Search results

The young feminists in this chapter were part of several feminist groups in Manchester, analysed in this ethnographic case study as part of Manchester’s feminist movement. The young women described their motivations for ‘be(com)ing feminist’ as ‘personal-political’ and ‘political-personal’ journeys (Hanisch, 1970) that came about because of individual and group experiences of gendered disadvantage and a recognition that the needs of women, and women’s equality, would not be achieved in current political and democratic arrangements that favour a focus on the ‘common good’. While the young women campaigned for several causes (abortion rights, safer streets, sexual objectification, and so on), their frustrations with the mainstream neglect of women’s issues were the key drivers for self-organising for political action. The aim of their activism was to dismantle (or at the very least diminish) the patriarchal social order, and their participation and activism focused on women’s issues and rights and the need to create a ‘politics of difference’ (Young, 1990) that addresses their group needs, differences, and specificities.

The purpose of this paper is to explore leadership for diversity informed by intersectionality and radical politics. Surfacing the political character of intersectionality, the authors suggest that a leadership for diversity imbued with a commitment to political action is essential for the progress towards equality.

Drawing lessons from the grassroots, political organizing of the black and Indigenous activist groups Combahee River Collective and Idle No More, the authors explore how these groups relied on feminist alliances to address social justice issues. Learning from their focus on intersectionality, the authors consider the role of politically engaged leadership in advancing diversity and equality in organizations.

The paper finds that leadership for diversity can be developed by shifting towards a more radical and transversal politics that challenges social and political structures that enable intersectionality or interlocking oppressions. This challenge relies on critical alliances negotiated across multiple intellectual, social and political positions and enacted through flexible solidarity to foster a collective ethical responsibility and social change. These forms of alliance-based praxis are important for advancing leadership for diversity.

This paper contributes to studies of leadership and critical diversity studies by articulating an alliance-based praxis for leadership underpinned by intersectionality, radical democracy and transversal politics.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the politics involved in local struggles against forestry extractivism. The forestry sector is dependent on vast areas of land for tree plantations. This creates deep-rooted conflicts between global corporations that seek access to natural resources and locals whose way of life requires the use of the same land.

This study draws on a political ontology frame of reference and storytelling methodology to build on testimonies of three small-scale farmers who actively seek to resist forestry plantations next to their land in rural Uruguay. The stories reveal the impossibilities they face when raising claims in the public political sphere and how they lack the means to organise strong collective resistance.

One of the testimonies reveals how the farmers engage in a form of “politics of place” (Escobar, 2001, 2008) to counter the power of the proponents of forestry and the further expansion of plantations. This form of politics strengthens and politicises the ontological difference between extractive and non-extractive worlds. The farmers seek to build new imaginations of rural living and sustainable futures without the presence of extractive corporations. They fulfil this aim by designing community projects that aim to revitalise ancient indigenous legends, set up agro-ecological farms, and teach schoolchildren about the environment.

The struggles of the farmers indicate the territorial transformations involved in (un)making (non)extractive places and the need to expand the analysis of the politics involved in struggles against extractivism beyond social struggles.

This article aims to develop the methodological and intellectual approach taken in the authors' co‐authored book to explore the synergies and disconnections in the experience of being in the academy at different historical moments using the inter‐relationship between different feminisms in the context of the authors' lived experiences as a mother and daughter whose experience of the academy has crossed second‐wave feminism into third wave. There have been significant demographic, cultural and legislative shifts, but the authors' conversations demonstrate the endurance of imbalances of power and the continuing need for a feminist politics of difference which can engage with contemporary life in the academy.

This is primarily a theoretical paper that adopts feminist approaches to reflection and dialogue. The article is designed to bring together lived experience across generations, feminist theories and methodologies and the implications for activism. The paper uses the device of “I‐Kath I‐Sophie” as part of an autoethnographic approach to the cross‐generational conversation.

Far from being redundant, the authors argue that feminist critiques of inequalities that are often manifest in women's invisibility and silence even in the academy in the twenty‐first century – there is still the need to support a politics of difference and to explore ways of giving women a voice. The persistence of inequalities means that feminist battles have not been entirely won. The authors argue for dialogue between the feminisms of mothers and daughters.

Feminist concepts and arguments from what has been called the “second wave” are still useful, especially in relation to maintaining the category woman as a speaking subject who can engage in collective action.

The authors' arguments support the continuation of spaces for women to share experience within the academy, for example in feminist reading groups and through women's networks.

Feminist theories and activism remain important political forces for women in the academy today and post feminism is a questionable conceptualisation and phenomenon. In times when feminist battles may seem to have been won there remain issues to explore in relation to a new problem with no name.

The article is original in its authorship, methodological approach to a conversation that crosses experience and theoretical frameworks across generations and in its support for a twenty‐first century politics of difference.

Objective of the study is to determine the factors effecting successful women leadership and to draw a comparison between Thailand and Malaysia. Primary data were collected from both countries. Quantitative research approach was used in this study by using a cross-sectional research design. Population of the study was based on the textile companies of Thailand and Malaysia. Employees of textile companies were selected as the respondents. Partial Least Square (PLS) was used for data analysis. Results of the study found that learning autonomy, emotional intelligence, political differences and organization culture (OC) are the major factor which effect on successful women leadership in both countries. Moreover, in both countries, learning autonomy, emotional intelligence and OC have positive role in successful women leadership, however, political differences effect negatively on successful women leadership. Additionally, there is a difference between both countries, in case of moderating role of political differences and OC. In Thailand, OC has positive role to enhance women leadership through emotional intelligence. In case of Malaysia, political differences weaken the positive relationship between the emotional intelligence and successful women leadership.

The establishment and implementation of a relatively strict immigration regime in Norway has taken place within a vocabulary of equality, humanity, social justice and decency. One aspect is an insistence on a “restricted and controlled” immigration in order to protect a state of equality in Norway and avoid the emergence of a new “underclass.” Another is the stress on Norway’s humanitarian traditions and the rich country’s responsibility towards people in need, also globally. A whole rhetoric has evolved where immigration politics appears as a matter of decency, somehow apart from the more pragmatic tug-of-wars affecting other fields of politics. On the one hand, a “restricted and controlled” immigration is necessary in order to protect certain moral qualities of Norwegian society. But on the other, immigration politics has also appeared as an indicator of the moral qualities of the Norwegian nation-state thus requiring “decent policies” in order not to threaten the image of a nation embodying such moral qualities.

Approaching anti-essentialism from the perspective of multiculturalism this article reexamines the value of tolerance in dealing with inter-cultural conflicts and in facilitation of multicultural discourses. It asserts that tolerance can be a potentially useful practice in specific local contexts, but it is not an ideal in itself. The article questions the role of public administration in building tolerance for cultural diversity and argues that providing visible forms of public recognition of cultural practices could be one possible role for government agencies.

Of all the aspects of theories that contain “postmodern sensibilities,” none seems to engender as much unease and resistance in its critics as the presumed celebration of moral deficit and the supposed debunking of ethical universalism. The charge of nihilism is usually traced back to a number of thinkers broadly associated with postmodern or poststructural theory. Nietzsche and his attempt to go “beyond good and evil,” as well as Foucault's disdain for the centered epistemological subject, are frequently cited as examples of postmodern theory's inability to grapple with the ubiquity of ethical issues, concerns for responsibility and the necessity of making moral valuations. While concerns for ethics do not appear, at first glance, as central issues, theory that is broadly associated with postmodernism is, I contend, often deeply aware of issues surrounding ethics and morality.

In 1983, in typically Parisian manner, J. F. Lyotard claimed that redistributive conflict had gone out of fashion, with the focus of postmodern conflict revolving increasingly less around issues of resource allocation. Contemporary societies were having to deal with le différend, with horizontal conflicts rooted in heterogeneous languages, instances, and rules. The concern and claims of one group could not be understood within the languages of the other (Belohradski, 1990; Lyotard, 1983).