Almost nothing is known about "unwanted sexual attention" and women's navigation of it when in bars and nightclubs. Using focus group discussions this article addresses that gap. It develops knowledge of the behaviors that constitute unwanted, the safety strategies used to manage them and examines how these practices underpin gender performance in night-time spaces: environments renowned for the dilemmas they pose to women. We then use these data to develop the concept "feisty femininity" to highlight a neglected form of femininity that overtly resists unwanted encounters. This femininity can arguably play a role in efforts aimed at ending gendered violence.

The aim of this paper is to critically engage with the idea that Therapeutic Communities (TCs) can be promoted in England and Wales as a radical alternative to prison for substance users who have broken the law. After grounding the discussion within the normative framework of an 'abolitionist real utopia' (Scott 2013), the article explores the historical and theoretical underpinnings of TCs. Existing literature advocating TCs as a radical alternative both before and instead of prison is then reviewed, followed by a critical reflection of the TCs compatibility with the broader values and principles of an abolitionist real utopia. To conclude, the article suggests that, although TCs could be a plausible and historically immanent non-penal real utopia for certain people in certain circumstances, we must not lose focus of wider social inequalities.

Since former Chancellor George Osborne described reducing public spending as ‘the great national challenge of our generation’ (Her Majesty’s Treasury, 2010: 12) the UK Government have demonstrated a profound interest in Payment by Results (PbR) as a mechanism to improve service quality, value for money and innovation (Audit Commission, 2012). Although PbR is not a new initiative, it has been rebranded and sold as a vehicle that can steer ongoing strategies for reform, particularly in the field of criminal justice and drug/alcohol treatment (Her Majesty’s Government, 2010; Ministry of Justice 2013). Despite such assertions, the initiative has become synonymous with budget cuts (Community Links, 2015), the privatisation of public services (Policy Exchange, 2013) and controversy. Drawing upon the findings of a focus group with staff who work in a Therapeutic Community, this article highlights the lived experience of practitioners as PbR takes hold of the alcohol and drug treatment sector. The findings suggest that outcome-orientated incentives, such as PbR, hold the potential to transform welfare-orientated sectors into a financial, market-focused milieu.

Gosling, HJ Recovery Capital. A framework for the contemporary Therapeutic Community? http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/9356/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively.Abstract PURPOSE: This paper will critically assess the extent to which recovery capital can provide a theoretical and practical way in which to explore, explain and communicate TC processes and practices 1 . METHOD:A 31-month ethnographic study of one situated residential TC in England. FINDINGS:The findings are usefully thought out as parallels, process and progress. Parallels can be drawn between the recovery capital literature and longstanding TC principles and prescriptions. The term process is significant as it illustrates how concepts proposed by the recovery capital literature can be employed, alongside traditional TC ideals, to create a practice-focused framework that is able to open up day-to-day processes and communicate (within and beyond the TC movement) how and why TCs provide an environment that is conducive to recovery. The ethos and application of the term progress illustrates the fundamental premise of this paper. Recovery capital provides a more contemporary way in which to understand and communicate the work that takes place in a TC. IMPLICATIONS:Synthesising the concepts proposed by both the TC and recovery capital literature provides a contemporary, practice-focused framework for the TC. Thus, reenforcing the modalities place within an increasingly competitive field.

Gosling, HJ Payment by Results. Challenges and Contradictions for the Therapeutic Communityhttp://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/3120/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LJMU Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain.The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of the record. Please see the repository URL above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription.For more information please contact researchonline@ljmu.ac.uk http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/ Citation (please note it is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work) Gosling KeywordsPayment by results, therapeutic community, recovery, outcome-based funding. A change in the tideThe 2010 Drug Strategy Reducing demand, Restricting supply, Building recovery: Supporting people to live a drug free life outlined the Coalition Government's approach to tackling substance use in the United Kingdom (Her Majesty's Government, 2010). The Strategy called for more responsibility to be put on the individual, placed more power and accountability into the hands of local communities and advocated a whole person approach to substance use in which an individual's level of recovery capital is recognised as one of the best predictors of sustained recovery 1 . To achieve the aims and objectives of the Strategy, the Government outlined plans to reform the way in which programmes that cater for substance users were paid for their services. Although not an entirely new initiative, the Government made clear their interest in an outcome-based payment scheme, known as Payment by Results, colloquially referred to as PbR. 2PbR was first introduced to the United Kingdom in 2000 by the Labour Government's National Health Service (NHS) plan, which set out to link the allocation of funds to the activities that hospitals undertook. This marked a departure from previous funding arrangements in which hospitals were paid according to block contracts, which involves a fixed payment for a broadly specified service (Battye and Sunderland, 2011). Generally speaking, PbR was designed to pay providers on the basis of the outcomes that they achieved rather than the activities undertaken.The fundamental aim of PbR was to improve service quality by offering bonuses to service providers for performance improvement or withholding payments for poor performance, population engaged with services in the local area, the maturity of the local system of support and the different speeds at which each area was expected to achieve full implementation (Departmen...