Malin Wieslander

This article analyses reasons for not reporting sexual harassment within the Swedish police. The empirical data consisting of interviews, participant observation, testimonies from the police #MeToo call, and internal police investigations is analysed through tracing ‘disclaimers’, a form of discursive devices aligning actions to restore meaning. The article identifies 20 disclaimers that represent distinct reasons for not reporting sexual harassment perpetrated by colleagues and supervisors. These disclaimers shed light on police cultural norms and what we label as ‘male network acceptance’, that together with organisational factors influence the un/willingness to report experiences of sexual harassment. The findings show that sexual harassment is renegotiated when perpetrated by colleagues, and that both the harassed and bystanders doubt that reporting will lead to positive impacts. There is therefore a need to develop and implement alternative ways of handling sexual harassment that enable a shift from individual guilt, and re-frame sexual harassment as an issue of collegial concern.

This article argues that a perpetrator‐based definition of sexual harassment that highlights corrupt aspects of sexual harassment may contribute to a shift in focus from the experience of the harassed, to the actions of the harasser. This argument is based on an analysis of testimonies of sexual harassment from the #metoo call by the Swedish police in 2017, which reference abuse of power and quid pro quo elements. By introducing the recently developed analytical framework of ‘sexual corruption’, we show how a perpetrator‐based definition of sexual harassment may contribute to attributing responsibility to harassers. Identifying sexual harassment that includes the abuse of power and quid pro quo elements as corruption centers on the role of the abuse of power and, thus, the responsibility of the person abusing their position of power. Moreover, this shift bypasses discussions of whether or not the situation was experienced as ‘unwelcome’ by the harassed, the severity of the act, and questions of coercion and consent. Identifying instances of sexual harassment that include the abuse of power and quid pro quo elements as corruption also closes off attempts to portray it in terms of ‘jokes’ or banter, which is common in the police context. The article contributes with analytical tools that enable a shift from tracing the experience of the harassed to centering on the actions and responsibility of the harasser.

This article focuses on how the concept of “turning points” can be used in narrative research when studying people’s (professional) identities and identity formation. By examining various understandings of turning points, we aim to show how they can be identified and used as analytical tools in different ways when conducting narrative analyses of (professional) identity formation. A case study from a research project on police identity is used to illustrate the application of various perspectives on turning points. The article offers guidance for researchers on choosing a context and focus for analysing turning points, as well as on the theoretical perspectives that come with these choices, and thereby suggests directions for analytical attention. The article shows how different perspectives on turning points have consequences for the understanding of professional identities.

The article examines Swedish police students’ and officers’ situational use of irony as a resource for engaging in workplace resistance. Through irony, managerial discourses and policies are destabilized, giving voice to an alternative reality. The resistance towards the police’s official discourses reinforces a gap between the management and officers in the ranks, strengthening in-group autonomy and norms among the rank and file, but also disrupting organizational control. Irony was restricted to, but also opened up for, ‘safe spaces’, suggesting that counter-hegemonic discourses among police employees are constrained by contextual factors such as their socio-political environment and organizational culture. Irony also helped to promote social harmony and sustain ‘conflict- free venues and encounters’, and the double nature of irony should be seen as a powerful resource for expressing criticism while avoiding sanctions. The article suggests that ironically expressed resistance towards institutional conditions is enabled and created by the very same conditions.

Diversity strategies to increase social inclusion in organisations have been a major concern in various institutions during recent decades. This article examines Swedish police recruits’ talk about diversity. The study is based on data from ethnographic fieldwork at the Swedish National Police Academy and focus group interviews of police recruits. Twenty-seven recruits were interviewed in their final year at the police academy, which included a period of probationary service at a police station. Using a discourse analysis, the article explores how the Swedish police's official policies for diversity and social equality are recognised, but also called into question, by Swedish police recruits. One dominating discourse of difference and two controversial discourses on diversity are outlined, showing that recruits frequently draw upon multiple discourses to legitimise their claims for and against diversity. A conceptual framework is developed for understanding the discourses and dilemmas of diversity within the police, with examples provided of how social order is reproduced among recruits.