Sexuality and organizational analysis—30 years on: Editorial introduction

Abstract

Sexuality is nothing if not complicated-but that is no excuse for ignoring it. (Burrell, 1984: 113) Gibson Burrell's 'Sex and organizational analysis', published in Organization Studies in 1984, represented an extremely important contribution to the development of critical management and organization studies. It was based on the application of insights from various disciplinary fields such as sociology, philosophy and social history to the study of sexuality in work organizations. Thirty years on, while sexuality remains a relatively marginal topic in mainstream organization studies, a substantial body of ideas has emerged in more critical quarters representing a flourishing dialogue that, in the spirit of Burrell's earlier contribution, has stretched across disciplinary boundaries. In recent years, this sub-field has been inspired and influenced particularly by the impact of feminist theory and post-structuralism, as well as insights from queer theory and post-colonialism.Alongside these important theoretical developments, lived experiences of sexuality within organizations have changed considerably during the last three decades. As consumers and workers our lives are shaped by the ubiquity of organizations and by the centrality of sexuality to our lives; 'we live, in short, in a sexualized world ' (Hawkes, 2002: 1). With the economies of most contemporary market societies being supported by thriving sex industries and sexualized modes of commercial exchange, sexuality has arguably never been so controlled, commodified and commercialized. An ever-expanding range of goods and services are provided and consumed

Prefigurative Partaking: Employees’ Environmental Activism in an Energy Utility

“…Since the 1990s, authors have been increasingly interested in what has been called ‘micro-emancipation’ (Alvesson & Willmott, 1992), emphasizing ‘various forms of everyday emancipation which people mobilize to challenge managerial domination’ (Huault et al, 2014, p. 27). Authors have discussed a range of often informal resistance tactics occurring in the workplace, such as cynicism (Fleming & Spicer, 2003), humour (Collinson, 2002) and sexuality (Brewis, Tyler, & Mills, 2014). Given the ‘quiet’, piecemeal nature of these everyday political acts in the workplace, they have also been labelled ‘infra-politics’ (Böhm, Spicer, & Fleming, 2008; Scott, 2005).…”

Explaining sexual minorities’ disclosure: The role of trust embedded in organizational practices

“…Environmental elements that co-impact disclosure might undermine the role of trust in one’s superiors with respect to the disclosure decision: for example, antidiscrimination laws, inclusive organizational policies and practices, and the nature of one’s interaction with one’s colleagues (Courtney, 2014; Law et al, 2011; Ragins & Cornwell, 2001). As suggested by Brewis, Tyler and Mills (2014) in a review of the progress since Burrell’s (1984) cornerstone work on the desexualization of organizational life, protective legislation, changing social attitudes and other important developments at the political level have led to more gender diversity in organizations. For instance, Day and Greene (2008) have reported an increasing number of organizations that specifically protect LGBTQ as a group under their nondiscrimination policies or include domestic partners in their benefit programmes.…”

Writing as skin: Negotiating the body in(to) learning about the managed self

“…The vulnerability that skin suggests of the body is hidden through standardised workplace dress (Harding, 2002), its leakiness is seen as problematic (Shildrick, 2015), even dangerous (Linstead, 2000). The skin and its fallibility is disproportionately associated with women because of their social positioning as sexual objects (Kelan, 2013; Trethewey, 1999), or their reproductive functions (Brewis et al, 2014; Brewis and Sinclair, 2000; Sayers and Jones, 2015).…”