Suchergebnisse

Jerusalem's Temple Mount/al-Haram al-Sharif is the holiest place in the world for Jews, the third holiest place for Muslims and a constant feature in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet the gendered dimensions of inter-communal disputes over sacred space in Jerusalem, as well as in other holy places around the world, have been largely neglected, as have women's roles in these site-specific conflicts. An implicit association of women with peaceful politics and syncretic religious practices has obscured the fact that women are often key actors in inter-communal contestation of holy places. This study looks to three contemporary women's movements in and around Jerusalem's Sacred Esplanade: Women for the Temple - a Jewish Orthodox movement for access to Temple Mount; The Murabitat - Muslim women activists devoted to the protection of Al-Aqsa Mosque from Jewish claims; and Women of the Wall - a Jewish feminist mobilization against restrictive gender regulations at the Western Wall. Lihi Ben-Shitrit demonstrates how attention to gender and to women's engagement in conflict over sacred places is essential for understanding what makes contested sacred sites increasingly 'indivisible' for

List of figures -- Acknowledgments -- Note on language -- Forward: a tourist at home -- Introduction -- Women for the temple and the (In)divisibility of Temple Mount -- Women of the wall: feminism between intra-and inter-communal contestation -- Al-Aqsa will not be divided! Murabitat traveling to, studying in, and sighting for Al-Aqsa -- Epilogue -the question of religious freedom.

How do women in conservative religious movements expand spaces for political activism in ways that go beyond their movements' strict ideas about male and female roles? How and why does this activism happen in some movements but not in others? Righteous Transgressions examines these questions by comparatively studying four groups: the Jewish settlers in the West Bank, the ultra-Orthodox Shas, the Islamic Movement in Israel, and the Palestinian Hamas. Lihi Ben Shitrit demonstrates that women's prioritization of a nationalist agenda over a proselytizing one shapes their activist involvement. Ben Shitrit shows how women construct "frames of exception" that temporarily suspend, rather than challenge, some of the limiting aspects of their movements' gender ideology. Viewing women as agents in such movements, she analyzes the ways in which activists use nationalism to astutely reframe gender role transgressions from inappropriate to righteous. The author engages the literature on women's agency in Muslim and Jewish religious contexts, and sheds light on the centrality of women's activism to the promotion of the spiritual, social, cultural, and political agendas of both the Israeli and Palestinian religious right. Looking at the four most influential political movements of the Israeli and Palestinian religious right, Righteous Transgressions reveals how the bounds of gender expectations can be crossed for the political good.

Abstract
Contested sacred sites, over which different religious groups assert claims to exclusivity, have drawn scholarly attention to the spatial interaction between religion and politics. However, the gendered dimensions of inter-communal religious-political disputes over sacred space, and women's roles in these site-specific conflicts, have been largely neglected. Using a case study of Orthodox Jewish women's activism for access to Temple Mount al-Haram al-Sharif, this article demonstrates how attention to gender and to women's engagement in inter-communal conflict over sacred places can illuminate unique intra-communal processes that aim to make a contested sacred site increasingly indivisible for parties to the conflict.

Women's activism in conservative religious-political movements poses a challenge to liberal feminism. Why do women participate in great numbers in political organizations that seem to limit women's freedom and equality? My work with women activists in the Islamic Movement and the Jewish ultra-Orthodox Shas Movement in Israel, both explicitly patriarchal religious revivalist groups similar to other movements across the Middle East, finds that these movements offer women powerful liberatory narratives. This paper takes issue with recent arguments that suggest that pious women experience agency in acts of submission rather than in resistance and that the association of agency with emancipatory desire and action is an expression of a patently Western tradition that celebrates the fiction of the autonomous individual. I find that women activists' interpretations of agency in piety practices are highly invested in the idea of the autonomous individual. The validity of practices, according to activists, rests on the choice and consciousness of the individual and on the rejection of submission to social norms. Furthermore, when we take into account the various class and cultural contexts of Middle Eastern women's piety practices and activism, we find that for many women religious movements offer real liberation from oppressive socio-economic realities and limiting cultural norms.

AbstractRadical‐right parties have gradually penetrated the political mainstream in many liberal democracies, marking a trend of 'democratic backsliding'. We propose that women's increasing visibility as representatives of radical‐right agendas makes democratic backsliders, their policies and their parties seem more legitimate, and may help explain their growing public acceptance. Our studies provide the first systematic examination of this hypothesis in three countries – Israel, Germany and the United States (N = 7203). In Studies 1a‐c, we show that voters perceive democracy‐eroding policies through a gendered lens – they attribute gender stereotypes to the parties promoting these policies and to the public supporting these policies. In Studies 2a‐c, we experimentally demonstrate the effect of politicians' gender on public acceptance of democracy‐eroding policies, politicians and parties, and demonstrate the role of gender stereotypes in mediating this effect. Finally, we show that the audiences susceptible to the mainstreaming effect of politicians' gender are precisely those that are often particularly repelled by radical‐right agendas and their perceived masculine image: Women and left‐wing voters.

Across the globe, women are increasingly more visible as leaders and activists in radical-right parties and movements. Does women's visibility in radical-right politics, both institutionalized and non-institutionalized, affect public acceptance of radical-right agendas? The present paper proposes a 'radical-right gender mainstreaming model', arguing that women in radical-right politics are perceived by the general public through a prism of feminine gender stereotypes, which counteract radical-right parties' and movements' masculine stereotypes, thus 'softening' their image and making them more acceptable to the general public. Across four experimental studies conducted in the Israeli context, we find strong evidence that women's visibility as radical-right parliamentary representatives (Studies 1a and 1b) and as radical-right political activists (Studies 2a and 2b) increases acceptance of and support for these parties' and movements' agenda, particularly among women. We further demonstrate that these effects are mediated by the attribution of feminine stereotypes (warmth) to women versus men political actors. Implications of these findings are discussed.

AbstractAcross the globe, women are increasingly more visible as leaders and activists in radical‐right parties and movements. Does women's visibility in radical‐right politics, both institutionalized and non‐institutionalized, affect public acceptance of radical‐right agendas? The present paper proposes a 'radical‐right gender mainstreaming model', arguing that women in radical‐right politics are perceived by the general public through a prism of feminine gender stereotypes, which counteract radical‐right parties' and movements' masculine stereotypes, thus 'softening' their image and making them more acceptable to the general public. Across four experimental studies conducted in the Israeli context, we find strong evidence that women's visibility as radical‐right parliamentary representatives (Studies 1a and 1b) and as radical‐right political activists (Studies 2a and 2b) increases acceptance of and support for these parties' and movements' agenda, particularly among women. We further demonstrate that these effects are mediated by the attribution of feminine stereotypes (warmth) to women versus men political actors. Implications of these findings are discussed.

The relationship between gender and political aggression is hotly debated and the empirical evidence is often mixed. While many surveys find a gender gap, with women less supportive of politically motivated aggression and violence than men, numerous case studies point to women's active involvement in political violence and refute the association of women with peacefulness. This article argues that the gender–aggression relation depends upon (1) the type of political aggression under study (i.e. direct vs. indirect political aggression), and (2) contextual factors, notably the salience of a protracted conflict. Using original datasets representing Israeli Jews (N = 3,126) we found that in the context of protracted conflict, gender has a unique effect on support for indirect forms of political aggression, over and above other central predictors of political aggression (i.e. political orientation and threat perceptions), such that women are actually more supportive of politically motivated social distancing and exclusion of out-groups in conflict as compared to men. Women and men, however, do not differ in their support for direct, politically motivated, violent acts against government officials. Results also shed light on potential mechanisms underlying these differences (and lack thereof), in the context of protracted conflict. The findings cast further doubt on the stereotype of 'peaceful women' and point to the need for policymakers concerned with conflict resolution to address context-related factors when considering the gender-based differences in political aggression.

"Political Research in the Middle East and North Africa focuses specifically on doing research in one of the most important regions in contemporary world politics. It is also one of the most difficult areas to do research in given the current high levels of violence, political instability, and authoritarianism that plague the region. Gathering together a large and diverse group of researchers who study the region, Janine Clark and Francesco Cavatorta's volume will serve as a foundational methods guide for young academics on how to conceive and carry out their research projects. At the same time the topics in the book provide a useful refresher to more established scholars so that their methodological training and ethical considerations keep pace with novel approaches and changing obstacles in the field. What makes this volume especially useful is its focus on methodological 'lessons learned' from the contributors' first hand experiences. Each chapter deals with the challenges of implementing qualitative and quantitative methods in the field, the real-life obstacles encountered and the possible solutions to overcoming them. It will therefore be an invaluable companion book to more standard methods books, which focus on the 'how to' of methods but are often devoid of any real discussion of the challenges of on-the-ground fieldwork."--Publisher's summary