Three feminist critiques of varying feminist capitulations to crisis-hegemony
Grear, A. (2011). Three feminist critiques of varying feminist capitulations to crisis-hegemony. In S. Kouvo & Z. Pearson (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on contemporary international law: Between resistance and compliance? (pp. 71-74). Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/7529
The seemingly intractable pull between the Scylla of 'resistance' and the Charybdis of 'compliance' and the agonistic dilemmas presented by the complexity and difficulty of positioning feminism in relation to them both is well-traced in these chapters by Dianne Otto, Julie Mertus and Maria Grahn-Farley. While a range of themes emerges from reflection on these nuanced and thoughtful chapters, at the heart of each, in different ways, the colonisation of certain emancipatory feminist projects and agendas by the crisis-driven post 9/11 international legal discourse emerges as a central concern, along with a set of related sub-themes: The traction (and inequality) of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic thought-worlds and actions; the pernicious effects of decontextualisation (either the transcendence or the 'emptying out' of context (including,worryingly, lived experience of violation)); the fragile potency of ground level viewpoint, action and perspective; the false totality of the securityhegemon; its liquid propagandism, and related concerns circling around co-opted feminist responses.
© 2011 Hart Publishing. Used with permission.
- Law Papers