2004
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies
  4. Volume 27, Issue 2/3
  5. Article
Volume 27, Issue 2/3
  • ISSN: 1388-3186
  • E-ISSN: 2352-2437
file format pdf download PDF

Abstract

Abstract

This article discusses an anti-gender mobilisation at the University of Amsterdam that sparked a widespread media and political debate about the perceived threat of ‘wokeness’ to academic freedom. Our analysis draws from a range of experiences, including classroom dynamics, institutional hearings, meetings, and informal discussions among colleagues. We examine the challenges of care and feminist pedagogy considering allegations that gender and sexuality programmes contribute to ‘a concerning radicalisation’ and endorse ‘woke ideology’. Specifically, we explore how the conflation of an individualised notion of academic freedom and potential hate speech became plausible in the neoliberal university, and how we responded by reclaiming academic freedom as a justice-centred collective right and duty. In the face of institutional silence and ongoing denial of the legitimacy of non-binary persons, we engaged in recalcitrant acts of resistance. These actions, which included discussing and critically analysing the allegations in some of our classes, underscored the university’s inadequacy in safeguarding marginalised students and staff, as well as the academic disciplines we represent.

© Maja Hertoghs, Wigbertson Julian Isenia, Willemijn Krebbekx & Rahil Roodsaz. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-ND BY 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2024.2-3.003.HERT
2024-09-01
2024-11-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/13883186/27/2/3/TVGN2024.2-3.003.HERT.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2024.2-3.003.HERT&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ahmed, S. (2021). Complaint!Durham: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, E. (2020). Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science. In E.N.Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/feminism-epistemology
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Archer, L. (2008). The new neoliberal subjects? Young/er academics’ constructions of professional identity. Journal of Education Policy, 23(3), 265–285.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Ball, S. (2021). The making of a neoliberal academic. Research in Teacher Education, 11(1), 15–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Beck, D., Habed, A.J., & Henninger, A. (Eds.). (2023). Blurring boundaries: ‘Antigender’ ideology meets feminist and LGBTIQ+ discourses. Leverkusen-Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bey, M. (2021). Black trans feminism. Durham: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bracke, S (2023). Een spook zonder vaste vorm. Groene Amsterdammer, 9, 38–43. Retrieved from https://www.groene.nl/artikel/een-spook-zonder-vaste-vorm
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, W. (2004). ‘The most we can hope for…’: Human rights and the politics of fatalism. South Atlantic Quarterly, 103(2–3), 451–463.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Butler, J. (1999 [1990]). Gender trouble. Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Butler, J. (2024). Who’s afraid of gender?New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Carmona, C. (2021) Silencing by not telling: Testimonial void as a new kind of testimonial injustice. Social Epistemology, 35(6), 577–592.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Corrêa, S. (2022). ‘Missing the point’: A conversation with Sonia Corrêa about the emergence and complexities of anti-gender politics at the intersections of human rights and health. Global Public Health, 17(11), 3243–3253.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Darder, A., Hernandez, K., Lam, K.D., & Baltodano, M. (Eds.). (2023). The critical pedagogy reader. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dijkgraaf, R. (2023). Antwoord op schriftelijke vragen van de leden Bisschop (SGP) en Beertema (PVV) over het artikel ‘Hoe wokecultuur docent het zwijgen oplegt’. Retrieved from https://open.overheid.nl/documenten/ronl-08789da8f7a5f0c-8c7aa8dce97ea35c4e65c6199/pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Doloriert, C. & Sambrook, S. (2012). Organisational autoethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 1(1), 83–95.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Engebretsen, E.L. (2022). Scientizing gender? An examination of anti-gender campaigns on social media, Norway. In H.Eslen-Ziya & A.Giorgi (Eds.), Populism and science in Europe (pp. 185–206). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Essanhaji, Z. (2023). The (im)possibility of complaint: On efforts of inverting and (en)countering the university. Gender and Education, 35(8), 758–773.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Graff, A., & Korolczuk, E. (2022). Anti-gender politics in the populist moment. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Gray, E.M. (2019). Re-doing teacher education: Joyful differences? australian queer teacher educators and social justice education. In T.Jones, L.Coll, L.Van Leent, & Y.Taylor (Eds.), Uplifting gender and sexuality education research (pp. 141–157). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Hall, B.L., Godrie, B., & Heck, I. (2020). Knowledge democracy and epistemic in/justice: Reflections on a conversation. The Canadian Journal of Action Research, 21(1), 27–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Harding, S. (2004). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. hooks, b. (2014 [1994]). Teaching to transgress. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Huijink, W. (2022). Opvattingen over seksuele en genderdiversiteit in Nederland en Europa 2022. Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Isenia, W.J., & Steinbock, E. (2022). How to read Dr Betty Paërl’s whip: Intersectional visions of trans/gender, sex worker and decolonial activism in the archive. Feminist Review, 132(1), 24–45.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. KNAW (2022). Sociale veiligheid in de Nederlandse wetenschap. Van papier naar praktijk. Amsterdam: KNAW.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Kuhar, R., & Paternotte, D. (2017). Anti-gender campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing against equality. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lee, C. (2018). Culture, consent and confidentiality in workplace autoethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 7(3), 302–319.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lorenz, C. (2012). If you’re so smart, why are you under surveillance? Universities, neoliberalism, and new public management. Critical Inquiry, 38(3), 599–629.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Mann, A., Mol, A., Satalkar, P., Savirani, A., Selim, N., Sur, M., Yates-Doerr, E. (2011). Mixing methods, tasting fingers: Notes on an ethnographic experiment. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory1(1), 221–243. doi:10.14318/hau1.1.009
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Mayer, S., & Goetz, J. (2023). Global perspectives on anti-feminism. Far-right and religious attacks on equality and diversity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. doi:10.3366/jj.7358671.4
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Morrall, P., & Goodman, B. (2013). Critical thinking, nurse education and universities: Some thoughts on current issues and implications for nursing practice. Nurse Education Today, 33(9), 935–937.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Musariri, L., Ruzibiza, Y., Shio, J., Amoabeng, D., & Bakuri, A. (2024). A call to rethink african scholars beyond ‘local experts’: Mobility, race, and gender in Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 47(1), 4–23. doi:10.1080/01419870.2023.2206464
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Naezer, M., Van den Brink, M, & Benschop, Y. (2019). Harassment in Dutch academia. Exploring manifestations, facilitating factors, effects and solutions. Utrecht: LNVH.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Paternotte, D., & Verloo, M. (2021). De-democratization and the politics of knowledge: Unpacking the cultural Marxism narrative. Social Politics, 28(3), 556–578. doi:10.1093/sp/jxab025
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Pearce, R., Erikainen, S., & Vincent, B. (2020). TERF wars: An introduction. The Sociological Review, 68(4), 677–698.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Readings, B. (1996). The university in ruins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Rechtbank Amsterdam (2023). Vonnis in kort geding zaaknummer C/13/733166 / KG ZA 23-371 EAM/EB. Retrieved from https://linkeddata.overheid.nl/front/portal/document-viewer?ext-id=ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2023:3388
  39. Rooney, E. (2004). A semi-private room. In J.Scott and D.Keates (Eds.), Going public: Feminism and the shifting boundaries of the private sphere (pp. 333–358). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Scott, J. (2022). what kind of freedom is academic freedom?Critical Times, 5(1), 1–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Sitze, A. (2017). Academic unfreedom, unacademic freedom. Massachusetts Review, 58(4), 589–607.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Sørensen, C., Whitley, E.A., Madon, S., Klyachko, D., Hosein, I., & Johnstone, J. (2001). Cultivating recalcitrance in information systems research. Realigning research and practice in information systems development. The Social and Organizational Perspective, 297–316.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Stoker, J., Stolker, C., & Waaldijk, B. (2023). Powerful and vulnerable academic freedom in practice. Retrieved from https://www.uva.nl/binaries/content/assets/uva/nl/nieuws-en-agenda/rapport-commissie-stolker_eng_260723.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Spivak, G.C. (2004). Terror: A speech after 9-11. Boundary 2, 31(2), 81–111.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Thompson-Lee, C. (2017). Heteronormativity in a rural school community: An autoethnography. Rotterdam: Sense publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Van den Berg, M, & Sedee, M. (2023, June). De ‘antigenderbeweging’ klinkt steeds luider in Nederland. NRC, 5June2023. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/06/05/de-antigenderbeweging-is-steeds-luider-in-nederland-a4166360
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Verloo, M. (2018). Gender knowledge, and opposition to the feminist project: Extremeright populist parties in The Netherlands. Politics and Governance, 6(3), 20–30.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Wekker, G., Slootman, M., Icaza, R., Jansen, H., & Vázquez, R. (2016). Let’s do diversity: Report of the diversity commission. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Warner, M. (1991). Introduction: Fear of a queer planet. Social Text, 29, 3–17.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/TVGN2024.2-3.003.HERT
Loading
Keyword(s): academic freedom; anti-gender mobilisation; epistemic in/justice; feminist pedagogy; neoliberal university

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error