 1,260 respondents in the second step, the authors examined the associations between economic attitudes and socioeconomic position. The analyses indicated a clear and relatively stable structure of attitudes towards economic issues consisting of two dimensions, one encompassing economic protectionism and the other views about the role of markets as an economic organising principle. However, a very weak association between elements of the social structure and attitudes towards distributive issues was found.
{"title":"Interesi ili nešto drugo? Ekonomski stavovi i njihova utemeljenost u društvenoj strukturi u Hrvatskoj","authors":"Andrija Henjak, Bartul Vuksan Ćusa","doi":"10.5613/RZS.49.1.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5613/RZS.49.1.2","url":null,"abstract":"Existing empirical research has demonstrated that Croatian politics is dominated by political cleavages based on attitudes toward history and sociocultural values and by the absence of divisions between voters based on economic and distributive issues. However, the absence of political competition based on redistributive issues does not mean that a structure of attitudes related to economic issues does not exist and that these attitudes are not grounded in individuals’ positions within the social structure. Using survey data collected following the parliamentary elections of 2011, 2015 and 2016 on representative probabilistic national samples of 1,000 participants, the authors explored the structure of attitudes toward distributive issues in Croatia. Using the regression analysis and data collected in 2015 on a representative probabilistic national sample of 1,260 respondents in the second step, the authors examined the associations between economic attitudes and socioeconomic position. The analyses indicated a clear and relatively stable structure of attitudes towards economic issues consisting of two dimensions, one encompassing economic protectionism and the other views about the role of markets as an economic organising principle. However, a very weak association between elements of the social structure and attitudes towards distributive issues was found.","PeriodicalId":39535,"journal":{"name":"Revija za Sociologiju","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5613/RZS.49.1.2","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44784777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：