Strand 1: Women’s and Gender Studies between Neo-discipline and Interdisciplinarity

Strand 1:  Women’s and Gender Studies between Neo-discipline and Interdisciplinarity]

In the spirit of the general theme of the conference concerning the “politics of location,” this strand opens up a forum for critical engagement about women’s and gender studies as an institutional and intellectual location. In previous decades when research and programs were developing, there were debates about whether women’s and gender studies research should be integrated in traditional disciplines or should exist in their own interdisciplinary location as an entirely new/ “neo-discipline.” And indeed, institutionally, we have seen manifestations of both strategies in European universities.

This year’s conference invites scholars to think about more contemporary inflections on the epistemological and institutional foundations of Women’s and Gender Studies. We list certain questions to stimulate paper ideas, but the strand is open to any focus that falls within the general parameters of the strand’s theme.

·        What is the status of “women” in Women’s Studies programs in a neo-discipline that includes new objects of analyses such as masculinities? Similarly, how does Gender Studies define its analytical focus at a historical moment when scholars wish to forefront sexuality or queer theory in studies that do not place the phenomenon of gender per se at the core of its analyses? What are the benefits and costs of more narrowly defining the borders of what is legitimate to study in Women’s Studies and Gender Studies?

·        What is the relationship of the women’s movement and feminism to Women’s and Gender Studies? Does this academic field require a particular political commitment? If so, what makes this requirement different from state socialist universities’ requirement that research reflect a Marxist politics? And if feminism is the common denominator of research and teaching in the discipline, what is the version of feminism that should/does underlie all Women’s and Gender Studies research? Is any version of feminism acceptable and who decides?

·        Saba Mahmood’s work on the piety movement necessarily leads to a challenging question for feminist research: If Women’s and Gender Studies has historically aimed to empower women and, or highlight resistance through its research, what sort of unspoken philosophical and political assumptions are being made about “freedom” ? That is, does feminist research assume that women/people necessarily want freedom and that oppression must lead to resistance that our studies will, in turn, map and celebrate? How are such assumptions theoretically or politically justified; or, conversely, what renders these assumptions problematic?

·        If one of the epistemological principles at the heart of Women’s and Gender Studies is that its research is “intersectional,” how do we justify giving more analytical attention to women/gender over race, religion, nationality, etc. in our research and teaching? What does intersectionality mean if women’s and gender studies research must have women or gender at its core before the research even begins? To use the geographical metaphor of the conference, is the “intersection” at the heart of women’s and gender research more like a main boulevard with smaller streets running off of it; or is it an axis whereby no one category is presumed to be more central or crucial at the outset of the research?

·        Finally, what are new emphases and approaches that have emerged in the last 10 years of the discipline and how do they build upon or challenge the traditions of Women and Gender Studies research?

The strand is coordinated by Allaine Cerwonka (Cerwonkaa@ceu.hu). Please contact us with questions or ideas.

Note that the deadline for the call for papers is August 15, 2011.