No abstract

By the end of 1987, Cleveland in northern England had been attributed with a new and disturbing meaning. It was the centre of a ‘crisis' about the sexual abuse of children. Although no one yet knows the ‘truth’ about the situation, popular and strongly held perceptions of what really happened remain widespread and entrenched. In this paper, the way in which a place came to be associated with a particular set of meanings is examined; the reasons why some readings are ‘silenced’ whereas others enter the dominant public discourse are investigated. In ‘Cleveland’, feminist perspectives were suppressed. The debate around child sexual abuse successfully avoided the question of who was doing the abusing, and there was a deafening silence on how to prevent that abuse. The issue of sexuality appeared to be edited out of the agenda. An examination of the symbolic geographies of a particular place such as Cleveland allows an analysis of power and the nature of society. It is now difficult to mention the name ‘Cleveland’ without triggering an array of images associated with child sexual abuse. What these images arc is important for any understanding of the situation whereby ‘Cleveland’ became a metaphor for child sexual abuse.

No abstract

No abstract