Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Notes on contributors -- Part 1 Conceptualizing Opposition and Oppositional Dynamics -- 1 Introduction: Dynamics of Opposition to Gender+ Equality in Europe -- 2 The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Making Sense of Opposition to Feminisms from a Social-Movement Perspective -- 3 Understanding the Dynamics of Opposition to Gender-Equality Change: Lessons from and for Social Complexity Theory -- Part 2 Varieties of Opposition to Gender+ Equality in Europe -- 4 Patriarchy Fights Back: Violent Opposition to Gender Equality in Online Contexts -- 5 Indirect Opposition: Diffuse Barriers to Gender+ Equality in the European Union -- 6 Contesting Gender Equality in Domestic-Violence Policy Debates: Comparing Three Countries in Central and Eastern Europe -- 7 A Feminist Opposition to Gender Equality? Making Sense of the Social Democratic Party's Internal Struggle over Extending Parental-Leave Quotas in Sweden -- 8 Subversion from Within: Opposition to Gender Equality in the Court of Justice of the European Union -- 9 Unpacking Oppositional Success: The French Laboratory -- 10 Popular Opposition to Economic Gender Equality and Homosexual Lifestyles -- 11 Suspending Democracy, Harming Gender Equality: The 2013 Law on Pregnancy Termination in Macedonia -- Part 3 Conclusions and Discussion: A Framework for Understanding Oppositional Dynamics on Gender-Equality Change and Possible Actions Against Opposition -- 12 How to Study Varieties of Opposition to Gender+ Equality in Europe? Lessons from this Book, Conceptual Building Blocks, and Puzzles to Address -- Index

This article aims to better understand current opposition to feminist politics by analyzing positions of extreme-right populist parties on gender knowledge, "explicit and implicit representations concerning the differences between the sexes and the relations between them, the origins and normative significance of these, the rationale and evidence underpinning them and their material form" (Cavaghan, 2017, p. 48). These understandings contribute to constructing a societal truth on gender and/or to setting the terms of the political debate about gender issues. This article introduces and uses the theoretical concept of episteme to highlight the systematic nature of discursive institutional settings, and the role knowledge and truth production plays in processes reproducing or countering gender inequality. The article analyzes the positions of extreme-right populist parties in the Netherlands and their discursive attacks on the feminist project in the Netherlands, in which these opponents use a redefined concept of 'cultural Marxism'. Through this analysis, the article illustrates the theoretical argument that epistemic dynamics play a strong role in opposition to feminist politics, that the shifting epistemic framing of science is important in these oppositions and that more comprehensive attention for the epistemic dimension is needed.

This article aims to better understand current opposition to feminist politics by analyzing positions of extreme-right populist parties on gender knowledge, "explicit and implicit representations concerning the differences between the sexes and the relations between them, the origins and normative significance of these, the rationale and evidence underpinning them and their material form" (Cavaghan, 2017, p. 48). These understandings contribute to constructing a societal truth on gender and/or to setting the terms of the political debate about gender issues. This article introduces and uses the theoretical concept of episteme to highlight the systematic nature of discursive institutional settings, and the role knowledge and truth production plays in processes reproducing or countering gender inequality. The article analyzes the positions of extreme-right populist parties in the Netherlands and their discursive attacks on the feminist project in the Netherlands, in which these opponents use a redefined concept of 'cultural Marxism'. Through this analysis, the article illustrates the theoretical argument that epistemic dynamics play a strong role in opposition to feminist politics, that the shifting epistemic framing of science is important in these oppositions and that more comprehensive attention for the epistemic dimension is needed.

The European Union (EU), a pioneer in gender equality policies, is moving from predominantly attending to gender inequality, towards policies that address multiple inequalities. This article argues that there are tendencies at EU level to assume an unquestioned similarity of inequalities, to fail to address the structural level and to fuel the political competition between inequalities. Based upon a comparison of specific sets of inequalities (class, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender), this article explores where and how structural and political intersectionality might be relevant. It argues that a 'one size fits all' approach to addressing multiple discrimination is based on an incorrect assumption of sameness or equivalence of the social categories connected to inequalities and of the mechanisms and processes that constitute them. Focusing on similarities ignores the differentiated character and dynamics of inequalities. It also overlooks the political dimension of equality goals. Moreover, it has become clear that attention to structural mechanisms and to the role of the state and the private sphere in reproducing inequalities is much needed. The final part of the article presents constructive ideas for a more comprehensive way of addressing multiple inequalities.

International audience ; The European Union (EU), a pioneer in gender equality policies, is moving from predominantly attending to gender inequality, towards policies that address multiple inequalities. This article argues that there are tendencies at EU level to assume an unquestioned similarity of inequalities, to fail to address the structural level and to fuel the political competition between inequalities. Based upon a comparison of specific sets of inequalities (class, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender), this article explores where and how structural and political intersectionality might be relevant. It argues that a 'one size fits all' approach to addressing multiple discrimination is based on an incorrect assumption of sameness or equivalence of the social categories connected to inequalities and of the mechanisms and processes that constitute them. Focusing on similarities ignores the differentiated character and dynamics of inequalities. It also overlooks the political dimension of equality goals. Moreover, it has become clear that attention to structural mechanisms and to the role of the state and the private sphere in reproducing inequalities is much needed. The final part of the article presents constructive ideas for a more comprehensive way of addressing multiple inequalities.

The European Union (EU), a pioneer in gender equality policies, is moving from predominantly attending to gender inequality, towards policies that address multiple inequalities. This article argues that there are tendencies at EU level to assume an unquestioned similarity of inequalities, to fail to address the structural level and to fuel the political competition between inequalities. Based upon a comparison of specific sets of inequalities (class, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender), this article explores where and how structural and political intersectionality might be relevant. It argues that a 'one size fits all' approach to addressing multiple discrimination is based on an incorrect assumption of sameness or equivalence of the social categories connected to inequalities and of the mechanisms and processes that constitute them. Focusing on similarities ignores the differentiated character and dynamics of inequalities. It also overlooks the political dimension of equality goals. Moreover, it has become clear that attention to structural mechanisms and to the role of the state and the private sphere in reproducing inequalities is much needed. The final part of the article presents constructive ideas for a more comprehensive way of addressing multiple inequalities.

Is the feminist project under threat in Europe? This thematic issue addresses the question in both theoretical and empirical ways, focusing on the various ways in which feminist politics are opposed and why, on what the impact of such opposition is, and how to improve our theoretical understanding of this particular manifestation of gender and politics. The issue addresses three major challenges: a need to reflect on the most suited concepts and theories in political and social sciences to understand what is at stake in Europe today; a need to vernacularize existing knowledge while forging global frames of analysis; and a need to avoid the risk of reifying oppositional forces and of reiterating dichotomous frames and categories. The responses to these challenges are: to analyse the threats to the feminist project as parts of larger projects against social justice and equality; to contrast macro narratives by engaging with the microlevel of the anti-feminist project, enabling a critique of mainstream scholarship; to analyse the threats to the feminist project as related to processes of changes to democracy, such as democratic backsliding; to give prominent attention to discursive, epistemic and symbolic processes; and finally to include studies on the response of feminist actors to the threats experienced. This collection of articles offers a variety of perspectives on the various threats to the feminist project in Europe today.

The aim of this article is to explore the ways in which gender equality is used in gender and politics research. We contend that the political and theoretical relevance of studying the multiple meanings of gender equality is enhanced by current crises. We discern four strategies used in gender and politics research: (1) escaping equality; (2) fixing equality; (3) deconstructing equality; or (4) delegating equality to political theory. This article is motivated by the belief that what is needed is not only more reflection on these choices, but also a productive dialogue between the different strategies.