Refine
Document Type
- Article (8)
- Other (5)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Postprint (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (17)
Keywords
- discourse (3)
- Anti-Feminismus (2)
- Anti-Gender (2)
- Anti-LGBTQI* (2)
- Mobilisierungsdynamiken (2)
- Neue Rechte (2)
- Populismus (2)
- Soziale Bewegungen (2)
- United Nations (2)
- Wissenschaft (2)
Institute
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (17) (remove)
Über kaum ein Thema werden so hitzige Debatten geführt wie über Geschlechtsidentität. Das Wissen darum, dass Gender sozial konstruiert ist, wird von Anti-Gender Aktivist*innen häufig als ‚Gender-Ideologie‘ bezeichnet und ruft heftige Gegenreaktionen hervor. Dies gilt nicht nur in Deutschland – sondern länderübergreifend. Auffällig viele der transnationalen Anti- Gender Mobilisierungen der letzten 20 Jahre finden bezogen auf Bildungseinrichtungen statt. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich der besonderen Rolle der Universität und der Wissenschaft für transnationale Anti-Gender Diskurse. Anhand verschiedener Beispiele zeige ich auf, dass das Verhältnis zwischen Anti-Gender Bewegungen und Wissenschaft geprägt ist von widersprüchlichen Dynamiken, von Abgrenzung aber auch Imitation. In ihrem Zusammenspiel wirken beide Dynamiken mobilisierend und tragen zum Erstarken regressiver Rollenbilder und antidemokratischer rechter Bewegungen in der breiteren Gesellschaft bei. Der letzte Teil des Beitrags ruft daher zu mehr Selbstreflexion der wissenschaftlichen Praxis auf Grundlage feministischer und intersektionaler Ansätze auf.
Über kaum ein Thema werden so hitzige Debatten geführt wie über Geschlechtsidentität. Das Wissen darum, dass Gender sozial konstruiert ist, wird von Anti-Gender Aktivist*innen häufig als ‚Gender-Ideologie‘ bezeichnet und ruft heftige Gegenreaktionen hervor. Dies gilt nicht nur in Deutschland – sondern länderübergreifend. Auffällig viele der transnationalen Anti- Gender Mobilisierungen der letzten 20 Jahre finden bezogen auf Bildungseinrichtungen statt. Dieser Beitrag widmet sich der besonderen Rolle der Universität und der Wissenschaft für transnationale Anti-Gender Diskurse. Anhand verschiedener Beispiele zeige ich auf, dass das Verhältnis zwischen Anti-Gender Bewegungen und Wissenschaft geprägt ist von widersprüchlichen Dynamiken, von Abgrenzung aber auch Imitation. In ihrem Zusammenspiel wirken beide Dynamiken mobilisierend und tragen zum Erstarken regressiver Rollenbilder und antidemokratischer rechter Bewegungen in der breiteren Gesellschaft bei. Der letzte Teil des Beitrags ruft daher zu mehr Selbstreflexion der wissenschaftlichen Praxis auf Grundlage feministischer und intersektionaler Ansätze auf.
In recent years, there have been a growing number of online and offline attacks linked to a loosely connected network of misogynist and antifeminist online communities called ‘the manosphere’. Since 2016, the ideas spread among and by groups of the manosphere have also become more closely aligned with those of other Far-Right online networks. In this commentary, I explore the role of what I term ‘evidence-based misogyny’ for mobilization and radicalization into the antifeminist and misogynist subcultures of the manosphere. Evidence-based misogyny is a discursive strategy, whereby members of the manosphere refer to (and misinterpret) knowledge in the form of statistics, studies, news items and pop-culture and mimic accepted methods of knowledge presentation to support their essentializing, polarizing views about gender relations in society. Evidence-based misogyny is a core aspect for manosphere-related mobilization as it provides a false sense of authority and forges a collective identity, which is framed as a supposed ‘alternative’ to mainstream gender knowledge. Due to its core function to justify and confirm the misogynist sentiments of users, evidence-based misogyny serves as connector between the manosphere and both mainstream conservative as well as other Far-Right and conspiratorial discourses.
The politics of fear
(2022)
The Other Side
(2020)
Given the current polarization of gender knowledge in the public discourse, this article investigates the "other side" of gender knowledge production. Building on feminist standpoint literature, I conduct a close reading of the affective-discursive dynamics of knowledge production in two anti-feminist online communities in the United States and India. I find that anti-feminist communities appropriate feminist practices of consciousness-raising to construct a shared sense of victimization. This appropriation is, however, incomplete. In contrast to feminist practices, anti-feminist knowledge generation is premised on the polarizing themes of "ultimate victimhood" and "ultimate other," which lead to violence and exclusion, rather than liberation.
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.
Introduction
(2022)
Several global governance initiatives launched in recent years have explicitly sought to integrate concern for gender equality and gendered harms into efforts to counter terrorism and violent extremism (CT/CVE). As a result, commitments to gender-sensitivity and gender equality in international and regional CT/CVE initiatives, in national action plans, and at the level of civil society programming, have become a common aspect of the multilevel governance of terrorism and violent extremism. In light of these developments, aspects of our own research have turned in the past years to explore how concerns about gender are being incorporated in the governance of (counter-)terrorism and violent extremism, and how this development has affected (gendered) practices and power relations in counterterrorism policymaking and implementation. We were inspired by the growing literature on gender and CT/CVE, and critical scholarship on terrorism and political violence, to bring together a collection of new research addressing these questions.
Introduction
(2023)
Several global governance initiatives launched in recent years have explicitly sought to integrate concern for gender equality and gendered harms into efforts to counter terrorism and violent extremism. As a result, commitments to gender-sensitivity and gender equality in international and regional counterterrorism and countering violent extremism (CT/CVE) initiatives, in national action plans, and at the level of civil society programming, have become a common aspect of the multilevel governance of terrorism and violent extremism. In light of these developments, aspects of our own research have turned in the past years to explore how concerns about gender are being incorporated in the governance of terrorism and violent extremism and how this development has affected (gendered) practices and power relations in CT policymaking and implementation. We were inspired by the growing literature on gender and CT/CVE, and critical scholarship on terrorism and political violence, to bring together a collection of new research addressing these questions.