Djuna Hallsworth

Media content, particularly screen fiction, faces growing accountability in representing mental disorders ethically and accurately, aligned with the principle of ‘nothing about us without us’. This article interrogates the way notions of authenticity and ethicality are applied to screen narratives by examining the content and reception of Idioterne ( The Idiots , 1998), Lars von Trier’s first and only Dogme95 film. Rather than an attempt to mediate ‘authentic’ disability or illness, I suggest that the film is better understood as an ‘encounter with madness’ that provokes audiences to reconsider how they assess illness legitimacy based on superficial observations. Analysing critical and academic responses, this article reveals how critiques of Idioterne , in fact, employ oppressive language while dismissing its nuanced portrayal of the ‘performance’ of a mental disorder. Arguing against the reductive biogenetic framing of mental disorders, the article advocates for media that embraces complexity and ambiguity, thereby fostering dialogues around what it means to ethically represent markers of identity.

There is considerable scholarship to support the idea that shared cultural narratives—about what it means to belong, to contribute, to be of value—are very effectively mediated through the mass media, and, in particular, through popular fictional formats such as feature film. This article analyses two contemporary, state-supported Danish films, Nymphomaniac, Director’s Cut and Dronningen (Queen of Hearts), arguing that these cultural artefacts explore the notion of cultural citizenship: a mode of citizenship that I define as the capacity to speak and be heard, and which cultivates a sense of belonging. Through their portrayal of sexually transgressive female characters, these films grapple with and subvert the gendered expectations around femininity, appearing to reinforce the international reputation of Denmark as a politically progressive state. By situating these depictions within their broader social context, though, I illustrate how they present the agency to use one’s own voice as a right that is not, in fact, possessed equally by all citizens. Building on existing literature on cultural citizenship and the Scandinavian welfare state system, I advocate for increased scholarly attention to the role of cinema in creating space for identification and the exploration of belonging.

Zakiya Luna’s rich study combines comprehensive discourse analysis of political rhetoric and archival documents with her own ethnographic experiences within the reproductive justice movement. This book is an entry point into this often-marginalized arena, presenting a unique perspective informed by years of participant observation and thorough research which has produced additional projects, attesting to Luna’s expertise in this field of study. As a woman of color, Luna’s work is symbolically significant, and her intersectional lens renders this study broadly applicable to scholars of law, sociology, and gender studies, to policymakers and activists, and, indeed, to all women, who the reproductive justice movement indirectly or directly impacts. In tracing the way that reproductive justice has been framed as a “human right,” Luna addresses the potential for the human rights discourse to deliver on its intrinsic promise to secure freedom and equity for all.