Silences That Matter



Care has traditionally been silenced and taken for granted, but care is no longer silenced en toto. In this chapter I describe the philosophical background of a concern with silence as related to issues of dominance and subalternity, and theoretically outline a novel understanding of silence as an active process of silencing where struggles are involved. Methodologically I describe some of the various tools used to identify silencing in contemporary texts, and finally I illustrate silencing with examples from my own research. In this process care is not just about becoming part of one positive, feminist story, but equally important, also part of another pessimistic, feminist story on struggles about silencing care—or elements of care.


Silencing Dominance Subalternity and methodology 


  1. Ahrenkiel, A., et al. (2012). Dagsinstitutionsarbejde og pædagogisk faglighed. Frederiksberg: Frydenlund.Google Scholar
  2. Ahrenkiel, A., et al. (2013). Unnoticed professional competence in day care work. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 3(2), 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anttonen, A. (2002). Universalism and social policy: A Nordic-feminist revaluation. NORA, 10(2), 71–80.Google Scholar
  4. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy: What’s the problem represented to be? Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  5. Bacchi, C., & Dahl, H. M. (2012). Silencing—Inside/outside. Unpublished work-in-progress.Google Scholar
  6. Berg, A.-J. (2008). Silence and articulation: Whiteness, racialization and feminist memory work. NORA, 16(4), 213–227.Google Scholar
  7. Boyne, R. (1990). Foucault and Derrida—The other side of reason. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, R. (1994). At føle sult. In R. Brown (Ed.), Kroppens gaver (pp. 47–62). Århus: Klim.Google Scholar
  9. Burau, V., & Dahl, H. M. (2013). Trajectories of change in Danish long-term care policies: Reproduction by adaptation through top-down and bottom-up reforms. In C. Ranci & E. Pavolini (Eds.), Reforms in Long-term care policies—Investigating institutional change and social impacts (pp. 79–96). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Burau, V., et al. (2007). Governing home care: A cross-national comparison. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  11. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Carrette, J. R. (2000). Foucault and religion: Spiritual corporality and political spirituality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Cixous, H. (1980). Sorties. In E. Marks & L. Courtivron (Eds.), New French feminisms (pp. 90–99). Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  14. Crawford, J., Kippax, S., Onyx, J., Gault, U., & Merton, P. (1990). Emotion and gender: Constructing meaning from memory. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  15. Dahl, H. M. (2000). Fra kitler til eget tøj—Diskurser om professionalisme, omsorg og køn, Ph.D. thesis. Århus: Politica.Google Scholar
  16. Dahl, H. M. (2005). A changing ideal of care in Denmark: A different form of retrenchment? In H. M. Dahl & T. R. Eriksen (Eds.), Dilemmas of care in the Nordic welfare state—Continuity and change (pp. 47–61). Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  17. Dahl, H. M. (2010). Nye styringsformer og anerkendelseskamp - Den vrede hjemmehjælper? Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, 19(4), 19–30.Google Scholar
  18. Dahl, H. M. (2012). Tavshed som magt og afmagt. Tidsskriftet Antropologi, 33(66), 3–16.Google Scholar
  19. Dahl, H. M., & Rasmussen, B. (2012). Paradoxes in elderly care: The Nordic model. In A. Kamp & H. Hvid (Eds.), Elderly care in transition—Management, meaning and identity at work: A Scandinavian perspective (pp. 29–49). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
  20. Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Derrida, J. (1981). Disseminations (B. Johnson, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Derrida, J. (1988). Letter to a Japanese friend. In D. Wood & R. Berbasconi (Eds.), Derrida and différance. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Eveline, J. (1994). The politics of advantage. Australian Feminist Studies, 19(autumn), 129–154.Google Scholar
  25. Eveline, J. and Bacchi, C. (2005). What are we mainstreaming when we mainstream gender. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7(4), 496–512.Google Scholar
  26. Farrar, P. D. (2001). Too painful to remember: Memory-work as a method to explore sensitive research topics. Accessed 9 Sept 2016.
  27. Folketingstidende: Forhandlinger i Folketingsåret 1957–58.Google Scholar
  28. Foucault, M. (1967). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge (6th ed.). London: Tavistock/Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Foucault, M. (1976). Lecture one: 7 January 1976, in ‘Two lectures’. In C. Gordon (Ed.), Michel Foucault power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 by Michel Foucault (C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.) (pp. 78–92). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  31. Foucault, M. (1984 [1976]). The history of sexuality: An introduction (R. Hurley, Trans.). London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  32. Fraser, N. (1989). Talking about needs: Interpretative contexts as political conflicts in welfare state societies. Ethics, 99, 291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gasché, R. (1986). The tain of the mirror. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Han, B.-C. (2012). Transparenzgesellschaft. Berlin: Matthes & Seitz Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  35. Haug, F. (1987). Memory work. In F. Haug (Ed.), Female sexualization (pp. 29–72). London: Verso.Google Scholar
  36. Hemmings, C. (2011). Why stories matter: The political grammar of feminist theory. London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hernes, H. (1987). Welfare state and woman power—Essays in state feminism. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  38. Howarth, D. (2005). Applying discourse theory: The method of articulation. In D. Howarth & J. Torfing (Eds.), Discourse theory in European politics: Identity, policy and governance (pp. 316–349). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Huckin, T. (2002). Textual silence and the discourse of homelessness. Discourse & Society, 13(2), 347–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Irigaray, L. (1979). Das Geschlecht, das nicht eins ist. Berlin: Merve Verlag.Google Scholar
  41. Jansson, M., Wendt, M., & Åse, C. (2008). Memory work reconsidered. NORA, 16(4), 228–240.Google Scholar
  42. Jenson, J. (1986). Gender and reproduction: Or, babies and the state. Studies in Political Economy, 20(summer), 9–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johansson, S. (1995). Introduktion. In S. Johansson (Ed.), Sjukhus och hem som arbetsplats (pp. 9–43). Stockholm: Bonniers.Google Scholar
  44. Kantola, J. (2006). Feminists theorize the state. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kofoed, J. (2007). Ansvar for egen elevhed. Suspensive komparationer på arbejde. In J. Kofoed & D. Staunæs (Eds.), Magtballader—14 fortællinger om magt, modstand og menneskers tilblivelse (pp. 99–121). Copenhagen: Danmarks Pædagogiske Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
  46. Kristeva, J. (1991). Kvindetid. In T. Ørum (Ed.), Køn og moderne tider. Århus: Tiderne skifter.Google Scholar
  47. Law, J. (2007). Making a mess with method. In W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social science methodology (pp. 595–605). New York: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lawrence, R. (2005). Sami, citizenship and non-recognition in Sweden and the European Union. In G. Cant, A. Goodall, & J. Inns (Eds.), Discourses and silences: Indigenous peoples, risks and resistance (pp. 103–114). Christchurch: University of Canterbury, Geography Department.Google Scholar
  49. Lykke, N., Markussen, R., & Olesen, F. (2000). There are always more things going on than you thought: Methodologies as thinking technologies—interview with Donna Haraway. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, 9(4), 52–60.Google Scholar
  50. Meagher, G., & Szebehely, M. (2013). Four Nordic countries—Four responses to the international trend on marketisation. In G. Meagher & M. Szebehely (Eds.), Marketisation in eldercare (pp. 241–288). Stockholm: Department of Social Work, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
  51. Moi, T. (1985). Sexual/textual politics. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  52. Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  53. Newman, J., & Tonkens, E. (2011). Introduction. In J. Newman & E. Tonkens (Eds.), Participation, responsibility and choice: Summoning the active citizen in Western European welfare states (pp. 9–28). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Onyx, J., & Small, J. (2001). Memory-work: The method. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(6), 773–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Patai, D. (1983). Beyond defensiveness: Feminist research strategies. Women’s Studies International Forum, 6(2), 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ranci, C., & Pavolini, E. (2011). Reforms in long-term care policies in Europe: An introduction. In C. Ranci & E. Pavolini (Eds.), Reforms in long-term care policies—Investigating institutional change and social impacts (pp. 3–22). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  57. Rasmussen, B. (2001). Corporate strategy and gendered professional identities: Reorganization and the struggle for recognition and positions. Gender, Work & Organizations, 8(3), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rausch, D. (2008). Diverging old-age care developments in Sweden and Denmark 1980–2000. Social Policy and Administration, 42(3), 267–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ritzaus Bureau. (2007a, September 20). Varme hænder er tyske.Google Scholar
  60. Ritzaus Bureau. (2007b, December 29). Ældreplejen forringet trods reform.Google Scholar
  61. Rönnblom, M. (2011). Poststructural comparative politics: What to compare and how. In A. Bletsas & C. Beasley (Eds.), Strategic interventions and exchanges: A festschrift in honour of Carol Bacchi (pp. 121–140). Adelaide: University of Adelaide Press.Google Scholar
  62. Spivak, G. C. (1994). Can the subaltern speak? In P. Wiiliams & L. Chrisman (Eds.), Colonial discourse and post-colonial theory—A reader (pp. 66–111). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Staten, H. (1985). Wittgenstein and Derrida. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  64. Tronto, J. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  65. Widerberg, K. (1995). Kundskabens kön—minnen, refleksioner og teori. Stockholm: Norstedts publishers.Google Scholar
  66. Whitford, M. (1991). Luce Irigaray: Philosophy in the feminine. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and BusinessRoskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark

Personalised recommendations