In the last decade, remittances have become connected to financialization, expanding financial markets and deepening financial logics in what has been termed the financialization of remittances (FOR). In Nepal, where remittances are of key importance, this manifests itself in the country's development strategy through attempts to formalize remittances and promote financial inclusion, entrepreneurship, and financial infrastructure. This article focuses on the most salient manifestation of the FOR in Nepal: a large-scale financial literacy education (FLE) campaign for transnational families. To examine how this FOR-FLE complex works, we bring together insights on emotional governance with those on the creation of (gendered) financial subjectivities. Based on an analysis of FLE pedagogical material and interviews with FLE experts, we suggest that the FOR-FLE complex in Nepal mobilizes a pedagogy of fear and hope to discipline the financial behavior of transnational families, transforming them into self-governing miniature financial corporations. We also highlight the gender dimensions of this emotional regime, which creates terror and works to patronize, shame, and stigmatize nonmigrant women of transnational families, rendering them responsible for development, decreasing out-migration, and reducing the economy's import dependency.

While "no means no" considers sex as consensual until someone says no, "yes means yes" defines sex only then as consensual when all parties have explicitly agreed. Consent is thus positively determined by the presence of a yes and no longer negatively determined by the absence of a no. "Yes means yes" thus not only sets the limit as to when sex becomes sexual violence, it also tells us how morally "correct" sex should look like. In the first part I will give an insight into debates about affirmative consent in the US and Germany. In the following, I will work out how affirmative consent misjudges the subjectifying functioning of sexual power relations. I will show that the understanding of affirmative consent is based on a gendered giver-receiver grammar of consent, which stabilizes heteronormative notions of female sexuality as passive and male sexuality as active. Based on the results of conversational analytical studies on sexual communication, I will argue that the politics of affirmative consent underestimates the internalization of heteronormative discourses in sexual subjects.

Secure settings are not queer because lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, Two Spirit, and asexual (LGBTQ+) people populate them, and neither are LGBTQ+ people inherently criminal because they are found in those spaces. Queer people bear disproportionate health, mental health, and social inequities that have had, historically and currently, the effect to criminalize them. This review discusses effective language and ideologies when working with LGBTQ+ people in secure settings. Major health, mental health, and social inequities are reviewed, along with the applied framework of minority stress. Then, the process of criminalization is diagrammed across the phases of predetainment, being in the system, and through re-entering the community. Finally, multilevel strategies are offered to decriminalize LGBTQ+ people ideologically and in practice.

This article takes as its starting point the so-called ‘sex scandals’ surrounding Italy’s former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi during the last years of his premiership (2009–2011), which have filled Italian newspaper columns and legal case files. Political discourses and media interpretations of women’s freedom at the time represented genders through the eroticisation of power. The deployment of postfeminist and stereotyped representations of gender relations produced a complex and ambivalent frame for female sexuality and agency which reproduced the hegemonic neoliberal rhetoric that locates freedom and emancipation in the market. This narrative was further inflected by class and race, as it was deployed through the opposed images of white, Italian, respectable, caring women, and cynical young women and migrants using their bodies as a resource in a sexual-economic exchange with men occupying positions of power. Through feminist reflections on work I frame and discuss the use of the notions of choice and freedom in these discourses. Shifting the focus from women’s behaviour to the analysis of a peculiar image of masculinity displayed by the then premier, the article highlights how racism, colonial legacies and homophobia are enmeshed in this historically and culturally based gender imagery.

Studies on older lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) adults in residential care point to their discrimination, invisibility and the taboo on LGBT lifestyles, and call for development of ‘gay-friendly’ care. Yet, the literature is short on how to create inclusive residential care for older LGBT people. We aim to acquire in-depth understanding of experiences and needs of LGBT older people concerning their inclusion and participation in care settings to contribute to development of inclusive and responsive care that structurally enhances visibility, ‘voice’ and wellbeing of LGBT residents. Responsive, multi-stakeholder research using interviews, participant observations and focus groups was conducted within three elderly care homes in the Netherlands. Thematic, interpretative analysis was performed. LGBT respondents reported social exclusion and the need to feel safe and at home and be yourself. Exclusive activities for LGBT people foster personal and relational empowerment. However, heterogenous activities seem crucial in dealing with stereotypical imaging, heteronormativity and an equality-as-sameness discourse that influenced culture and daily practice in the homes and negatively affected the position of LGBT older adults. For development of gay-friendly elderly care exclusionary social norms need to be addressed. Dialogical sharing of narratives can help to empower LGBT older adults and stimulate understanding and shared responsibility between LGBT and heterosexual older people, as well as professionals.

This article will explore data obtained through interviews with UK family law practitioners and clients with experience of financial relief on formalised same-sex relationship breakdown. It will focus on questions around how solicitors have approached and argued their dissolution cases (and the extent to which they have drawn upon heteronormative arguments and case law), and whether both they and the clients believed that civil partnerships are, and should be, treated similarly to marriages. The discussion will examine the different understandings of ‘equality’ employed, and question the ways that the participants relied on ideas of sameness and difference. It will be argued that the solicitors placed particular stress on sameness, and that heteronormative constructs of gendered inequalities have been transplanted into same-sex cases, in a system where practitioners’ submissions are based on ‘what works.’ This is despite the fact that lesbian and gay couples do not map onto the ‘template’ under which the parties have been subjected to different gendered expectations. Conversely, the clients were less willing to take on the full legal implications associated with (heterosexual) marital breakdown and less receptive of the solicitors ‘translating’ their matters to pigeonhole them into the existing framework.

Sexuality and intimacy in care homes for older people are overshadowed by concern with prolonging physical and/or psychological autonomy. When sexuality and intimacy have been addressed in scholarship, this can reflect a sexological focus concerned with how to continue sexual activity with reduced capacity. We review the (Anglophone) academic and practitioner literatures bearing on sexuality and intimacy in relation to older care home residents (though much of this applies to older people generally). We highlight how ageism (or ageist erotophobia), which defines older people as post-sexual, restricts opportunities for the expression of sexuality and intimacy. In doing so, we draw attention to more critical writing that recognises constraints on sexuality and intimacy and indicates solutions to some of the problems identified. We also highlight problems faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGB&T) residents who are doubly excluded from sexual/intimate citizenship because of ageism combined with the heterosexual assumption. Older LGB&T residents/individuals can feel obliged to deny or disguise their identity. We conclude by outlining an agenda for research based on more sociologically informed practitioner-led work.

Queer theory is a relatively new theoretical approach in organizational discourse that we think can uncover power relations and normative and hierarchical processes in diversity management discourse. ‘Heteronormativity’ and ‘performativity’, core concepts of queer theory, critique categorization and fixed identities and thereby problematize and broaden perspectives on current diversity management discourse, especially those associated with organizational constructions of diversity dimensions. In this article, we focus on the discursive and intersectional construction of subject positions and identities within organizations by drawing upon a queer theoretical framework to analyze three companies' codes of conduct that claim to create an inclusive work environment. The deconstructive analysis of these discursive artifacts emphasizes the intersectional power dynamics of and between the categories of sex, gender and sexuality, and can be taken as a point of departure for questioning the heteronormative arrangements of diversity management practices.

In this article we discuss the recent history of the failed draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure, situating this within the broader context of the ordination of women and debates around the Equality Act exceptions for an organised religion. We aim to provide an account of the ways in which equality rights have been implemented in the relevant law; how the Church of England is responding to these rights; and how broader society understands the importance of gender equality and reacts to Synod's rejection of the draft Measure. We analyse these with reference to theories of heteronormativity and scholarship of human rights. In doing so, we aim to explain what is happening in the Church of England and broader society, and draw some conclusions about the current opportunities open to the Church and the state in matters of rights and equality.1