@incollection{Haenel2023, author = {H{\"a}nel, Hilkje C.}, title = {Behinderung als soziale Kategorie im Kontext epistemischer Ungerechtigkeiten, Ignoranz und Abh{\"a}ngigkeit}, series = {Bedeutung und Implikationen epistemischer Ungerechtigkeit}, booktitle = {Bedeutung und Implikationen epistemischer Ungerechtigkeit}, editor = {Schleidgen, Sebastian and Friedrich, Orsolya and Wolkenstein, Andreas}, publisher = {Tectum}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8288-4660-9}, doi = {10.5771/9783828877368-153}, pages = {153 -- 182}, year = {2023}, language = {de} } @incollection{Haenel2023, author = {H{\"a}nel, Hilkje C.}, title = {Epistemische Ungerechtigkeiten zwischen Medizin und Technik}, series = {Medizin - Technik - Ethik}, volume = {5}, booktitle = {Medizin - Technik - Ethik}, editor = {Loh, Janina and Grote, Thomas}, publisher = {J.B. Metzler}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-662-65867-3}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-662-65868-0_5}, pages = {87 -- 106}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Nicht erst seit Covid-19 sind die Wissens- und Kommunikationsl{\"u}cken sowie die Hierarchie zwischen {\"A}rzt*innen und Patient*innen offensichtlich. Zus{\"a}tzlich befinden sich kranke Menschen sowohl aufgrund ihrer Krankheit als auch aufgrund ihrer Abh{\"a}ngigkeit vom Gesundheitswesen in einer besonders verletzlichen Lage; Patient*innen sind ein paradigmatisches Beispiel f{\"u}r fragile epistemische Subjekte. Im vorliegenden Text wird zun{\"a}chst skizziert inwieweit Patient*innen fragile epistemische Subjekte sind und welche Formen testimonialer und hermeneutischer Ungerechtigkeit im Gesundheitswesen besonders zum Tragen kommen. Danach wird ein besonderes Augenmerk auf die Idee gelegt, dass sogenannte „pathozentrische epistemische Ungerechtigkeiten" durch bestimmte theoretische Vorstellungen von Gesundheit untermauert und reproduziert werden. Hierbei soll schlussendlich untersucht werden, inwieweit dieses Problem durch technische Mittel in der Medizin verst{\"a}rkt oder geschw{\"a}cht werden kann; so reproduzieren Algorithmen beispielsweise die vorhandenen Vorstellungen und Praktiken.}, language = {de} } @incollection{HeubergerSchwab2021, author = {Heuberger, Moritz and Schwab, Christian}, title = {Challenges of digital service provision for local governments from the citizens' view}, series = {The future of local self-government}, booktitle = {The future of local self-government}, editor = {Bergstr{\"o}m, Tomas and Franzke, Jochen and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-56058-4}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-56059-1_9}, pages = {115 -- 130}, year = {2021}, language = {en} } @incollection{RothermelKellyJasser2022, author = {Rothermel, Ann-Kathrin and Kelly, Megan and Jasser, Greta}, title = {Of victims, mass murder, and "real men"}, series = {Male supremacism in the United States}, booktitle = {Male supremacism in the United States}, editor = {Carian, Emily K. and DiBranco, Alex and Ebin, Chelsea}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-1-003-16472-2}, doi = {10.4324/9781003164722-9}, pages = {117 -- 141}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Over the last few decades, a network of misogynist blogs, websites, wikis, and forums has developed, where users share their bigoted, sexist, and toxic views of society in general and masculinity and femininity in particular. This chapter outlines conceptual framework of hegemonic and hybrid masculinity. It provides a brief overview of the historical development of the manosphere and its various configurations and present our analysis of the masculinities performed by the five groups of the manosphere. The concept of hegemonic masculinity was articulated by Connell and colleagues in the 1980s as "the pattern of practice that allowed men's dominance over women to continue." Prior to the advent of the manosphere, an online iteration of male supremacist mobilizations, both Men's Rights Activists and Pick-up artists developed as offline movements in the 1970s. MRAs perceive their respective societies as inherently stacked against men. This chapter analyses the masculinities of the manosphere and how they "repudiat[e] and reif[y]" hegemonic masculinity and male supremacism.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Rothermel2023, author = {Rothermel, Ann-Kathrin}, title = {Gender at the crossroads}, series = {Gender and the governance of terrorism and violent extremism}, booktitle = {Gender and the governance of terrorism and violent extremism}, editor = {Rothermel, Ann-Kathrin and Shepherd, Laura J.}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-1-003-38126-6}, doi = {10.4324/9781003381266-2}, pages = {11 -- 36}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Since the early 2000s, the United Nations (UN) global counterterrorism architecture has seen significant changes towards increased multilateralism, a focus on prevention, and inter-institutional coordination across the UN's three pillars of work. Throughout this reform process, gender aspects have increasingly become presented as a "cross-cutting" theme. In this article, I investigate the role of gender in the UN's counterterrorism reform process at the humanitarian-development-peace nexus, or "triple nexus", from a feminist institutionalist perspective. I conduct a feminist discourse analysis of the counterterrorism discourses of three UN entities, which represent the different UN pillars of peace and security (DPO), development (UNDP), and humanitarianism and human rights (OHCHR). The article examines the role of gender in the inter-institutional reform process by focusing on the changes, overlaps and differences in the discursive production of gender in the entities' counterterrorism agendas over time and in two recent UN counterterrorism conferences. I find that gendered dynamics of nested newness and institutional layering have played an essential role both as a justification for the involvement of individual entities in counterterrorism and as a vehicle for inter-institutional cooperation and struggle for discursive power.}, language = {en} }