Het homohuwelijk na invoering:voor- en tegenstanders

Gay marriage after its introduction: supporters and objectors Sixty-five percent of the Dutch population disagrees largely or completely with the statement that gay marriage should be abolished, whereas sixteen percent agrees to it. In this article, we show which characteristics increase the likelihood to reject gay marriage. With information on family of origin, we show that the perception of mother’s attitude towards homosexuality during one’s youth strongly affects rejecting gay marriage. But the strongest determinant comes from socialization by ways of religious institutions. Here, attending religious services is more important than the distinction between various denominations. A lower education enhances particularly the chance to be neutral regarding abolishing gay marriage, whereas field of education has no effect. Moreover, we show that men and non-western immigrants have a larger likelihood to reject gay marriage

‘Horrors of Holland’:Explaining attitude change toward euthanasia and homosexuals in The Netherlands, 1971-1998

In this article, we investigate changes in public opinion in the Netherlands toward two controversial issues: homosexuals and euthanasia. We find that a rapid decrease in opposition to both issues in the seventies and early eighties was followed by a period of a stable minority opposition. We identify relevant period and cohort indicators to test which characteristics are associated with the changes in the attitudes. We collected period and cohort characteristics that are applicable to both of the attitudes, but specific attitude-related circumstantial conditions as well. For both attitudes, it turns out that the changing composition of Dutch society with regard to religiousness accounts for the largest changes in public opinion. Furthermore, we find that the influence of religion on both the attitude towards euthanasia and the attitude towards homosexuals became stronger over time, whereas the influence of educational attainment weakened over time

Social Capital and Its Returns as an Explanation for Early Labor Market Success of Majority and Minority Members in the Netherlands

This paper tests whether social capital can explain differences in labor market success between ethnic majority and minority members. To overcome problems of reverse causality—labor market success is not only the result of social capital, but also leads to better networks—the focus is on adolescents who enter the labor market. Data from the ‘Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Survey’ are used (N = 2574) and matched to register data from Statistics Netherlands. Hypotheses are tested with structural equation models and a longitudinal approach. Two different mechanisms are tested: the capital deficit and the return deficit. Ethnic majority and minority members do not differ in social capital, thus refuting the capital deficit hypothesis. However, for majority members, the upper reachability of their social capital negatively affects chances of unemployment and positively affects chances of having a permanent contract. For minority members, no such effects were observed, indicating that the same level of social capital that benefits majorities, does not benefit minorities. More research into the return deficit minority members face is needed

Avoidance in action: Negative tie closure in balanced triads among pupils over time

We study avoidance tie closure in balance triads among pupils in two Dutch secondary schools using stochastic actor-oriented models (SAOMs). We find that pupils were likely to avoid the friends of those they avoided but not enough evidence is found to either fully accept or refute the idea that pupils disagree with their friends on whom to avoid. Moreover, pupils’ migration background does not seem to influence avoidance tie closure in balanced triads. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical implications. Based on our findings, we elaborate on the possibility of a singular balance promoting effect rather than multiple distinct ones. Limitations are pointed out and future research suggestions are offered

Money, Childbearing, Gender: Explaining within-Couple Inequality after Parenthood

Using population register data for the Netherlands, we analyze the child penalty for new parents in three groups of couples: different-sex and lesbian couples with a biological child and different-sex couples with an adopted child. With a longitudinal design, we follow parents’ earnings from 2 years before to 8 years after the arrival of the child and use event study models to estimate the effects of the transition to parenthood on earnings trajectories. Comparing different groups of couples allows to test hypotheses related to three types of difference that are early impossible to disentangle when studying only heterosexual biological parents: relative earnings, childbearing and gender. Our results offer strong support for gender as the main driver of diver-gent child penalties: for mothers, the gender of their partners is more consequential for their earnings trajectories than going through pregnancy or being a secondary earner before parenthood

Money, Birth, Gender: Explaining Unequal Earnings Trajectories following Parenthood

Using population register data from the Netherlands, we analyze the child penalty for new parents in three groups of couples: different-sex and female same-sex couples with a biological child and different-sex couples with an adopted child. With a longitudinal design, we follow parents’ earnings from two years before to eight years after the arrival of the child and use event study models to estimate the effects of the transition to parenthood on earnings trajectories. Comparing different groups of couples allows us to test hypotheses related to three types of within-couple differences that are difficult to disentangle when studying only heterosexual biological parents: relative earnings, childbearing, and gender. Our results offer strong support for gender as the main driver of divergent child penalties. The gender of their partners is more consequential for mothers’ earnings trajectories than is childbearing or the pre-parenthood relative earnings in the couple