Bacchi

 What kind of problems do we think we can solve?

 What one proposes to do about something show what one thinks is
problematic
 Policies and policy documents
 6 points – what is left unproblematic within problem representation –
where are the silences? Can problem be thought about differently?

Principle 19: the right to freedom of opinion and expression

What’s the ‘problem’ (for example, of ‘problem gamblers’, ‘drug

use/abuse’, ‘gender inequality’, ‘domestic violence’, ‘global warming’,
‘sexual harassment’, etc.) represented to be in a specific policy or policy
proposal?

Inequality in freedom of opinion and expression which can include

expression through speech, choice of clothes, name, bodily characteristics.

What presuppositions or assumptions underpin this representation of the

‘problem’?

can be said to assume that there is already an acceptance of people with

different gender expressions and sexual orientations around as it suggests
that states must ensure that there is no discrimination against people
sharing their opinions and expressions. I think this can’t be said to be true
about everywhere as it takes time to build up acceptance.
 What is left unproblematic in this problem representation? Where are
the silences? Can the ‘problem’ be thought about differently?

The freedom of identity and the ability to express oneself how they wish can
be said to be unproblematic however this could lead to a bigger problem of
discriminatory views being expressed which I think it’s important that this
principle suggests ‘Ensure that the exercise of freedom of opinion and
expression does not violate the rights and freedoms of persons of diverse
sexual orientations and gender identities’

What effects are produced by this representation of the ‘problem’?

Possibility of extremist views?

How/where has this representation of the ‘problem’ been produced,

disseminated and defended? How has it been (or could it be) questioned,
disrupted and replaced?

It could be questioned by right-wing politics and used to claim they too

should have freedom of expression and identity despite their views being
potentially expensive towards queer people