Search

The increasing visibility of sexualities beyond heterosexual, gay/lesbian, and bisexual is often associated with progressive politics and the questioning of heteronormativity. Yet non‐majoritarian sexualities can also include self‐identifications premised upon an opposition to LGBTQ+ equality and inclusion, including those who identify as "ex‐gay." Drawing on fieldwork with evangelical Christian activists in London, UK, this paper uses a court case in which the "legality" of ex‐gay sexuality was contested to discuss the law's simultaneous desire and inability to render contested identities legally legible. In seeking recognition as a sexual minority, self‐described ex‐gay evangelicals reveal the inadequacy of modern law's efforts to regulate difference as either "innate" or "chosen," thus upsetting the terms of the hetero‐secular legal gaze even as they embrace heterosexual supremacy. As such, this activism, which is typically analyzed in terms of evangelicalism's commitment to heteronormativity, works to denaturalize the concept of sexual orientation(s)—including, I argue, the heterosexuality ex‐gay Christians pursue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many ways the school music curriculum has become increasingly diverse since the 1970s. For example, 'pop' and 'world' musics have been listed in UK curricula and syllabuses with an aim of becoming more inclusive. However, this article argues that such approaches to curriculum as content have confounded social justice in school music, and in particular when perpetuating a prejudicial discourse. To understand this discourse, three 'distortions' of the material nature of musical knowledge are explored as potential sources of ongoing student alienation from school music: reification, hegemonic appropriation and the loss of meaning. These distortions are also exemplified through a case study critique of social realism and the UK government's Model Music Curriculum. By way of conclusion, and as a possible resolution to the distortions, some characteristics of a curriculum as process are proposed that have implications for decolonisation and wider issues of social justice, such as class and gender. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The English National Health Service (NHS) has suffered from a democratic deficit since its inception. Democratic accountability was to be through ministers to Parliament, but ministerial control over and responsibility for the NHS were regarded as myths. Reorganizations and management and market reforms, in the neoliberal era, have centralized power within the NHS. However, successive governments have sought to reduce their responsibility for health care through institutional depoliticization, to shift blame, facilitated through legal changes. New Labour’s creation of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Monitor were somewhat successful in reducing ministerial culpability regarding health technology regulation and foundation trusts, respectively. The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition created NHS England to reduce ministerial culpability for health care more generally. This is pertinent as the NHS is currently being undermined by inadequate funding and privatization. However, the public has not shifted from blaming the government to blaming NHS England. This indicates limits to the capacity of law to legitimize changes to social relations. While market reforms were justified on the basis of empowering patients, I argue that addressing the democratic deficit is a preferable means of achieving this goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the method implemented under the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA) to assess nature. The synthesis of this project was published in June, 2011. Our paper analyzes this approach by highlighting the reification process of Man-Nature relationships which it operates. These relationships, which are intrinsically subjective, are objectified through the stages of categorization, inscription and quantification. From this analysis, there emerges that beside the debates about nature evaluation, the UK NEA results should be interpreted with hindsight, because they offer a very restricted view of nature and the well-being of humans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the work of ministerial special advisers who play a key but under-researched role in transmitting policy ideas in government. We argue that this focus is necessary to challenge the reification of neoliberalism as an explanatory determinant of policy making. Initially we discuss the literature on the transmission of social science ideas into policy making, contrasting this with a governmentality approach. We then consider the role of UK special advisers, illustrating this empirically by drawing on advisers' reflections of their role. We conclude by highlighting ambiguity, inconsistency and agency in the take-up and deployment of ideas in policy making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]