title: Afterword—Geographies of Sexuality and Gender ‘Down Under’

authors: Longhurst, Robyn

abstract: The specialist sessions on ‘Geographies of Sexuality and Gender ‘‘Down Under’’’at the Australian Geographers’ conference in Melbourne in July 2007, and the subsequent publication of the essays presented here, is long overdue. The editors, in their introduction, explain that the aims of the sessions and this subsequent themed issue are (1) to showcase specifically Australasian-based research on spaces, places and scales of sexuality and gender; and (2) to offer Australasian perspectives on disciplinary debates about sexuality and gender. Undoubtedly these aims have been fulfilled. These essays have been written by scholars in a range of disciplines. Some are emerging scholars, others more senior. It is an eclectic collection containing essays on topics as diverse as young men who surf, and women who ‘come out’ as lesbian only to then ‘come out’ again as heterosexual, and yet key questions about identity, difference, gender, and sexuality underpin all the contributions, which give it a useful cohesion. When I first saw the call for papers for the specialist sessions at the Melbourne conference I was keen to take part. Over the past 15 years or so I have attended a number of New Zealand and Australian geography conference sessions on gender but I cannot recall attending sessions specifically on sexuality, or even on sexuality and gender. The conference in Melbourne, therefore, was a great opportunity but unfortunately it was one I missed (although I co-authored a paper with Lynda Johnston). The blow of this missing out, however, was lessened by an invitation to write the ‘Afterword’ for this collection. I really enjoyed reading the essays. They represent the burgeoning and exciting work on gay, lesbian, queer, feminist and gender geographies currently being carried out by scholars working in and on New Zealand and Australia. Undoubtedly they make a very significant empirical, theoretical and political contribution to the discipline. In the paragraphs that follow I address each of these contributions in turn.

text: Afterword—Geographies of Sexuality and Gender ‘Down Under’ The specialist sessions on ‘Geographies of Sexuality and Gender ‘‘Down Under’’’at the Australian Geographers’ conference in Melbourne in July 2007, and the subsequent publication of the essays presented here, is long overdue. The editors, in their introduction, explain that the aims of the sessions and this subsequent themed issue are (1) to showcase specifically Australasian-based research on spaces, places and scales of sexuality and gender; and (2) to offer Australasian perspectives on disciplinary debates about sexuality and gender. Undoubtedly these aims have been fulfilled. These essays have been written by scholars in a range of disciplines. Some are emerging scholars, others more senior. It is an eclectic collection containing essays on topics as diverse as young men who surf, and women who ‘come out’ as lesbian only to then ‘come out’ again as heterosexual, and yet key questions about identity, difference, gender, and sexuality underpin all the contributions, which give it a useful cohesion. When I first saw the call for papers for the specialist sessions at the Melbourne conference I was keen to take part. Over the past 15 years or so I have attended a number of New Zealand and Australian geography conference sessions on gender but I cannot recall attending sessions specifically on sexuality, or even on sexuality and gender. The conference in Melbourne, therefore, was a great opportunity but unfortunately it was one I missed (although I co-authored a paper with Lynda Johnston). The blow of this missing out, however, was lessened by an invitation to write the ‘Afterword’ for this collection. I really enjoyed reading the essays. They represent the burgeoning and exciting work on gay, lesbian, queer, feminist and gender geographies currently being carried out by scholars working in and on New Zealand and Australia. Undoubtedly they make a very significant empirical, theoretical and political contribution to the discipline. In the paragraphs that follow I address each of these contributions in turn.

year: 2008

title: Does relational mobility vary across national regions? A within-country examination

authors: Milfont, Taciano L.

subjects: Science & Technology

abstract: Relational mobility is a socio-ecological construct quantifying how much freedom and opportunity a society affords individuals to choose and dispose of interpersonal relationships. Past research has confirmed that relational mobility varies across nations, but no large-scale study has examined the degree to which relational mobility may vary within a single nation. We report two studies (Study 1, N = 647; Study 2, N = 7343) exploring within-country similarity or variability in relational mobility across all 27 states and five geo-socio-political regions in the continent-size country of Brazil. Results confirmed the measurement equivalence of the Relational Mobility Scale across respondents from all Brazilian states. Notably, relational mobility scores were uniform across Brazilian regions and states, indicating a common national culture regarding the amount of opportunities Brazilians have in selecting new relationship partners within their social context. Replicating existing findings, relational mobility was positively associated with pro-active tendencies that help people retain relationships—levels of intimacy and self-disclosure toward a close friend—indicating that friends tend to feel closer intimacy to their close friends, and reveal serious personal information to a larger degree in social contexts where opportunities to find and retain relationships with like-minded others are greater.

text: Does relational mobility vary across national regions? A within-country examination Relational mobility is a socio-ecological construct quantifying how much freedom and opportunity a society affords individuals to choose and dispose of interpersonal relationships. Past research has confirmed that relational mobility varies across nations, but no large-scale study has examined the degree to which relational mobility may vary within a single nation. We report two studies (Study 1, N = 647; Study 2, N = 7343) exploring within-country similarity or variability in relational mobility across all 27 states and five geo-socio-political regions in the continent-size country of Brazil. Results confirmed the measurement equivalence of the Relational Mobility Scale across respondents from all Brazilian states. Notably, relational mobility scores were uniform across Brazilian regions and states, indicating a common national culture regarding the amount of opportunities Brazilians have in selecting new relationship partners within their social context. Replicating existing findings, relational mobility was positively associated with pro-active tendencies that help people retain relationships—levels of intimacy and self-disclosure toward a close friend—indicating that friends tend to feel closer intimacy to their close friends, and reveal serious personal information to a larger degree in social contexts where opportunities to find and retain relationships with like-minded others are greater.

year: 2020

title: Māori language resources and Māori initiatives for teaching and learning te reo Māori

authors: Greensill, Hineitimoana

abstract: As the most southerly member of the Polynesian languages, a sub-group of the widespread Austronesian language family (Harlow, 2007), te reo Māori has been the subject of substantial analysis, documentation, and analyses of its structure since first contact with Captain Cook in 1769 (Whaanga & Greensill, 2014). The history, trials and tribulations of te reo Māori in Aotearoa have been well documented (see, for example, Reedy, 2000; Spolsky, 2005; Waitangi Tribunal, 1986, 2011). The various reasons for the language’s decline has been an area of ongoing debate and critique by academics, researchers, linguists, language activists, parliamentarians and Māori in recent times (see, for example, Bauer, 2008; Benton, 2015; Higgins, Rewi, & Olsen-Reeder, 2014; Rata, 2007; Winitana, 2011).

text: Māori language resources and Māori initiatives for teaching and learning te reo Māori As the most southerly member of the Polynesian languages, a sub-group of the widespread Austronesian language family (Harlow, 2007), te reo Māori has been the subject of substantial analysis, documentation, and analyses of its structure since first contact with Captain Cook in 1769 (Whaanga & Greensill, 2014). The history, trials and tribulations of te reo Māori in Aotearoa have been well documented (see, for example, Reedy, 2000; Spolsky, 2005; Waitangi Tribunal, 1986, 2011). The various reasons for the language’s decline has been an area of ongoing debate and critique by academics, researchers, linguists, language activists, parliamentarians and Māori in recent times (see, for example, Bauer, 2008; Benton, 2015; Higgins, Rewi, & Olsen-Reeder, 2014; Rata, 2007; Winitana, 2011).

year: 2017