Gendered dichotomies and segregation patterns in computing jobs in Australia

Sex segregation in employment is a phenomenon that can be observed and analysed at different levels, ranging from comparisons between broad classifications by industry or occupation through to finely defined jobs within such classifications. From an aggregate perspective, the contribution of information technology (IT) employment to sex segregation is clear--it remains a highly male-dominated field apparently imbued with the ongoing masculinity of science and technology. While this situation is clearly contrary to hopes of a new industry freed from traditional distinctions between 'men's' and 'women's' work, it comes as little surprise to most feminist and labour studies analysts. An extensive literature documents the persistently masculine culture of IT employment and education (see, among many, Margolis and Fisher 2002; Wajcman 1991; Webster 1996; Wright 1996, 1997), and the idea that new occupations might escape sexism by sidestepping 'old traditions' has been effectively critiqued by writers such as Adam, who notes the fallacy of assuming a spontaneous emergence of equality in new settings (2005: 140).

Humanitarian responsibilities and interventionist claims in international society

This article calls for a widening of the debate about humanitarian intervention to incorporate insights from constructivism, 'Welsh School' Critical Security Studies, and critical approaches to Third World International Relations. After identifying a series of problems with the contemporary debate, which is dominated by the English School, it calls for a broadening of the concept of intervention and suggests a need to rethink the meaning of humanitarianism and terms such as the 'supreme humanitarian emergency'.

No more free beer tomorrow? Economic policy and outcomes in Australia and New Zealand since 1984

There are no controlled experiments in macroeconomic policy, nor in systematic programs of microeconomic reform, but a comparison between New Zealand and Australia over the period since 1984 provides as close an approach to such an experiment as is ever likely to be possible. From quite similar starting points the two countries pursued liberal reform programs that differed sharply, mainly as a result of exogenous differences in constitutional structures and the personal styles of the central actors. Australia followed a more cautious, piecemeal, consensus-based approach, whereas New Zealand, in contrast, adopted a radical, rapid, 'purist' platform. The NZ reform package was generally seen by contemporary commentators as representing a 'textbook' model for best practice reform. However, Australia since 1984 has performed much better than New Zealand, whose per capita GDP growth indeed ranked at or near the bottom of the OECD. In this paper, we assess a variety of explanations for the divergences in policies and outcomes.