爱的制度逻辑:亲密领域的激情秩序

IF 0.9 2区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY American Journal of Cultural Sociology Pub Date : 2024-05-25 DOI:10.1057/s41290-024-00209-9
Roger Friedland, Henk Roose, John W. Mohr
{"title":"爱的制度逻辑:亲密领域的激情秩序","authors":"Roger Friedland, Henk Roose, John W. Mohr","doi":"10.1057/s41290-024-00209-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We use Multiple Correspondence Analysis to capture the institutional logics of love and intimacy among a random sample of American university students. Comparing the theoretical assumptions of field theory and the institutional logics approach we explore whether institutional logics of intimacy exist, what kinds of practices are gathered in these logics, and whether these institutional logics are shaped by the actors’ field capitals, <i>viz</i>. gender and social class. Using survey data collected from a random sample of 1315 students from a large Pacific university (PU) we find that institutional logics of intimacy come in multiple forms: abstinence, loving sex and hookup sex, each characterized by its specific doings, feelings, and sayings. Our analyses further suggest that the logics of intimate practice have their own internal order, or grammar, which is only weakly conditioned by persons’ class or gender positions in the social structure. Although the perduring logics of intimacy are largely autonomous from persons’ positions in the field, the effects we do find largely echo Armstrong and Hamilton’s account of college life as a class project of young privileged women whose social networks formed through the Greek party scene (Armstrong and Hamilton in <i>Paying for the Party. How College Maintains Inequality</i>, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2013). Constellations of meaningful practice, not distributions of capitals among persons, overwhelmingly organize the pathways of practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":45140,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Cultural Sociology","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The institutional logics of love: the order of passion in an intimate field\",\"authors\":\"Roger Friedland, Henk Roose, John W. Mohr\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41290-024-00209-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We use Multiple Correspondence Analysis to capture the institutional logics of love and intimacy among a random sample of American university students. Comparing the theoretical assumptions of field theory and the institutional logics approach we explore whether institutional logics of intimacy exist, what kinds of practices are gathered in these logics, and whether these institutional logics are shaped by the actors’ field capitals, <i>viz</i>. gender and social class. Using survey data collected from a random sample of 1315 students from a large Pacific university (PU) we find that institutional logics of intimacy come in multiple forms: abstinence, loving sex and hookup sex, each characterized by its specific doings, feelings, and sayings. Our analyses further suggest that the logics of intimate practice have their own internal order, or grammar, which is only weakly conditioned by persons’ class or gender positions in the social structure. Although the perduring logics of intimacy are largely autonomous from persons’ positions in the field, the effects we do find largely echo Armstrong and Hamilton’s account of college life as a class project of young privileged women whose social networks formed through the Greek party scene (Armstrong and Hamilton in <i>Paying for the Party. How College Maintains Inequality</i>, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2013). Constellations of meaningful practice, not distributions of capitals among persons, overwhelmingly organize the pathways of practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Cultural Sociology\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Cultural Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41290-024-00209-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Cultural Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41290-024-00209-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们使用多重对应分析法来捕捉美国大学生随机样本中爱与亲密关系的制度逻辑。通过比较场域理论和制度逻辑方法的理论假设,我们探讨了亲密关系的制度逻辑是否存在,这些逻辑中聚集了哪些类型的实践,以及这些制度逻辑是否由行动者的场域资本(即性别和社会阶层)所塑造。通过对太平洋地区一所大型大学(PU)的 1315 名学生的随机抽样调查数据,我们发现亲密关系的制度逻辑有多种形式:禁欲、性爱和勾搭,每种形式都有其特定的行为、感受和说法。我们的分析进一步表明,亲密关系实践的逻辑有其自身的内部秩序或语法,只受到个人在社会结构中的阶级或性别地位的微弱制约。虽然亲密关系的持久逻辑在很大程度上独立于个人在该领域中的地位,但我们发现的影响在很大程度上与阿姆斯特朗和汉密尔顿的观点不谋而合,即大学生活是年轻特权女性的阶级项目,她们的社交网络是通过希腊派对场景形成的(阿姆斯特朗和汉密尔顿在《为派对买单:大学如何维持不平等》一书中)。大学如何维持不平等》,哈佛大学出版社,剑桥,2013 年)。有意义的实践组合,而不是资本在人与人之间的分配,在很大程度上组织了实践的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The institutional logics of love: the order of passion in an intimate field

We use Multiple Correspondence Analysis to capture the institutional logics of love and intimacy among a random sample of American university students. Comparing the theoretical assumptions of field theory and the institutional logics approach we explore whether institutional logics of intimacy exist, what kinds of practices are gathered in these logics, and whether these institutional logics are shaped by the actors’ field capitals, viz. gender and social class. Using survey data collected from a random sample of 1315 students from a large Pacific university (PU) we find that institutional logics of intimacy come in multiple forms: abstinence, loving sex and hookup sex, each characterized by its specific doings, feelings, and sayings. Our analyses further suggest that the logics of intimate practice have their own internal order, or grammar, which is only weakly conditioned by persons’ class or gender positions in the social structure. Although the perduring logics of intimacy are largely autonomous from persons’ positions in the field, the effects we do find largely echo Armstrong and Hamilton’s account of college life as a class project of young privileged women whose social networks formed through the Greek party scene (Armstrong and Hamilton in Paying for the Party. How College Maintains Inequality, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2013). Constellations of meaningful practice, not distributions of capitals among persons, overwhelmingly organize the pathways of practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: From modernity''s onset, social theorists have been announcing the death of meaning, at the hands of market forces, impersonal power, scientific expertise, and the pervasive forces of rationalization and industrialization. Yet, cultural structures and processes have proved surprisingly resilient. Relatively autonomous patterns of meaning - sweeping narratives and dividing codes, redolent if elusive symbols, fervent demands for purity and cringing fears of pollution - continue to exert extraordinary effects on action and institutions. They affect structures of inequality, racism and marginality, gender and sexuality, crime and punishment, social movements, market success and citizen incorporation. New and old new media project continuous symbolic reconstructions of private and public life. As contemporary sociology registered the continuing robustness of cultural power, the new discipline of cultural sociology was born. How should these complex cultural processes be conceptualized? What are the best empirical ways to study social meaning? Even as debates rage around these field-specific theoretical and methodological questions, a broadly cultural sensibility has spread into every arena of sociological study, illuminating how struggles over meaning affect the most disparate processes of contemporary social life.Bringing together the best of these studies and debates, the American Journal of Cultural Sociology (AJCS) publicly crystallizes the cultural turn in contemporary sociology. By providing a common forum for the many voices engaged in meaning-centered social inquiry, the AJCS will facilitate communication, sharpen contrasts, sustain clarity, and allow for periodic condensation and synthesis of different perspectives. The journal aims to provide a single space where cultural sociologists can follow the latest developments and debates within the field. The American Journal of Cultural Sociology is indexed by SCOPUS, a database listing journals and country scientific indicators and rankings, and is also indexed in Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science Core Collection, in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). SSCI provides searchable author abstracts for the leading journals in 55 social science disciplines, with a comprehensive backfile of cited reference data from 1900 to the present. AJCS’s inclusion in the SSCI provides greater discoverability for the journal and allows for real-time insight into the citation performance.We welcome high quality submissions of any length and focus: contemporary and historical studies, macro and micro, institutional and symbolic, ethnographic and statistical, philosophical and methodological. Contemporary cultural sociology has developed from European and American roots, and today is an international field. The AJCS will publish rigorous, meaning-centered sociology whatever its origins and focus, and will distribute it around the world.
期刊最新文献
Theory of society and cultural sociology. Niklas Luhmann and after From heroism to victimhood: Sèvres narrative and trauma of victimization in Turkey Higher education and the transition to adulthood: socioeconomic inequality in college students’ self-narratives Why do states discriminate between refugee groups? Understanding how Syrian and Ukrainian refugees were framed in Germany and Poland Orientalism reimagined: a semantic network analysis of slum tour reviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1