Definitions, discourses and dilemmas: policy and academic engagement with the sexualisation of popular culture

Abstract

While debates around sexualisation are underway in academic, policy, practitioner and popular contexts, there are tensions as well as connections across and within these arenas. This article traces the origins of policymakers' engagement with sexualisation and reflects on the conclusions from the recent reviews commissioned by the current and former Westminster governments, including links with strategic responses to violence against women and girls (VAWG). Within academia, themes of agency, participation and pleasures in sexualised culture(s) are, arguably, more dominant. Here, we explore these differing engagements with the issue of sexualisation. We draw on the practice-based evidence of women's organisations, and suggest this constitutes an ‘epistemic community’ [Haas, P.M. 1992. Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy co-ordination. International Organization 46, no. 1: 1–35; cited in Walby, S. 2011a. The future of feminism. Cambridge: Polity Press], a vantage point from where sexualisation is primarily viewed as a ‘conducive context’ [Kelly, L. 2007. A conducive context: Trafficking of persons in central Asia. In Human trafficking, ed. M. Lee, 73–91. Cullompton: Willan Publishing] for VAWG.

Keywords:

• sexualisation
• violence against women and girls
• gender
• agency
• masculinity

Notes

Much prevalence research excludes girls, since sampling parameters often begin at 16.

E.g. Rape Crisis Centres, women's refuges, and organisations working on trafficking and sexual exploitation, FGM and honour based violence and second tier lobbying/campaigning orgs such as the EVAW.

The final document acknowledged that the academic debate about what constitutes sexualisation was indeed beyond its scope (Papadopoulos 2010), revealing a tension between theoretically informed academic research and the more pragmatic approach of policy-making.

Founding members include: Lovewise (who focus on sex from a Christian perspective); Evaluate (who aim to delay sexual experience until a long-term committed exclusive relationship’); Challenge team UK (aim to encourage people to save sex for marriage); LIFE; Silver Ring Thing (who promote abstinence); Right to Life; Family Education Trust (advocating a ‘clear moral framework that shows a proper respect for parents and for marriage’). See http://www.lifecharity.org.uk/srecouncillaunchmay2011 (accessed June 15, 2011).