Search results

Purpose – This chapter shows how professional women from diverse geographic locations claim belonging in the public sphere by using motherhood as an important strategy for negotiating gendered and classed spaces of belonging while constructing moral agency and proper citizenship as women.

Methodology/Approach – During anthropological research in Sudan and Mexico, the biographic narratives of two women, both key informants in larger, long-term ethnographic projects, were obtained by each researcher by engaging in a process of intersubjective knowledge production. These were analysed using the method of context analysis for dialogically constructed ‘narrations of the nation’.

Findings – The trope of moral motherhood works in widely differing national contexts as a means for women to claim a position in a public space and at the same time to negotiate the boundaries between private and public domains. Invoking this trope enables professional women to forge public belonging and to participate in politics, while still safeguarding their femininity and their decency.

Originality – This chapter demonstrates that national discourses about motherhood can be instrumental in creating a sense of civic belonging for professional women in two nation-states with widely diverse (post)colonial histories. Comparing narratives of belonging from such different national contexts can provide insight into belonging as an intrinsic part of identity constructions in paternalistic states. Both narratives show similarities in the way that motherhood constitutes a trope for active female citizenship whereby women actively claim public spaces and contest dominant discourses, which in the process de-essentializes motherhood.

The progressive limits to rights mobilization have become starkly apparent in the past two decades. No new suspect classes have been forthcoming from the Supreme Court since 1977 despite continued demands for legal recognition by lesbians and gays, indigenous peoples and others interested in expanding civil rights doctrine. Public tolerance for civil rights measures has likewise dried up. Since the 1960s, referenda on civil rights have halted affirmative action programs, limited school busing and housing discrimination protections, promoted English-only laws, limited AIDS policies, and ended the judicial recognition of same-sex marriage, among other issues. Nearly 80% of these referenda have had outcomes realizing the Madisonian fear of “majority tyranny”¹ and signaling the Nietzschean dread of a politics of resentment (Brown, 1995, p. 214; Connolly, 1991, p. 64).

This chapter provides an analysis of the history of politics in sport, how nationalism has amplified divisions in politics and sports and how social media has impacted politics in sports.

The authors examine how the nationalism narrative is present in sports, thus further enmeshing politics in sport. A review of literature and case studies are used to provide context of how athletes have used their social media for political purposes and how political ideologies and social media can impact international sport markets.

While politics and sports being deeply intertwined is not new, social media has pushed even publicly apolitical organizations to get involved in political discussions. Social media has allowed for some to continue pushing a nationalism narrative as it relates to sport and challenge athletes who appear to threaten seemingly nationalistic values. However, social media also enables athletes to engage their fans and advocate for themselves and political issues in real time.

n/a.

The chapter looks at nationalism, politics in sport and how social media can be used to further amplify and/or divide over political ideologies. Athletes are in a unique position to use their social media platforms to speak directly to their fans and engage in politics, pushing organizations to seemingly abandon their once public apolitical stances. This chapter examines how athletes, organizations and politicians are using social media to debate matters, advocate for social justice and call attention to a myriad of political issues.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and evaluate red tourism in China and, in doing so, shed light on the complex relationships between tourism, heritage and identity politics.

Mixed methods – literature review, document analysis, interviews with government officials, travel agents and tourists.

Red tourism is an initiative to preserve, promote and pass down China’s communist past that is underpinned by political purposes. It has resulted in an imbalance between the government’s designation of communist heritage sites all over the country and the concentration of visitors in a small number of popular destinations. Red tourism fosters allegiance to the Communist Party of China. At the same time, it is expected to bring economic opportunities to remote locations through tourism spending and the branding opportunities that it provides. However, a different emphasis can be discerned at the national and local levels, whereby the former emphasizes political cohesion and the latter stresses local economic development.

Four sites are investigated in detail out of the hundreds that might have been explored.

Recommendations are made to: diversify the product, increase stakeholder involvement, enhance heritage conservation plans, improve interpretation.

Many implications for relationships between governments at all levels and the Chinese population. Also implications for the economic well-being of places and people adjacent to red tourism sites.

One of very few papers in either English or Chinese that addresses the red tourism policy in detail and with substantial empirical materials.

Handler's genealogy of postmodernism recounted in his address recognizes its origin in aesthetic disciplines and its somewhat viral transcription into social jurisprudence: “the postmodern concept of subversion developed first in language and literary theory, art, and architecture and then spread into politics and law” (1992a, p. 698). Although Handler's rejection of deconstruction stems from what he sees to be its political quiescence, its association with aesthetic critiques of modernism haunts his claims as one source of its essential conservatism. Aesthetic values, he implies, remain distant or distinct from pressing issues of political and social inequality.

This chapter considers a narrative attuned to the tensions of bicultural performativity (blackness and whiteness) and how that performance relates to the politics of dislocation within the context of pursuing an advanced degree at a prestigious university. It does so by providing moments from my own narrative of self that focuses on an interrupted and hybridized racial project. In this chapter, I attempt to engage the reader by communicating the subjectivity of such moments in a provocative, fragmented, and emotionally charged self-reflexive manner. My own narrative, its performative element, and its racialized nature, are then considered in relation to larger sociological contexts and forces that present bicultural racial formations and their boundary transgression as a regulatory mechanism. Out of these narrative examples, I emphasize the growing centrality of performance studies as a frame of analysis.

Social movement scholars have increasingly drawn attention to the process of “bridge building” in social movements – that is, the process by which activists attempt to resolve conflicts stemming from different collective identities. However, most scholars assume that social movements primarily attempt to resolve tensions among activists themselves, and thus that bridge building is a means to other ends rather than a primary goal of social movement activism. In this chapter, I challenge these assumptions through a case study of a “bridging organization” known as Bridge Builders, which sought as its primary goal to “bridge the gap between the LGBT and Christian communities” at a Christian university in Nashville, Tennessee. I highlight the mechanisms by which Bridge Builders attempted to facilitate bridge building at the university, and I argue that Bridge Builders succeeded in bridging (a) disparate institutional identities at their university, (b) “structural holes” between LGBT- and religious-identified groups at their university, and (c) oppositional personal identities among organizational members. As I discuss in the conclusion, the case of Bridge Builders has implications for literatures on bridge building in social movements, cultural and biographical consequences of social movements, and social movement strategy.