Introduction: the sexual politics of austerity

Neoliberal rationality appears as common-sense (Hall and O’Shea, 2013) in almost every geographical region, forging political and economic agendas, as well as investing every domain of social and personal life (Brenner et al, 2010, Cooper, 2008, Harvey, 2005). In this respect, the affirmation of austerity politics as the main response to the global financial crisis originated in the US mortgage market from 2007 marks the triumph of the neoliberal order, its key-principles being intensified and unchallenged transnationally (Aalbers, 2013, Dardot and Laval, 2014, Peck, 2013). At the global scale the impact of the neoliberal reason on welfare regimes seems to be inescapable: cuts in services and public expenditure, the emergence of new contractual forms of public/private partnership (and ownership of assets), homeownership promoted as the key towards an asset-based welfare provision through the expansion of credit and the consequent raising of indebtedness for the consumer-citizen (Aalbers, 2008, Ascoli and Ranci, 2002, Rolnik, 2013, Ronald, 2008, Watson, 2009). The main consequences of this global trend are rising inequalities, and increasing poverty, unemployment and indebtedness; whilst the hegemony of the neoliberal principle of selfresponsibilization has led towards the progressive criminalization and blaming of people living in poverty (Taylor-Gooby, 2013, Wacquant, 2009). How do such processes impact on sexuality and sexual politics? The answer is at least twofold, highlighting the contradictory character of capitalism, defined by Bassi (2006) as the tension between capture and escape. [Opening Paragraph]