Suchergebnisse

Savigny examines how the prevalence of sexism and misogyny across the media, entertainment and cultural industries keeps sexist values firmly within popular consciousness. She traces the development of key feminist thinking and explores what we can do next after the #MeToo era.

Engaging in public discussion and debate are crucial aspects of the impact agenda, but what are the politics of this engagement? What happens when female academics engage with, or are reported by, media in disseminating their research? Does negative impact 'count' as impact? Adopting a poststructuralist intersectional feminist analysis, this article uses the REF policy agenda as a case study in order to explore these questions. Drawing on extensive qualitative interview data, I operationalize the concept 'cultural sexism' as a mechanism to connect micro and macro analysis, using cumulative individual experiences to render visible wider social and political power structures. This article argues that while women may seek to actively build impact and public engagement in to their research agendas, we need to be cognizant that the site of interaction between media and academia is gendered and raced. I argue that we therefore need to reflect upon the ethics of pursuing a policy which (1) disproportionately exposes a diversity of women to structural and symbolic violence (2) has the potential to silence women's contribution to knowledge and (3) conversely may serve to simply privilege masculinised assumptions as to what does and does not count as knowledge.

Politics and International Relations (IR) tend to be discussed as separate disciplines. Rather than emphasising their shared divisions and methodological differences, dominant narratives separate the two, but these narratives also serve to reinforce and legitimate (to slightly differing degrees) the dominance of American positivism. As such, it is argued that if we are to understand the contemporary state of both disciplines, it is useful to reflect on their historical development. The aim of this article is (briefly) to map critically the development of Politics and IR as disciplines that, while having differing historical beginnings, have developed as parallel rather than integrated disciplines facing similar internal epistemological, methodological and cultural divisions. It is noted, however, that their parallel development is uneven, with challenges to the mainstream coming far earlier in IR than Politics, and as such opening the way for much greater acceptance of the notion of methodological pluralism in contemporary IR (outside the US) than in the study of Politics. Further, it is argued that the writing of histories of the disciplines thus far have served to legitimate and reinforce dominant Western conceptions of IR and Politics both descriptively and normatively. Adapted from the source document.