Anti-Genderism

cent conservative mobilisations across Europe alarm us, the progress that has been made in the field of gender equality has not only been rather stagnant and uneven, but also much shakier and easier to reverse than we had imagined. In countries such as Croatia, Germany, Italy, France, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Slovakia and Slovenia, the post-war consensus on human rights is currently being threatened as issues such as gender mainstreaming, sexual education, LGBTQ+ rights and reproductive rights have come under coordinated attacks carried out by the Church, religious and lay conservative NGOs, right wing politicians, and even grassroots mobilisations.

This article explores how resistance and power are intertwined within the field of mainstream Swedish feminism, by an- alyzing some of its more visible expressions and strategies. These feminist resistance strategies could be described as circulating resistance (e.g., the #metoo campaign), public assemblies, the more subtle “disciplinary resistance”, and state feminism. The article illustrates how these different forms of resistance fuel different reactions from movements that reiterate different discourses of “anti-genderism”. In addition, some forms of feminism (state feminism and feminist disci- plinary resistance) sometimes develop into, or overlap with, different technologies of power.

Die erstarkenden Angriffe auf die interdisziplinäre Geschlechterforschung, feministische und queerfeministische Forschung und die Abwehrreaktionen auf geschlechtergerechte und antiras-sistische Sprache dienen unserem Seminar als Ausgangspunkt, um die Spezifika, Potentiale und Fallstricke positionierter Wissensproduktion zu ergründen. Dafür erschließen wir zunächst Grundlagen der feministischen Wissenschaftskritik (u.a. Collins, Harding), bevor wir uns ge-nauer mit der feministischen Wissensproduktion in der Soziologie auseinandersetzen. Darauf aufbauend beleuchten wir aktuelle Forschungen zu Anti-Genderismus sowie den Zusammen-hängen von Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit und Anti-Feminismus. Zuletzt wenden wir uns Diskus-sionen zu, die das Verhältnis von Wissenschaft und Politik thematisieren. Das Seminar vermit-telt einen Einstieg in wissenschaftstheoretische Fragestellungen, Grundlagen feministischer Theorie und bietet einen kritischen Blick auf die Geschichte der Soziologie und ihre Kanonisie-rungsprozesse an.

Transnational anti-gender mobilizations emerged almost simultaneously throughout the years 2012-2013 all over Europe, seriously challenging women’s and minorities' rights, and attempting to undermine the very foundations of liberal democracy. Countries such as Croatia, Italy, France, Germany, Poland, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain became the stages of fierce attacks on gender equality and the rights of sexual minorities, as well as attempts to revoke the post-war international consensus on human rights. It was not long before progressives around Europe started to address these new conservative movements. This paper aims to present and critically evaluate these progressive reactions. First, we provide a short overview of existing academic literature and reflect on the anthropological and political foundations of the anti-gender campaign. We then provide numerous typologies of progressive responses, and follow up with their critical evaluation, pointing to broader structural causes behind the rise of anti-gender movements. Finally, we provide recommendations as to how current responses to the anti-gender campaign could be improved. Keywords: anti-genderism, gender ideology, conservative politics, right wing, fundamentalism, cultural wars, progressive politics.

Open Access Publikation Lizenz (CC BY 4.0)

It is well known that gender studies has been subject to fierce and quite polemic criticism for several years, especially from right-wing populists. Gender researchers have formulated numerous analyses and responses to this criticism. In this article we investigate the arguments that are used. It is undoubtedly important to defend oneself. But it seems to us that the responses often remain in a defensive line of argument and that the controversial points at issue are rather hinted at than elaborated. By contrast, we attempt to highlight central differences in this debate and hope to be able to lead a more vigorous debate as a result. Finally, against this background we look at how gender studies could productively position itself.

My response to The Onion video called 'Trump Supporter Feels Betrayed by President after Reading 800 Pages of Queer Feminist Theory'.  free access on The Disorder of Things Blog at https://thedisorderofthings.com/2017/07/06/right-wing-populism-anti-genderism-and-real-us-americans-in-the-age-of-trump/

In their recent article in The Guardian, based on the forthcoming book The Light that Failed: The Reckoning Ivan Krastev and Steven Holmes claim that the current illiberal backlash in countries such as Poland and Hungary is best explained by the post-transformational fatigue rooted in unsuccessful efforts to emulate the West after 1989. While this tendency "has been given an assortment of names-Americanisation, Europeanisation, democratisation, liberalisation, enlargement, integration, harmonisation, globalisation and so forth-… it has always signified modernisation by imitation and integration by assimilation" resulting in resentment, anger and resistance harnessed largely by the right-wing populists. They pronounce that the "god of liberalism" died in Eastern Europe, mostly due to the unfulfilled promises of western liberalism to transform post-communist countries by helping them to catch-up with the West. This explanation fits well into narratives of fragile democracy in post-communist countries, but is it true? Today's populist leaders in the region are certainly eager to present democratization as a form of cultural colonization, and call for regaining sovereignty-in politics, economy and culture-in order to mobilize the electorate, but is this the key to their electoral successes? Clearly, the tensions between what was promised in 1989 and what was delivered two decades after were one of the factors that facilitated the victories of right-wing populist parties in the region, but the connection between the two is neither straightforward nor is disillusionment with democracy unique to the post-communist context. I disagree with the vision presented by Krastev and Holmes on three levels. The first problem is that they uncritically follow the populists in collapsing the difference between liberal democracy and neoliberalism. Secondly, they ignore the role of transnational ultraconservative networks and discourses in promulgating a vision of the West in need of being saved by the East. Thirdly, they view the illiberal tendencies in effect as an Eastern European peculiarity, rather than a transnational trend, present also in most Western countries.

The aim of this article is to furnish insights of the Italian public debate on the recognition of LGBTQ rights, which can be understood as an interesting case study of the complex relationship between (multi)secularisation processes and re/definition of citizenship models. More specifically, the article analyses two political events related to this debate that took place in Rome in June 2015. The first is the Family Day demonstration, promoted by conservative Catholic groups; the second is the LGBTQ Pride parade, promoted by various gay, lesbian and transsexual/gender associations. We analyse the official statements issued by the two organising committees of the demonstrations, adopting the framework and methods of the Critical Discourse Analysis. Above and beyond an evident political conflict between the two discourses, we try to shed light on their mutual construction on the basis of what we call ‘naturalization’ and ‘universalization’ processes.