Advertisement

How to Wield Feminist Power

  • Elisabeth Prügl
Chapter
Part of the Gender and Politics book series

Abstract

Feminism means engaging with power. Feminists have rallied against patriarchal power in order to undermine it, but they also have come together to empower themselves and challenge existing arrangements. Indeed, like all human agents, women have wielded power in various feminized roles throughout history. What is new in the contemporary era is the fact that there is not just women’s power, but feminist power. That is, power that has been generated from, and is wielded through, feminist activism.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbott, Andrew (1988) The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackerly, Brooke A. (2000) Political Theory and Feminist Social Criticism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. —— (2008) Universal Human Rights in a World of Difference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ackerly, Brooke A. and Jacqui True (2010) Doing Feminist Research in Political and Social Science. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ackerly, Brooke A., Maria Stern, and Jacqui True (eds.) (2006) Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Ahikire, Josephine (2007) “Gender Training and the Politics of Mainstreaming in Post-Beijing Uganda”, in Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay and Franz Wong (eds.) Revisiting Gender Training: The Making and Remaking of Gender Knowledge. Amsterdam and Oxford: KIT Publishers and Oxfam GB, pp. 39–46.Google Scholar
  7. Allison, Graham T. (1972) Essence of Decision. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  8. Bacchi, Carol (1999) Women, Policy and Politics: The Construction of Policy Problems. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  9. —— (2009) Analysing Policy: What’s the Problem Represented to Be? New South Wales: Pearson Education Australia.Google Scholar
  10. Bacchi, Carol and Joan Eveline (2010) “Power, Resistance and Reflexive Practice”, in Carol Bacchi and Joan Eveline (eds.) Mainstreaming Politics: Gendering Practices and Feminist Theory. South Australia: University of Adelaide Press, pp. 139–161.Google Scholar
  11. Beck, Ulrich (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Benhabib, Seyla (2006) “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy”, in Seyla Benhabib (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 67–94.Google Scholar
  13. Bergmann, Nadja (2006) “Gender Malnstreamlng als Berufsfeld”, in Luise Gubitzer and Susanne Schunter-Kleemann (eds.) Gender Mainstreaming — Durchbruch der Frauenpolitik oder deren Ende? Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 221–234.Google Scholar
  14. Bohman, James and William Rehg (2007) “Jürgen Habermas”, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/habermas/ (accessed 8 May 2015).Google Scholar
  15. Brenner, Neil (2004) New State Spaces: Urban Governance and the Rescaling of Statehood. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cornwall, Andrea, Elizabeth Harrison, and Ann Whitehead (2007) “Gender Myths and Feminist Fables: The Struggle for Interpretive Power in Gender and Development”, Development and Change, 38(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cunliffe, Ann L. and Jong S. Jun (2005) “The Need for Reflexivity in Public Administration”, Administration & Society, 37(2), 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dryzek, John S. (2006) “Transnational Democracy In an Insecure World”, International Political Science Review, 27(2), 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. —— (2010) Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Everett, Jana (2009) “Governance Reforms and Rural Women in India: What Types of Women Citizens are Produced by the Will to Empower?”, Social Politics, summer, 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Evetts, Julia (2003) “The Sociological Analysis of Professionalism: Occupational Change in the Modern World”, International Sociology, 18(2), 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eyben, Rosalind and Laura Turquet (eds.) (2013) Feminists in Development Organizations: Change from the Margins. Bourton on Dunsmore: Practical Action Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Ferguson, James (1994) The Anti-Politics Machine: “Development,” Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  24. Fischer, Frank (2009) Democracy and Expertise: Reorienting Policy Inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Foucault, Michel (1991) “Governmentality”, in Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller (eds.) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 87–104.Google Scholar
  26. —— (2008) The Birth of Biopolitics. Lectures at the College de France 1978–1979. Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Gutmann, Amy and Dennis Thompson (2004) Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Habermas, Jürgen (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Trans. William Rehg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hajer, Maarten and Hendrik Wagenaar (eds.) (2003) Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Haraway, Donna (1988) “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”, Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hartsock, Nancy (1998) The Feminist Standpoint Revisited and Other Essays. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hawkesworth, Mary E. (1988) Theoretical Issues in Policy Analysis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  33. Halley, Janet (2006) Split Decisions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Halley, Janet, Prabha Kotiswaran, Hila Shamir, and Chantal Thomas (2006) “From the International to the Local in Feminist Legal Responses to Rape, Prostitution/Sex Work, and Sex Trafficking: Four Studies in Contemporary Governance Feminism”, Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 29, 335–423.Google Scholar
  35. Hamati-Ataya, Inanna (2012) “Reflectivity, Reflexivity, Reflexivism: IR’s ‘Reflexive Turn’- and Beyond”, European Journal of International Relations, 19(4), 669–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Harding, Sandra (1993) “Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What Is ‘Strong Objectivity’?”, in Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter (eds.) Feminist Epistemologies. New York: Routledge, pp. 49–82.Google Scholar
  37. Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks (2003) “Unraveling the Central State, but How? Types of Multi-level Governance”, American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243.Google Scholar
  38. Jasanoff, Sheila (1990) The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kennedy, David (2005) “Challenging Expert Rule: The Politics of Global Governance”, Sydney Law Review, 27, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
  40. Keohane, Robert O. (1988) “International Institutions: Two Approaches”, International Studies Quarterly, 32(4), 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lugones, Maria (1987) “Playfulness, ‘World’-Traveling, and Loving Perception”, Hypathia, 2, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Naples, Nancy A. (2003) Feminism and Method: Ethnography, Discourse Analysis and Activist Research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Prügl, Elisabeth (2010) Gender Expertise and Feminist Knowledge. Presented at the conference on “Gender Politics in International Governance;” Graduate Institute, Geneva, 6 to 8 October.Google Scholar
  44. —— (2011a) “Diversity Management and Gender Mainstreaming as Technologies of Government”, Politics and Gender, 7, 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. —— (2011b) Transforming Masculine Rule: Agriculture and Rural Development in the European Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. —— (2013) “Gender Expertise as Feminist Strategy”, in Gülay Caglar, Elisabeth Prügl, and Susanne Zwingel (eds.) Feminist Strategies in International Governance. London: Routledge, pp. 57–73.Google Scholar
  47. Ramazanoglu, Caroline and Janet Holland (2002) Feminist Methodology: Challenges and Choices. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Scharpf, Fritz (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sexwale, Bunie M. Matlanyame (1996) “What Happened to Feminist Politics in ’Gender Training/?’”, in Mary Maynard and June Purvis (eds.) New Frontiers in Women’s Studies: Knowledge, Identity and Nationalism. London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 51–62.Google Scholar
  50. Smith, Dorothy E. (1987) The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  51. Squires, Judith (2005) “Is Mainstreaming Transformative? Theorizing Mainstreaming in the Context of Diversity and Deliberation”, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 12(3), 366–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stern, Maria (2006) “Racism, Sexism, Classism, and Much More: Reading Security Identity in Marginalized Sites”, in Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, and Jacqui True (eds.) Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 174–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sylvester, Christine (1994) “Empathetic Cooperation: A Feminist Method for IR”, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 23(2), 315–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thompson, Hayley (2014) “Expertise in the Global Governance of Gender.” Paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Convention, March, Toronto.Google Scholar
  55. Tickner, J. Ann (2006) “Feminism Meets International Relations: Some Methodological Issues”, in Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, and Jacqui True (eds.) Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. True, Jacqui and Laura Parisi (2013) “Gender Mainstreaming Strategies in International Governance”, in Gülay Caglar, Elisabeth Prügl, and Susanne Zwingel (eds.) Feminist Strategies in International Governance. London: Routledge, pp. 37–56.Google Scholar
  57. Weldon, Laurel S. (2006) “Inclusion and Understanding: A Collective Methodology for Feminist International Relations”, in Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, and Jacqui True (eds.) Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 62–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wetterer, Angelika (2002) ‘Strategie Rhetorischer Modernisierung: Gender Mainstreaming, Managing Diversity und die Professionalisierung der Gender-Expertinnen’, Zeitschrift für Frauenforschung und Geschlechterstudien, 20(3), 129–149.Google Scholar
  59. Wilensky, Harold L. (1964) “The Professionalization of Everyone?”, American Journal of Sociology, 70(2), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Young, Iris M. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  61. —— (2006) “Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy”, in Seyla Benhabib (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 120–135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisabeth Prügl

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations