Peripheral Inclusion Through Informal Silencing and Voice — A Study of LGB Officers in the Swedish Police

Abstract

Seen through the growth of progressive diversity policies it may appear that contemporary organizations are sites of equality. But although inclusion is the formally stated aim of many organizations, exclusionary pressures toward LGBT workers still challenge sexual minorities' access to full inclusion. A central concern in this paper is exploring how to understand inclusion in organizational contexts where inclusion is formally advocated, and yet where both inclusionary and exclusionary pressures exist. Drawing on an interview study of Swedish gay and lesbian police officers we present the concept ‘peripheral inclusion' as a way to understand inclusion in contemporary organizational life. In addition, we theorize that the dynamics between silencing and voice is a key mode that impacts the informal ways in which exclusion and inclusion occur. We thereby contribute to previous research on inclusion that has focused on the degree to which minorities are included by conceptualizing the mode in which inclusion occurs in everyday work. Studying modes and degrees of inclusion and exclusion in relation to each other highlights how inclusion is a collective and fragile process in which inclusionary and exclusionary pressures coexist, and that questions of who and what is included in contemporary organizations are shifting and open questions.

Age, sexuality and hegemonic masculinity: Exploring older gay men’s masculinity practices at work

“…Deploying Connell’s (1995) concept of practice as body‐reflexive social action, our research demonstrates how older gay men practice masculinities by utilizing their bodies as a site for reproducing heteronormativity, as well as negotiating heteronormativity to argue for change. Prior research shows that social expectations surrounding masculinity can generate multiple disadvantages that hamper LGBT workers’ careers (e.g., Drydakis, 2015; Stenger & Roulet, 2018), and burden their workplace social relations (e.g., Hoel et al, 2014; Rumens & Kerfoot, 2009), continually marking them as the unsuitable other (e.g., Benozzo et al, 2015; Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018). Yet, this literature neglects the imbrications of masculinity and embodiment, as if ageing or other social processes involving the body have no significant bearing on masculinity.…”

“…From one perspective, organizations are increasingly developing LGBT‐friendly initiatives such as supportive workplace policies to address the needs of LGBT workers (Cook & Glass, 2016). From another perspective, research reveals that heteronormativity persists and has a negative impact on LGBT workers (Benozzo, Pizzorno, Bell, & Koro‐Ljungberg, 2015; Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018). In recruitment, lesbian and gay job applicants can receive fewer interview invites, lower pay deals and exclusion remains particularly strong in male‐dominated occupations that require competencies associated with hegemonic masculinity (Drydakis, 2015).…”

‘There’s nowhere wonky left to go’: Gentrification, queerness and class politics of inclusion in (East) London

“…The findings complement and extend extant discussions on the exclusionary pressures which accompany inclusion. On the one hand, they complement these by showing that inclusion is indeed often ‘peripheral’ (Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018) and/or entails the silencing and suppression of forms of difference that cannot be included according to the norms governing recognition (Steidl & Brookshire, 2018). On the other hand, the study extends these by showing how these norms are organized according to classed logics.…”

“…Whilst inclusion is often sold as a benevolent and progressive project, critical scholars argue that it can work to conceal power relations and exclude 'undesirable' Others (David, 2016;Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018;Tyler, 2019). Most simply focus on who/what is excluded and 'silenced' from this discourse (e.g., Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018), but others, and in particular those working from a queer perspective, have questioned the terms upon which 'diversity' is recognized (Bendl, Fleischmann, & Walenta, 2008;Brewis, 2018;Tyler, 2019). In so doing, they have challenged the very notion that 'inclusion' is 'good' and traced the manifold ways in which becoming included can work to 'normalize' differences in pursuit of organizational interests.…”

The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations

“…At the same time, the more organizational inclusion research is establishing itself as a coherent and acknowledged field of study, the more critical engagement with this inclusion turn is arising. Scholars question its ontological assumptions (Janssens & Steyaert, 2020) as well as arguing that forms of unconditional inclusion are irreconcilable with/not livable in contemporary capitalist work organizations (e.g., Ahmed, 2012;Brewis, 2019;Burchiellaro, 2020;Priola, Lasio, Serri, & De Simone, 2018;Rennstam & Sullivan, 2018;Tyler, 2019).…”