University of Edinburgh School of Social and Political Studies Honours Option

SSPS10001: Contemporary Feminist Debates Semester 1 (Autumn 2013)

Class times: Tuesdays14.10 - 17.00 Location: Seminar Room 1, Ground Floor, Chrystal Macmillan Building

Convener: Dr Radhika Govinda Chrystal Macmillan Building 6.21 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Wednesdays 14.00-16.00 or by appointment Convener: Dr Mary Holmes Chrystal Macmillan Building 6.30 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Wednesdays 14.00-16.00 or by appointment

CONTEMPORARY FEMINIST DEBATES: Week-by-Week Course Outline KEY CONCEPTS & WHY THEY MATTER Week 1

Week 2 Week 3

Introduction to the Course Allocation to Groups 1-4 (depending on numbers) Radhika Govinda and Mary Holmes

Lecture: What is Feminism? Mary Holmes Class Discussion on videos on feminism as seen through the eyes of others

Group & Class Discussions: (a) West & Zimmerman, & (b) the four group exercises Lecture: Is Universal Sisterhood Possible? Radhika Govinda

Lecture: What is Gender? Why does the concept matter? Mary Holmes Guidance on Group exercises for Week 2

Lecture: What is Feminist Theory? Mary Holmes Group & Class Discussions on set reading

DEBATES, ISSUES & CONTROVERSIES Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Week 8

Week 9

Week 10

Week 11

Lecture: Sameness, difference and equality: does our biology constrain us? Alison Koslowski Lecture: Is the welfare state increasing the autonomy of women or creating new dependencies? Elke Heins Lecture: Why does women’s political underrepresentation matter? Fiona MacKay Lecture: Gender and Violence Lynn Jamieson

Group & Class Discussions on set reading

Lecture: Can hegemonic masculinity be challenged? Claire Duncanson Lecture: Women’s bodies: agency, or selfobjectification? Fiona McQueen Lecture: Feminism and ‘Green’ Issues? Lynn Jamieson

Group & Class Discussions on set reading

Class Discussion on set reading

Debate in Small Groups for and against gender quotas Class Discussion on set reading

Small Group Discussions on set reading

Small Group Discussions on set reading

Course Overview & Review: Mary Holmes and Radhika Govinda SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 2

Teaching Team Name

Subject Area

Email

Dr Mary Holmes

Sociology

[email protected]

Dr Radhika Govinda

Sociology

[email protected]

Dr Alison Koslowski

Social Policy

[email protected]

Dr Elke Heins

Social Policy

[email protected]

Prof Fiona MacKay

Politics & IR

[email protected]

Prof Lynn Jamieson

Sociology

[email protected]

Dr Claire Duncanson

Politics & IR

[email protected]

Ms Fiona McQueen

Sociology

[email protected]

Course Governance and Format This is a ‘School of Social & Political Science’ course which is currently convened and administered from Sociology.The class meets for one session of 3 hours a week (including a 20 minute break).A range ofteaching methods will be employed, including lectures and mini-lectures, question-andanswer sessions, small group and whole class discussions and exercises, and non-assessed group presentations. Please note all teaching begins promptly at 14.10. Students registered for the course are expected to: • attend the weekly class regularly and punctually • make an active contribution to group discussions and exercises in class • participate in student group presentations • read allthe ‘To Do’ readings for each lecture and write bullet-points for discussion on these • complete assessed coursework on time

Communication: Most notices will be posted on the CFD pages on Learn. Please make sure that you regularly check the Announcements section of the course pages. From time to time we will email you, using your University email address. It is your responsibility to check this regularly, even if it is not your usual email address. You can set up an auto-forward facility to ensure all mail sent to your university account is forwarded to your usual email address.

Summary of Intended Learning Outcomes: The course aims to develop students’ understanding of gender, feminist debates, and different feminist approaches to the study of gender across the social sciences, to stimulate interest in the subject, and to support students in developing their research, organisational and communication skills. Upon completion of the course, students should be able to: • Understand and appraise the main feminist approaches to the study of gender; • Understand the links between different strands of feminist thought, mainstream social and political thought, and contemporary social and political issues and debates; • Develop research and analytical skills that help facilitate independent learning; • Be able to communicate to others in a clear and concise manner, both verbally and in writing, nurtured in classroom activities and essay construction and feedback; • Co-operate with others in shared learning in seminars through small group work and listening. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 3

Assessment: Assessment for the course is based on a short essay worth 25% and a long essay worth 75%. A list of essay questions and guidance for essay writing are provided at the end of this handbook and are also posted on Learn, together with a link to the School-wide marking descriptors.

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF ESSAYS Honours students will submit online using our submission system – ELMA. You will not be required to submit a paper copy. Marked course work, grades and feedback will be returned online – you will not receive a paper of your marked course work or feedback. For information, help and advice on submitting coursework and accessing feedback, please see the ELMA wiki at https://www.wiki.ed.ac.uk/display/SPSITWiki/ELMA Late Submission of Essays The School of Social & Political Science does not operate a system of ‘extensions’. If you are submitting an essay late you should also complete a Late Penalty Waiver (LPW) form explaining any mitigating circumstances. In the absence of a LPW, or where a LPW is submitted without a genuine case for mitigation late penalties will be applied. Note that if you do have good reason for being late with an essay, and you provide adequate evidence explaining this, you will not be penalised! Please see the Sociology Honours handbook for full details of our procedures. SHORT ESSAY: Your short essay is due no later than noon on Monday 28th October. You must submit your essay through ELMA. Penalties apply for late submission. • •

•

• •

Your short essay should be between 1400-1600 words. Essays above 1,600 words will be penalized using the Ordinary level criterion of 1 mark for every 20 words over length: anything between 1,601 and 1,620 words will lose one point, between 1,621 and 1,640 two points, and so on. Note that the lower 1400 figure is a guideline for students which you will not be penalized for going below. However, you should note that shorter essays are unlikely to achieve the required depth and that this will be reflected in your mark. Do not put your name or matriculation number on the front of the essay, only your Exam Number. Please also state a precise word count.

Please note that essays submitted on time will be returned to you through ELMA within three working weeks.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 4

LONG ESSAY: Long essays must be submitted through ELMA no later than noon on Monday 9th December. • •

• • •

Essays should be no longer than 4500 words and no shorter than 3500 words, excluding bibliography. A good essay is likely to be close to the upper limit. The penalty for excessive word length in coursework is one mark deducted for each additional 20 words over the limit. The limit is 4500 words, so anything between 4501 and 4520 words will lose one point, and so on. Do not put your name or matriculation number on the front of the essay, only your Exam Number. Please also state a precise word count. Submission procedures are the same as the short essay – you must submit an electronic copy via ELMA.

Students may submit a (non-assessed) long essay plan for feedback– this should be in bullet point form and not longer than ONE A4 side - in Week 10 to Radhika Govinda and Mary Holmes (please email as file attachments). Comments and advice on these will be given during office hours in Week 11. Marked essays will be returned to you through ELMA within three working weeks.

Students with learning difficulties: Advice, guidance and support materials are available to students with learning difficulties. Well in advance of coursework deadlines, you should contact the University Disability Office for further information. See the Disability Office website: http://www.disability-office.ed.ac.uk/

Plagiarism: You must ensure that you understand what the University regards as plagiarism and why the University takes it seriously. All cases of suspected plagiarism, or other forms of academic misconduct, will be reported to the School Academic Misconduct Officer. You’ll find further information in the Sociology Honours handbook, and at the following site: http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/undergrad/honours/what_is_plagiarism

CLASS PARTICIPATION Class participation takes a number of forms, including general discussions, group debates, group exercises and informal presentations. No passengers please! Everybody will be assigned to one of fourworking groups (depending on numbers, there may be more groups). Each group will take the lead on some of the activities described below.In addition, you are expected to be ready to listen, ask questions and comment constructively and respectfully on the contributions of others. Lively debate is welcome; sexist, racist, homophobic and intemperate language is not. You will find our protocol on Learn and in Honours handbooks.

General Class Discussions: In Weeks 3, 5 and 7, everyone will be involved in general class discussions. Please make sure you have read the key reading or readings based on which discussions will take place. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 5

Group Discussions: In Weeks 2, 4, 6, 8and 10, everybody will participate in group discussions around the set readings. Please come prepared with six points about these and any questions you want to ask about them. Class Exercises: In Week2,everybody will be participating in some exercises that require advance preparation. It will involve you as a member of your discussion group carrying out a short activity beforehand. Guidance will be given on this the week before and also the details are in this Handbook.

Class Debate: In Week6,there will be a debate in small groups arguing for orarguing againstpositive action to ensure equal or more equal political representation of men and women, for example among members of parliaments in Britain. Guidance for this will be put up on Learn.

Video Viewing & Discussion: In Week1, some short videos will be screened. Please watch theseand writearound 4 to 6 points about them (depending on length)as you do so, to talk about in the discussion following.

CLASS PREPARATION ALL THE PREPARATION FOR CLASSES THAT YOU WILL NEED TO DO IS OUTLINED ON A WEEK-BY-WEEK BASIS IN THE ‘TO DO’ BOXES WHICH APPEAR IN THE WEEKLY GUIDE BELOW. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU READ AHEAD TO PLAN YOUR PREPARATION IN GOOD TIME.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 6

READING AND RESOURCES

BACKGROUND READING: Suggested background reading [all in RESERVE collection

of the Library]: H. Bradley (2007) Gender, Polity Press V. Bryson (1999) Feminist Debates, Palgrave R.W. Connell (2002) Gender, Polity Press M. Holmes (2007) What is Gender? Sociological Approaches, Sage S. Jackson and J. Jones (eds) (1998) Contemporary Feminist Theories, Edinburgh UP S. Jackson and S. Scott (eds.) (2002) Gender: A Sociological Reader, Routledge A. Phillips (ed) (1998) Feminism and Politics. Oxford UP J. Pilcher and I. Whelehan (2004) 50 Key Concepts in Gender Studies. Sage S. Kesslerand W. McKenna (1978) Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach Ch 1, pp 1-8 and Ch.6 K. Woodward (2009) Why Feminism Matters: Lost and Found, Palgrave Macmillan I. Whelehan (1995) Modern Feminist Thought, Edinburgh UP RESOURCES: This reading list is by no means exhaustive. Many of the recommended texts have extensive bibliographies. In addition, the library subscribes to various relevant journals including Feminist Review, Signs, Feminist Theory, Women’s Studies International Quarterly, Feminist Studies; Gender and History; Journal of Women’s History; Journal of Gender Studies; European Journal of Women’s Studies, Gender and Society. Students are also encouraged to seek additional sources independently. Learn: Key texts are posted on Learn on the CFD site. The course reading list and other material will also be found there. Each week, lecture slides and group presentation slides will be added to the site. Slides will go onto the CFD Learn pages by mid-day on the Monday before the Tuesday lecture. A NOTE ABOUT STUDYING: CFD is a demanding course which covers a lot of ground and encourages you to explore controversial and sometimes difficult ideas and issues. From experience of previous years, we recommend you find one or two (or more) ‘study buddies’ with whom you can discuss ideas and issues thrown up by your reading and learning (local cafes and bars are particularly handyplaces for these discussions!). You might find it useful to consult the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment (TLA), accessible at http://www.tla.ed.ac.uk/, if you feel you need to improve your study and assessment skills. SUGGESTED PURCHASE: No single text covers the course. You may, however, consider clubbing together with some of your study buddies to purchase this reader, which contains abridged versions of the relevant readings: e.g. Kolmar, W. & F. Bartkowski (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill £34.95. In addition, the independent bookshop Wordpower, West Nicholson Street (opposite the Pear Tree), stocks a good range of relevant books and can order titles for you. http://www.wordpower.co.uk/ You can also try abebooks.co.uk for second-hand copies of all books – they’re really good!

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 7

WEEK 1: (A) INTRODUCTION TO THE COURSE (RADHIKA GOVINDA, SOCIOLOGY; MARY

HOLMES, SOCIOLOGY) The introductory part of the Week 1 class will overview the structure and organisation of the course. Class members will also be allocated to one of four (or more, depending on how large the class is) discussion groups.

(B) WHAT IS FEMINISM? (MARY HOLMES, SOCIOLOGY) In the next part of theWeek 1class, some short videos on feminism will beshown and discussed. Some crucial questions for this course will be explored - What is feminism? What different kinds of feminism are there? Why is feminism responded to in the ways it is? The readings which are * starred are recommended key readings.

Key readings: *Beasley, Chris (1999) ‘Introduction’ in What is Feminism?, Sage [LEARN] * Stewart, Abigail, Lal, Jayati and McGuire, Kristin (2011) “Expanding the Archives of Global Feminisms: Narratives of Feminism and Activism” Signs 36, 4: pp.889-941 [E-JOURNAL] * Snyder, Claire (2008) “What is third wave feminism? A New Directions Essay” Signs 34, pp.175-96 [E-JOURNAL]

Further Reading: Beasley, Chris (1999) What is Feminism?, Sage Brennan, T. and Pateman, C. (1998) ‘Mere Auxiliaries to the Commonwealth’, pp.93-115 in A. Phillips (ed) Feminism and Politics Oxford University Press Bryson, Valerie (1998) Feminist Debates. Chapters 1,2 and 3. [RESERVE] Bryson, V. (1992, 2003) Feminist Political Theory: An Introduction, Palgrave Bulbeck, Chilla (1998) Reorienting Western Feminisms, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Collins, Patricia Hill (1991) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and the Politics of Empowerment, London: Routledge, Chapters 1 and 2 [RESERVE] Corrin, Chris (1999) Feminist Perspectives on Politics, London: Longman. Jackson, Stevie and Jones, Jacqui (eds) (1998) Contemporary Feminist Theories. Edinburgh University Press. Chapters 1&2 [E-BOOK] hooks, bell (1984) Feminist Theory From Margin to Center, Boston, MA: South End Press, Chapter 2. [RESERVE] hooks, bell (2000) Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics, Boston, MA: South End Press, Chapter 1: ‘Feminist politics: where we stand’. [LEARN] Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill. Part I: What is Feminist Theory? What is Feminism? [RESERVE] Lister, Ruth (2005) ‘Being Feminist’ Government and Opposition 40 (3): 442-663 [E-JOURNAL] Mansbridge, Jane (1995) ‘What is the feminist movement?’ in Myra Marx Ferree and Patricia Yancey Martin (eds) (1995) Feminist Organizations: Harvest of the New Women's Movement, Philadelphia: Temple University Press. McNay, Lois (2004) ‘Situated Intersubjectivity’ in Witz, A & Marshall, B. Engendering the Social: Feminist Encounters with Sociological Theory Open University Press. [RESERVE] McRobbie, Angela (2009) The Aftermath of Feminism Sage. Okin, Susan Moller (1980/1992) Women in Western Political Thought. Princeton UP. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 8

Patel, Pratibha (1997) ‘Third wave feminism and black women’s activism’ in Heidi Safia Mirza (ed.) Black British Feminism: A Reader. Routledge. [RESERVE] Pilcher, Jane and Imelda Whelehan (2004) 50 Key Concepts in Gender Studies. Sage pp.48-55; 144-146; 169-171[RESERVE] Segal, Lynn (1999) Why Feminism? Cambridge:Polity. Chapter 1: ‘Generations of Feminism’, pp.9-37. Somerville, J. (2001) 'Germaine Greer versus the New Feminism: Gender Politics in the United Kingdom and United States'. Social Politics 8: 351-385. [E-JOURNAL] Whelehan, Imelda (1995) Modern Feminist Thought, Edinburgh University Press, ‘Introduction’ [RESERVE] Witz, Anne and Marshall, Barbara (2004) ‘The masculinity of the social: towards a politics of interrogation’ in Witz, A & Marshall, B. Engendering the Social: Feminist Encounters with Sociological Theory Open University Press. [RESERVE]

(C) WHAT IS GENDER? (MARY HOLMES, SOCIOLOGY) The third segment of the Week 1 class considers the key term of ‘gender’ within feminist work. Where did the term come from? Has it been useful to distinguish between sex and gender? Is gender something that we are, we learn, do, or perform? To what degree does it determine how we act and interact in the world? To what extent is gender done to us through organised sets of social of relations and structures? The readings which are * starred are recommended key readings. Key readings for Lecture: * Connell, R.W. (2002) Gender. Polity, espCh 1 [LEARN] [RESERVE] *Oakley, Ann (1997) ‘A Brief History of Gender’ in Ann Oakley and Juliet Mitchell (eds) Who’s Afraid of Feminism? Hamish Hamilton [LEARN] * Stanley, Liz (1984) “Should ‘sex’ really be ‘gender’ – or ‘gender’ really be sex?” in (ed) R.J. Anderson Applied Sociological Perspectives London: Longman, Chap 1, pp.1-19 * West, Candace and Zimmerman, Don H. (1987) ‘Doing Gender’. Gender and Society 1 (2): 125-151 [E-JOURNAL] Further Reading: Bryson, Valerie (1999) Feminist Debates, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Chapter 3. [RESERVE] Butler, Judith (1990, 2005) ‘Gender Trouble and the Subversion of Identity’ C 89 in Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill pp496-503 Connell, R. W. (1987) Gender and Power, Cambridge: Polity Press. [RESERVE] Delphy, Christine (1993) “Rethinking Sex and Gender” Women’s Studies International Forum vol. 16, No. 1, pp 1-9 Douglas, Mary (1966, 2005) ‘The System at War With itself’ C.43 in Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill. Pp203-210 Fine, Cordelia (2010) Delusions of Gender London: Icon Books, pp. xv-xxix, 245-46 [LEARN] [RESERVE] Holmes, Mary (2009) Gender and Everyday Life, Routledge. Howson, Alexandra (2005) Embodying Gender Sage. [RESERVE] Jackson, Stevi and Sue Scott (2002) Gender: A Sociological Reader, Routledge, Chapters 1 – 4 [RESERVE] Kessler, S. and McKenna, W. Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach (1978) Ch 1 pp 1-8 and Ch.6 [RESERVE] Lorber, Judith (1994) “‘Night to his Day’: The Social Construction of Gender” in her Paradoxes of Gender, Yale University Press Marini, Margaret Mooney (1990) “Sex and Gender: What Do We Know?”Sociological Forum, vol. 5, 95-120 SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 9

Mead, Margaret (1935, 2005) “Sex and Temperament” C36 in Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill. Pp157-161 Millett, Kate (1969, 2005) ‘Theory of Sexual Politics’ in C46 Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill, pp218-219 Oakley, Ann (1972) Sex, Gender and Society, Maurice Temple Smith Oakley, Ann (1997) ‘A Brief History of Gender’ in Ann Oakley and Juliet Mitchell (eds) Who’s Afraid of Feminism? Hamish Hamilton Pilcher, Jane and Imelda Whelehan (2004) 50 Key Concepts in Gender Studies. Sage [RESERVE] Riley, Denise (1988) “Am I That Name?” Feminism and the Category ‘Women’ in History Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press [RESERVE] Sapolsky, Robert M (1997), “Testosterone Rules,” Discover, Vol 18 No.3, March: http://www.discover.com/issues/mar-97/features/testosteronerule1077/ Smith, D. (1990) Texts, Facts and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling London: Routledge, chapter 6 ‘Femininity as Discourse’. Squires, Judith (1999) Gender in Political Theory, Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.32-65. Steinem, Gloria (1984) “If Men Could Menstruate”, from her Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions, London: Cape. Walter, Natasha (1999) The New Feminism, London: Virago, Chapter 8. [ECA LIBRARY]

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 10

TO DO – BETWEEN WEEK 1 & WEEK 2: EVERYONE: READ WEST, CANDACE AND ZIMMERMAN, DON (1987) ‘DOING GENDER’. GENDER AND SOCIETY 1 (2): 125-151 [E-JOURNAL] & MAKE A LIST OF 3 OR 4 THINGS IT SAYS WHICH YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT & ALSO ANY QUESTIONS ETC YOU HAVE ABOUT IT. GROUP 1: KEEP AN INFORMAL GENDER DIARY FOR A FEW DAYS. THINK ABOUT WAYS IN WHICH GENDER IS USED OR PERFORMED BY YOURSELF, YOUR FRIENDS AND OTHERS IN DIFFERENT SOCIAL SITUATIONS AND WITH DIFFERENT MIXES OF PEOPLE. GROUP 2: WATCH OR LISTEN ON THE RADIO TO YOUR FAVOURITE SOAP OPERA. MAKE A LIST OF WAYS IN WHICH ‘GENDER CONFORMITY’ IS REPRESENTED IN IT, AND ALSO ANY WAYS IN WHICH PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED IN ‘GENDER FREE’ OR ‘GENDER NEUTRAL’ TERMS. GROUP 3: READ YOUR FAVOURITE WEEKLY OR MONTHLY MAGAZINES.MAKE A LIST OF WAYS IN WHICH ‘GENDER CONFORMITY’ IS REPRESENTED IN THEM, AND ALSO ANY WAYS IN WHICH PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED IN ‘GENDER FREE’ OR ‘GENDER NEUTRAL’ TERMS. GROUP 4: OBSERVE THINGS AND PEOPLE – STAFF AS WELL AS STUDENTS - IN THE UNIVERSITY, IN CLASSROOMS & BARS, CORRIDORS AND NEAR-BY STREETS.IN WHAT WAYS ARE GENDER HIERARCHIES AND WAYS OF BEHAVING REPLICATED, AND IN WHAT WAYS MIGHT THEY BE CHALLENGED OR JUST DEPARTED FROM? MAKE A LIST OF BOTH.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 11

WEEK 2: (A) DOING GENDER: Groups discussion & feedback session Groups discussion session (each group to appoint a scribe and a reporter)

Feedback session 1:West and Zimmerman’s ‘Doing Gender’ • • •

What are the main things this article says? What questions do you have about it? Anything else important to mention?

Feedback session 2: Gender and ‘life as we know it’ • • • •

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4

(B) WHAT IS FEMINIST THEORY? (MARY HOLMES, SOCIOLOGY) There is no general agreement about what counts as feminist theory, so we will have to get a sense of the debates and draw up our own assessment of what it might contain. Based on your reading, we will draw out some of the key criteria for deciding if something should be considered as feminist theory. Then we will try and see what might be missing from our criteria and what it includes and excludes. The readings which are * starred are recommended key readings.

Reading for the Introductory comments – Just skim the List of Contents Wendy Lynn Lee (2010) Contemporary Feminist Theory and Activism: Six Global Issues Broadview Press (Just note the list of Contents). [available via Google Books, also the Amazon website] Carole McCann and Seung Kyung Kim (eds, 2002) Feminist Theory Reader: Global and Local Perspectives London: Routledge (Just note the list of Contents). [RESERVE] Jane Pilcher & Imelda Whelan (2004) 50 Key Concepts in Gender Studies London: Sage (Just note the list of Contents). [RESERVE] Key reading for the ‘Feminist Theory’ debate on feminist theory All the articles to be discussed can be accessed via the library’s E-JOURNALs collection; they are very short, just 3 or 4 pages, and were all solicited published as a ‘debate about feminist theory’ when the journal of that name first started. Taken together, they enable some crucial questions to be raised abut what feminist theory should be like. *Sara Ahmed (2000) ‘Whose Counting?’ Feminist Theory1: 97-103. [E-JOURNAL] SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 12

*Bronwyn Winter (2000) ‘Who Counts (or Doesn’t Count) What as Feminist Theory?: An Exercise in Dictionary Use’ Feminist Theory1: 105-111.[E-JOURNAL] *Elizabeth Ermarth (2000) ‘What Counts as Feminist Theory?’ Feminist Theory1: 113-118.[EJOURNAL] Sylvia Walby (2000) ‘In search of feminist theory’ Feminist Theory1: 236-238. [E-JOURNAL] * Liz Stanley & Sue Wise (2000) “But the empress has no clothes! Some awkward questions about the ‘missing revolution’ in feminist theory” Feminist Theory 1, pp.1-261-88.[E-JOURNAL] Andrea Peto (2001) ‘An empress in a new-old dress’ Feminist Theory2: 89-93. [E-JOURNAL] *Katie King (2001) ‘Productive agencies of feminist theory’ Feminist Theory 2: 94-98. [E-JOURNAL] * Judith Stacey (2001) ‘The empress of feminist Theory is overdressed’ Feminist Theory 2: 99-103. [EJOURNAL] Jen Marchbank and Gayle Letherby (2001) ‘Not ‘missing’ but marginalized?: Alternative voices in feminist theory’ Feminist Theory2: 104-107. [E-JOURNAL] Maggie Humm (2001) ‘Madchen without uniforms: Contemporary feminist theories/praxis’ Feminist Theory 2: 108-111. [E-JOURNAL] Clare Hemmings (2005) ‘Telling feminist stories’ Feminist Theory6: 115-139. [E-JOURNAL] Rachel Torr (2007) ‘What’s wrong with aspiring to find out what has really happened in academic feminism’s recent past?: Response to Clare Hemmings’ ‘Telling feminist stories’ Feminist Theory8: 59-67. [E-JOURNAL] Clare Hemmings (2007) ‘What is a feminist theorist responsible for? Response to Rachel Torr’ Feminist Theory8: 69-76.

Key reading: The Travels of Feminist Theory *Jackie Stacey (1997, 2nd edition)‘Feminist theory: Capital F, capital T’ in Victoria Robinson & Diane Richardson Introducing Women’s Studies London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.54-76 [LEARN] and compare Stacey’s chapter with the successor chapter in the third edition of this extremely successful Women’s Studies textbook by Sally Hines – *Sally Hines (2008, 3rd edition) ‘Feminist theories’ in Diane Richardson & Victoria Robinson Introducing Gender and Women’s Studies London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.20-34 [LEARN]. * hooks, bell (2000) Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics, Boston, MA: South End Press, [LEARN] and compare this with Judith Butler (1999) Gender Trouble New York: Routledge [RESERVE]; alternatively, compare any bell hooks book with any Judith Butler book.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 13

BETWEEN WEEK 2 & WEEK 3: READ AND NOTE 4-6 POINTS, AND ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING READINGS:

CRENSHAW, K. (1989) ‘DEMARGINALIZING THE INTERSECTION OF RACE AND SEX: A BLACK FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF ANTIDISCRIMINATION DOCTRINE, FEMINIST THEORY AND ANTI-RACIST POLITICS’, THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LEGAL FORUM, 139-67. AVAILABLE AT: http://www.yale.edu/wff/pdf/Crenshaw_article.pdf (LAST ACCESSED 3 JANUARY 2013) AND

NAMALA, A. (2008) ‘DALIT WOMEN: THE CONFLICT AND THE DILEMMA’, IN M. JOHN (ED.) WOMEN’S STUDIES IN INDIA: A READER, NEW DELHI: PENGUIN BOOKS, PP. 458-66 AND

MORGAN, R. (1996) ‘INTRODUCTION: PLANETARY FEMINISM’, SISTERHOOD IS GLOBAL, NEW YORK: THE FEMINIST PRESS

WEEK 3: WHAT IS INTERSECTIONALITY? (RADHIKA GOVINDA, SOCIOLOGY) While many feminist scholars have heralded ‘intersectionality’ as the cutting edge of contemporary feminist theory over the last three decades, what it means and the extent to which it helps us analyse and articulate experiences of identities and inequalities continues to be hotly debated. We will begin with a set of activities to experientially understand intersectionality, then proceed to review foundational narratives (Sojourner Truth, bell hooks, Kimberle Crenshaw) as well as more recent theorisations on intersectionality (Avtar Brah and Phoenix, Kathy Davis, Nira Yuval-Davis), and conclude with a discussion on intersectional analysis of women’s experiences of race, caste, gender,so as to be be able to critically evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and future trajectories of research on intersectionality.

Key reading for lecture: SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 14

Davis, K. (2008) ‘Intersectionality as buzzword: a sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful’, Feminist Theory 9(1): 67-85. Available at: http://www.kathydavis.info/articles/Intersectionality_as_buzzword.pdf (last accessed 3 January 2013) Yuval-Davis, N. (2006) ‘Intersectionality and Feminist Politics’, European Journal Of Women’s Studies 13(3): 193-209. Available at: http://ganymedes.lib.unideb.hu:8080/udpeer/bitstream/2437.2/11132/1/PEER_stage2_10.1 177%252F1350506806065752.pdf (last accessed 3 January 2013)

Key reading for discussion: Crenshaw, K. (1989) ‘Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics’, University of Chicago Legal Forum 138-67. Available at: http://www.yale.edu/wff/pdf/Crenshaw_article.pdf (last accessed 3 January 2013) Namala, A. (2008) ‘Dalit Women: the Conflict and the Dilemma’, in M. John (ed.) Women’s Studies in India: A Reader, New Delhi: Penguin Books, pp. 458-66 Morgan, R. (1996) ‘Introduction: Planetary Feminism,’ Sisterhood is Global, New York: The Feminist Press

Further reading: Anthias, F. (2002) ‘Beyond Feminism and Multiculturalism: Locating Difference and the Politics of Location’, Women’s Studies International Forum 25(3): 275-86(e-resource) Anthias, F. and N. Yuval-Davis (1992) Racialized Boundaries: Race, Nation, Gender, Colour and Class and the Anti-Racist Struggle, London: Routledge AWID (2004) ‘Intersectionality: a tool for gender and economic justice’, Women’s Rights and Economic Change,9: 1-8. Available at: http://www.awid.org/eng/content/download/43580/464031/file/Intersectionality,%20A%2 0Tool%20for%20Gender%20and%20Economic%20Justice.pdf(last accessed 3 January 2013) Bacchi, C L. (1990) Same difference : feminism and sexual difference St. Leonards, N.S.W. : Allen & Unwin Benhabib, S. (2002) The Claims of Culture, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Beteille, A. (1990) ‘Race, Caste and Gender’, Man 25(3): 489-504 (e-resource) Brah, A. (1996) Cartographies of Diaspora, London: Routledge Brah, A. and A. Phoenix (2004) ‘Ain’t I a Woman? Revisiting Intersectionality,’ Journal of International Women’s Studies 5(3): 75-86. Available at: http://www.bridgew.edu/soas/jiws/May04/Phoenix_Brah.pdf(last accessed 3 January 2013) Chakaravarti, U. (2003) Gendering Caste Through a Feminist Lens, Calcutta: Stree (on order) Choo, H. Y., and M.M. Ferree (2010) ‘Practising intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities’, Sociological Theory 28:129-49(e-resource) Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics and violence against women of color, Stanford Law Review 43:12-41. Available at: http://www.peopleofcolororganize.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/mappingmargins.pdf(last accessed 3 January 2013) Dube, L. (2003) ‘Caste and women’, in A. Rao (ed.) Gender and Caste, New Delhi: Kali for Women, pp. 223-48 (hub reserve) Essed, P. (2001) ‘Towards a Methodology to Identify Continuing Forms of Everyday Discriminatoon’. Available at:www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/essed45.htm(last accessed 3 January 2013) Fraser, N. (1997) Justice Interruptus, New York: Routledge(hub reserve) Guru, G. (2003) ‘Dalit women talk differently’, in A. Rao (ed.) Gender and Caste, New Delhi: Kali for Women, pp. 80-85 (hub reserve) hooks, b. (1981) Ain’t I a Woman, Boston, MA: South End Press hooks, b. (2000) Feminism is for everybody: passionate politics, London: Pluto SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 15

Kannabiran, K. (2006) ‘A Cartography of Resistance: The National Federation of Dalit Women’, in N. Yuval-Davis, K. Kannabiran and U. Vieten (eds.) The Situated Politics of Belonging, London: Sage, pp. 54-74 Lutz, H., M.T. Herrera Vivar and L. Supik (eds.) (2011) Framing Intersectionality: Debates on a Multifaceted Concept in Gender Studies, Surrey: Ashgate Manorama, R. (2008) ‘Dalit women: the downtrodden among the downtrodden’, in M. John (ed.) Women’s Studies in India: A Reader, New Delhi: Penguin Books, pp. 445-452 OR The Right to Livelihood Award (2006) Interview with Dr. Ruth Manorama, 22 September. Available at: http://www.rightlivelihood.org/manorama_interview.html(last accessed 3 January 2013) Maynard, M. (1994) “‘Race”, Gender and the Concept of “Difference” in Feminist Thought’, in H. Afshar and M. Maynard (eds.) The Dynamics of ‘Race’ and Gender, London: Taylor and Francis Naples, N. (2008) ‘Crossing borders: feminism, intersectionality and globalisaton’, Hawke Research Institute Working Paper Series 36, Magill: University of South Australia. Available at:http://w3.unisa.edu.au/hawkeinstitute/publications/downloads/wp36.pdf (last accessed 11 November 2011) Nash, J.C. (2008) ‘Rethinking intersectionality’, Feminist Review 89: 1-15. Available at: http://socialdifference.columbia.edu/files/socialdiff/projects/Article__Rethinking_Intersectionality_by_Jennifer_C__Nash.pdf(last accessed 3 January 2013) Omvedt, G. (2003) ‘The downtrodden among the downtrodden: an interview with a Dalit agricultural labourer’, in A. Rao (ed.) Gender and Caste, New Delhi: Kali for Women, pp. 31024 (hub reserve) Purkayastha, B. (2012) ‘Intersectionality in a Transnational World’, Gender and Society 21(1): 55-66(eresource) Truth, S. (1851) ‘Ain’t I A Woman?’, Speech delivered at Women’s Convention, Akron, Ohio. Available at: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/sojtruth-woman.asp (last accessed 3 January 2013) Young, Iris Marion (1990) Justice and the politics of difference Princeton, N.J. ; Oxford : Princeton University Press. Yuval-Davis, N. (2011) ‘Power, intersectionality and the politics of belonging’, FREIA Working Paper No. 75, University of Aalborg, Denmark. Available at: http://vbn.aau.dk/files/58024503/FREIA_wp_75.pdf(last accessed 3 January 2013)

TO DO NOW ----THINK ABOUT WHICH QUESTION YOU WILL ANSWER FOR YOUR SHORT ESSAY AND START WORKING ON IT!

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 16

BETWEEN WEEK 3 AND WEEK 4 ---

READ THE FOLLOWING TWO ITEMS ---

THE FIRST IS CHAPTER 1 IN SHULAMITH FIRESTONE’S (1970) THE DIALECTIC OF

SEX THE CASE FOR FEMINIST REVOLUTION. TRY TO READ THE WHOLE OF THIS SHORT BOOK, BUT THE FIRST CHAPTER IS ESSENTIAL READING. IT CAN BE DOWNLOADED FREE FROM HTTP://WWW.MARXISTS.ORG/SUBJECT/WOMEN/WUTHORS/FIRESTONESHULAMITH/DIALECTIC-SEX.HTM

THE SECOND IS CATHERINE HAKIM’S (2011 ‘FEMINIST MYTHS AND MAGIC MEDICINE’. IT CAN BE DOWNLOADED FREE FROM THE CENTRE FOR POLICY STUDIES WEBSITE AT

HTTP://WWW.CPS.ORG.UK

WEEK 4: SAMENESS, DIFFERENCE AND EQUALITY: DOES OUR BIOLOGY CONSTRAIN US? (ALISON KOSLOWSKI, SOCIAL POLICY) What does ‘equality’ mean in the context of sex difference? We will explore different meanings of the term “equality” and how we might recognize “inequalities”. We will also discuss the important role of the concept of equality in increasing (particularly) women’s access to a range of legal protections against sex discrimination. A key theme of many of these debates has been, to what extent should we theorize women as ‘different from’, or ‘the same as’, men? This is particularly true when it comes to parenting. This week builds on the feminist classic by the late Shulamith Firestone “The Dialectic of Sex” and a report by a writer many feminists love to hate, Catherine Hakim. We will explore the role that parenting practices arguably play in underpinning structures of gendered inequalities and discuss whether these are rooted in biological differences. We will also discuss whether, even if such inequalities are rooted in biological differences that might continue to constrain individuals in contemporary societies? Finally, we will discuss what a feminist parenting landscape might ideally look like.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 17

Key reading: Firestone, Shulamith (1970) The Dialectic of Sex: the case for feminist revolution, New York: Bantam Books Hakim, Catherine (2011) Feminist Myths and Magic Medicine, London: Centre for Policy Studies

Further reading: Armstrong, Jo, Walby, Sylvia and Strid, Sofia (2009) ‘The gendered division of labour: how can we assess the quality of employment and care policy from a gender equality perspective?’, Benefits: The Journal of Poverty & Social Justice, Vol 17, no 3, pp:263-75 [E-JOURNAL] Badinter, Elisabeth (2005) Dead End Feminism. Cambridge: Polity Bagilhole, B (2007) ‘An exploration of UK equal opportunities and diversity policies: looking through the lens of intersectionality’, International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities & Nations, Vol 7, no 2, pp153-63 [E-JOURNAL] Banyard, Kat (2010) The Equality Illusion: The Truth About Women and Men Today. London: Faber and Faber. [HUB RESERVE] Breitenbach, Esther and Galligan, Yvonne (2006) ‘Measuring Gender Equality: reflecting on experiences and challenges in the UK and Ireland’, Policy & Politics, vol34, no 4, pp.597614 [E-JOURNAL] Crompton, Rosemary (ed) (1999) Restructuring Gender Relations and Employment. The Decline of the Male Breadwinner, Oxford: Oxford University Press Firestone, Shulamith (1970) The Dialectic of Sex: the case for feminist revolution, New York: Bantam Books Greer, Germaine (2006/1970) The Female Eunuch, London: Harper Perennial Hobson, Barbara (2002) Making Men into Fathers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hakim, Catherine (2011) Feminist Myths and Magic Medicine, London: Centre for Policy Studies McLaughlin, Janice (2003) Feminist Social and Political Theory, Chapter One: Equal Rights. Palgrave MacMillan. [RESERVE] McCall, Leslie (2005) ‘The complexity of intersectionality’, Signs, Vol 30, No 3, pp1771-1800 [EJOURNAL] McNay, Lois (2008) Against Recognition Polity Press: Cambridge (use the index to find discussion of key readings) Payne, Sarah and Lesley Doyle (2010) ‘Gender equity or gender equality in health?’ Policy & Politics, vol38, no 1, pp:171-5 [E-JOURNAL] Prince Cooke, Lynn (2011) Gender-Class Equality in Political Economies, London: Routledge (on order for library) Scott, Jacqueline, Crompton, Rosemary and Lyonette, Clare (eds) (2010) Gender Inequalities in the 21st Century: New Barriers and Continuing Constraints. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Walby, Sylvia and Armstrong, Jo (2010) ‘Measuring equalities: data and indicators in Britain’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, vol 13, no3, pp.237-49 [E-JOURNAL] Walter, Natasha (2010) Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism. London: Virago. Warren, Tracy, Pascall, Gillian and Fox, Elizabeth (2010) ‘Gender equality in time: low-paid mothers’ paid and unpaid work’, Feminist Economics, Vol 16, no 3, pp193-219 [EJOURNAL] Wilkinson, Richard and Pickett, Kate (2010) The Spirit Level: Why Equality is Better for Everyone. London: Penguin. Wolf, Naomi (1990) The Beauty Myth, London: Chatto & Windus Young, Iris Marion (1987) Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, Chapters 6 and 7 [RESERVE]

Further resources: It’s unlikely to be in the library, but I thoroughly recommend Caitlin Moran’s (2011) How to Be a Woman (London: Ebury Press). “Part memoir, part rant”, it’s a wonderfully funny take on some serious issues: SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 18

“There’s never been a better time to be a woman: we have the vote and the Pill, and we haven’t been burnt as witches since 1727. However, a few nagging questions do remain…Why are we supposed to get Brazilians? Should we use Botox? Do men secretly hate us? What should you call your vagina? Why does your bra hurt? And why does everyone ask you when you’re going to have a baby?” (cover) Best not to cite it in your essays – just enjoy!

Useful websites: Equality and Human Rights Commission www.equalityhumanrights.com – funded by, but independent of, UK government, this body oversees the Equality Act 2010 – UK-wide legislation that enshrines protection for those with ‘protected characteristics’. Web site contains information on the Act, as well as a multitude of research reports dating back to the original Equal Opportunities Commission. Fawcett Society www.fawcettsociety.org.uk - campaigning organisation focuses on influencing policy-makers and describes itself as “Working for women’s rights since 1866”. UK Feminista www.ukfeminista.org.uk - new organisation, started in 2010 by Kat Banyard: “a movement of ordinary women and men campaigning for gender equality”. Holds summer schools to train people in the arts of activism.

TO DO - BETWEEN WEEK 4 & WEEK 5: EVERYONE: READ THE 2 KEY READINGS FOR THE LECTURE (DALY, LEWIS) & MAKE A LIST OF AROUND 4 - 5 KEY POINTS FOR EACH READING WHICH YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT: DALY, MARY AND RAKE, KATHERINE (2003) GENDER AND THE

WELFARE STATE: CARE, WORK AND WELFARE IN EUROPE AND THE USA, CAMBRIDGE: POLITY PRESS, CHAPTER 1, PP. 10-31 (SEE ALSO 185-186) [LEARN] LEWIS, JANE (2008) ‘FEMINIST PERSPECTIVES’, CHAPTER 13 IN PETE ALCOCK, MARGARET MAY, AND KAREN ROWLINGSON (EDS), THE STUDENT'S COMPANION TO SOCIAL POLICY (3RD ED), OXFORD: BLACKWELL PUBLISHING [LEARN]

WEEK 5: IS THE WELFARE STATE INCREASING THE AUTONOMY OF WOMEN OR CREATING NEW DEPENDENCIES? (ELKE HEINS, SOCIAL POLICY) SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 19

This week’s debate focuses on questions around the effects of the welfare state on gender roles, in particular concerning the role of women. On some accounts, the welfare state has improved the lives of women although there is disagreement about the extent to which gender equality has been achieved. On other accounts, the state exists to maintain the status quo and welfare policy continues to perpetuate inequality. In this session we will compare a range of feminist perspectives on the role of the state in relation to women as both welfare providers and welfare recipients. Two broad approaches are identified: 1) a historical approach – examining for change and continuity over time and 2) a comparative approach – examining for difference across welfare states. Key issues will include dependency, family policy, the ‘male breadwinner’ model, gendered income and labour market inequalities, and debates around dual earner/dual carer models of welfare.

Key reading: Daly, Mary and Rake, Katherine (2003) Gender and the Welfare State: Care, Work and Welfare in Europe and the USA, Cambridge: Polity Press, Chapter 1, pp. 10-31 (see also 185-186) [LEARN] Lewis, Jane (2008) ‘Feminist Perspectives’, Chapter 13 in Pete Alcock, Margaret May, and Karen Rowlingson (eds), The Student's Companion to Social Policy (3rd ed), Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 99-105 [LEARN] (Chapters 21 and 30 are also useful).

Class discussion: This week we will have a discussion based on the issues raised in the lecture. Questions will include the following: • What is the role of families – and within them women – as providers of welfare? • Should feminists support welfare payments based on family responsibility? • What are the relations between gender, poverty and wealth? • What demands should feminists make on the welfare state? • Should policy be gender sensitive or gender neutral?

Further reading: Alcock, Peter, May, Margaret and Rowlingson, Karen (eds) (2008): The Student’s Companion to Social Policy, 3rd edition, Oxford: Blackwell. There are three relevant chapters in this text book: Chapters 21 and 30 (plus Chapter 13 above). Bellamy, K., Bennett, F. & Millar, J. (2006): Who Benefits? A gender analysis of the UK benefits and tax credits system, London: Fawcett Society. Carabine, J (2001) ‘Constituting Sexuality through Social Policy: the Case of Lone Motherhood’ in Social and Legal Studies, 10(3):291-314. Daly, Mary (1994) ‘A Matter of Dependency: The Gender Dimension of British Income Maintenance provision’ Sociology, 28(3):779-97 [E-JOURNAL] Daly, M. (2011) ‘What Adult Worker Model? A Critical Look at Recent Social Policy Reform in Europe from a Gender and Family Perspective’, Social Politics, 18(1): 1-23. Hughes, Bill, McKie, Linda, Hopkins, Debra and Watson, Nick (2005) Love’s Labours Lost? Feminism, the Disabled people’s Movement and an Ethic of Care, Sociology, 39(2): 259-275 [E-JOURNAL] Jordan, J. (2006): “Mothers, Wives, and Workers. Explaining Gendered Dimensions of the Welfare State”, Comparative Political Studies, 39(9): 1109-1132. Lewis, Jane (2000) ‘Gender and welfare regimes’, Chapter 2 in Lewis, Gail, Gewirtz, Sharon and Clarke, John (eds.) Rethinking Social Policy, London: Sage. [E-BOOK] Lewis, Jane (2001) ‘The Decline of the Male Breadwinner Model: Implications for Work and Care’, Social Politics 8 (2): 152-169. Lewis, Jane (2006): ‘Employment and Care: The Policy Problem, Gender Equality and the Issue of Choice’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 8(2):103-114. Lewis, J. and Giullari, S. (2005) ‘The adult worker model family, gender equality and care: the search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capability approach’, SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 20

Economy and Society, 34(1): 76-104. Lister, Ruth (1992) Women’s Economic Dependency and Social Security, Equal Opportunities Commission, Manchester. Lister, Ruth (1997) Citizenship: Feminist Perspectives, Hampshire: Macmillan, in particular Chapter 7: ‘Women’s Social Citizenship: Earning and Caring’. Lister, Ruth (2000) ‘Gender and the analysis of social policy’, Chapter 1 in Lewis, Gail, Gewirtz, Sharon and Clarke, John (eds.) Rethinking Social Policy, London: Sage. [E-BOOK] Orloff, Ann (1996): ‘Gender in the Welfare State’, Annual Review of Sociology, 22(1):51-78 (EJOURNAL). See also Ann Orloff’s filmed lecture on UNSWTV ‘Can we support care and gender equality?’ at http://tv.unsw.edu.au/video/professor-ann-orloff-can-we-support-care-and-genderequalityPahl, Jan (1999) ‘The family and the production of welfare’ in Baldock, John et al. (eds) Social Policy, Oxford: OUP (Chapter 8). Pascall, Gillian (1997): Social Policy: A New Feminist Analysis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge. Prokhovnik, R (1998): ‘Public and Private Citizenship: From Gender Invisibility to Feminist Inclusiveness?’ Feminist Review 60: 84-104 [E-JOURNAL] Rowlingson, Karen and McKay Stephen (2002) Lone Parent Families: Gender, Class and State, Harlow: Person Education. Sainsbury, Diane (1996) Gender, Equality and Welfare States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Scott, Gill (2008) ‘Gender, poverty and wealth’, Chapter 7 in Tess Ridge and Sharon Wright (eds) Understanding Inequality, Poverty and Wealth, Bristol: Policy Press. Skevik, Anne (2005): Women’s Citizenship in the Time of Activation: The case of Lone Mothers in “Needs-based” Welfare States, Social Politics – International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 12(1):42-66. Walby, Sylvia (2005) ‘Gender Mainstreaming: Productive Tensions in Theory and Practice, Social Politics - International Studies in Gender State and Society, 2005, 12(3): 321-343. Williams, Fiona (1989) ‘Feminist Critiques of the Welfare State’, in Williams, Fiona Social Policy: A Critical Introduction – Issues of Race, Gender and Class, Cambridge: Polity (Chapter 3) [LEARN].

TO DO - BETWEEN WEEK 5 & WEEK 6: GROUP 1: PREPARE THE CASE IN FAVOUR OF GENDER QUOTAS GROUP 2: PREPARE THE CASE AGAINST GENDER QUOTAS TO ‘PREPARE’ – DO THE READING (SEE LECTURE, DEBATE & FURTHER READING LIST), CONFER WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR DISCUSSION GROUP BY EMAIL OR FACE-TO-FACE; AND AGREE 6 TO 8 POINTS IN FAVOUR (GROUP 1) OR AGAINST (GROUP 2) GENDER QUOTAS. N.B. THE PROTOCOL FOR PREPARING YOUR CASES IS AVAILABLE ON LEARN

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 21

WEEK 6: WHY DOES WOMEN’S POLITICAL UNDER-REPRESENTATION MATTER? (FIONA MACKAY, POLITICS & IR) The gender imbalance in political leadership and office-holding has increasingly become the focus of public and political debate and activism at local, national and global levels. Whilst the ‘feminisation’ of politics is one of the most marked trends in contemporary comparative politics, gender balance remains the exception rather than the rule. This week we examine the problems and questions raised by the issue of women, gender and political representation. When we speak about the ‘under representation of women’, what vision of representation are we invoking and with what attendant problems and expectations? (Why) does it matter? What does ‘gender’ have to do with it? Do ‘Supply’ or ‘Demand’ side factors best account for the relatively few women in political life? How can we account for variation across political parties and political systems? What difference might the presence of women make to ‘high politics’?

Key reading for lecture: Lovenduski, Joni (2005) Feminizing Politics. Cambridge: Polity, pp. 1-11 [LEARN] Phillips, Anne (1998) ‘Democracy and Representation. Or, Why Should it Matter Who Our Representatives Are?’ Ch.10. In Anne Phillips (ed) Feminism and Politics Oxford University Press [LEARN] Pippa Norris 'Gender Equality in Elected Office: Beyond Quotas', Inaugural Chrystal Macmillan Lecture, School of Social Political Science, University of Edinburgh: http://youtu.be/ygYmUBNap34(additional resources on http://www.pippanorris.com)

Small group debate: Governments and political parties have been placed under increasing pressure to counter women’s minority status through the introduction of measures such as gender quotas, aimed at increasing the selection and election of female political candidates. Gender quotas remain controversial and in the second half of this week’s session, two teams will debate their pros and cons.

Key reading for debate: Baldez, Lisa (2006)’The Pros and Cons of Gender Quota Laws: What Happens When You Kick Men Out and Let Women In? Politics & Gender 2/1:102-109 [E-JOURNAL] *see also rest of Critical Perspectives Section on Gender Quotas Dahlerup, Drude (ed.)(2006) Women, Quotas and Politics. London: Routledge. Chapters 1 and Chapter 2 by Carol Bacchi “Arguing For and Against Quotas: Theoretical Issues”. [E-BOOK] Childs, Sarah and Elizabeth Evans (2012) ‘Out of the Hands of the Parties: Women’s Legislative Recruitment at Westminster’, The Political Quarterly, 83 (4), 742-748 [E-JOURNAL] *see also rest of Feminism section in this volume, especially introduction by Joni Lovenduski

Key resources for data about quotas and women’s representation: The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) global database of quotas for women: http://www.quotaproject.org/ The Interparliamentary Union database on women in parliaments: http://www.ipu.org/wmne/world.htm SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 22

Further reading: Carroll, Susan J. (ed) (2003) Women and American Politics: New Questions, New Directions. Oxford University Press [Available online at: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198293488.001.0001/acprof9780198293484] Caul, Miki (1999) ‘Women's Representation in Parliament: The Role of Political Parties’ Party Politics, 5 (1), 79-98 [E-JOURNAL] Caul, Miki (2001) ‘Political Parties and the adoption of candidate gender quotas: a cross national analysis’ Journal of Politics, 63 (4), 1214-1229 [E-JOURNAL] Childs, Sarah, Webb, Paul and Sally Marthaler (2010) ‘ Constituting and Substantively Representing Women: Applying New Approaches to a UK Case Study’, Politics & Gender 6 (2), 199223 [E-JOURNAL] Childs, Sarah (2004) ‘A Feminised Style of Politics? Women MPs in the House of Commons’ The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6 (1), 3-19 [E-JOURNAL] Childs, Sarah (2004) New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Representing Women. London: Routledge. Childs, Sarah and Mona Lena Krook (2006) ‘Should Feminists Give up on Critical Mass? A Contingent Yes’, Politics & Gender, 2 (4), 522-530 [E-JOURNAL] Childs, Sarah, Lovenduski, Joni and Campbell, Rosie (2005) Women at the Top 2005: Changing Numbers, Changing Politics? Hansard Society (available online at: http://hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2007/10/01/Women-at-theTop-2005.aspx) Dahlerup, Drude (1988) ‘From a Small to a Large Minority: Women in Scandinavian Politics’ Scandinavian Political Studies 11, 275-298 -- also reprinted in Sarah Childs and Mona Lena Krook (eds) Women, Gender and Politics: A Reader. Oxford University Press. Dahlerup, Drude (2006) ‘The Story of the Theory of Critical Mass’, Politics & Gender 2 (4), 511-522 [E-JOURNAL] Dahlerup, Drude (ed)(2006) Women, Quotas and Politics. London: Routledge. Dahlerup, Drude and Lenita Freidenvall (2005) ‘Quotas as a “Fast Track” to Equal Political Representation for Women: Why Scandinavia is No Longer the Model’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7 (1), 26-48. Dahlerup Drude and Lenita Freidenvall (2010) ‘Judging gender quotas: predictions and results’, Policy & Politics, 38 (3), 407-25. Dobrowolsky, Alexandra and Hart, Vivien (eds) Women Making Constitutions. Basingstoke: Palgrave. [various chapters] Dovi, S (2002) ‘Preferable descriptive representation: will just any woman. Black or Latino do?’ American Political Science Review, 96 (4), 729-743 [E-JOURNAL] Dovi, S. (2007) ‘Theorizing Women's Representation in the United States’, Politics & Gender 3(3): 297-319 [E-JOURNAL] Duerst-Lahti, Georgia and Kelly, Rita Mae (eds) (1995) Gender Power, Leadership and Governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Franceschet, Susan, Mona Lena Krook and Jennifer M. Piscopo (eds) The Impact of Gender Quotas. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hawkesworth, Mary (2003) ‘Congressional Enactments of Race–Gender: Toward a Theory of Raced–Gendered Institutions’,American Political Science Review, 97 (4), 529-550 [EJOURNAL] Inglehart, Ronald and Norris, Pippa (2003) Rising Tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kittilson, Miki Caul (2006) Challenging Parties, Changing Parliaments: Women and Elected Office in Contemporary Western Europe. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. Krook, Mona Lena (2006) ‘Gender Quotas, Norms and Politics’, Politics &Gender, 2(1), 110-118 [EJOURNAL] Krook, Mona Lena (2006) 'Reforming Representation: The Diffusion of Candidate Gender Quotas Worldwide', Politics & Gender, 2 (3), 303-327. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 23

Krook, Mona Lena (2009) Quotas for Women in Politics: gender and candidate selection reform worldwide. Oxford University Press [E-BOOK] Lawless, Jennifer and Richard Fox (2005) It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lovenduski, Joni (ed) (2000) Women and Politics. Volumes I and II. Ashgate [various chapters] Lovenduski, Joni and Pippa Norris (eds) (1993) Gender and Party Politics. London: Sage. [see especially Introduction] Lovenduski, Joni and Norris, Pippa (2003) ‘Westminster Women: the politics of presence’ Political Studies, 51 (1), 84-102 [E-JOURNAL] Mackay, Fiona (2004) ‘Gender and Political representation in the UK: The State of the “Discipline”’ The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6(1), 99-120 [E-JOURNAL] Mackay, Fiona (2008) ‘”Thick” conceptions of substantive representation: women, gender and political institutions’. Representation, 44 (2),125-139 [LEARN] Mansbridge, Jane (1999) ‘Should Blacks represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes”’ Journal of Politics, 63, 628-57 [E-JOURNAL] Mansbridge, Jane (2005) ‘Combating the Dangers of Essentialism’, Politics & Gender, 1 (4), 622-638 [E-JOURNAL] Nanivadekar, Medha (2006) ‘Are Quotas a Good Idea? The Indian Experience with Reserved Seats for Women’ Politics & Gender, 2 (1), 119-128 [E-JOURNAL] Norris, Pippa and Lovenduski, Joni (1995) Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British Parliament.Cambridge University Press [see especially Ch. 1 ‘Puzzles in Political Recruitment’] Phillips, Anne (1995) The Politics of Presence. Clarendon Press [1998 edn available online at http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198294158.001.0001/acprof9780198294153] Puwar, Nirmal (2004) ‘Thinking about making a difference’ The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6 (1), 65-80 [E-JOURNAL] Sawer, Marian, Manon Tremblay and Linda Trimble (eds) (2006) Representing women in parliament: a comparative study. London: Routledge. [various chapters] Shepherd-Robinson, Laura and Joni Lovenduski (2002) Women and Candidate Selection in British Political Parties. London: Fawcett Society. [available online at http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=883] Swers, Michelle (2002) The Difference Women Make: The Policy Impact of Women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [see in particular Chs. 1 & 8] Weldon, S. Laurel (2002) ‘Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policymaking’, Journal of Politics, 64 (4), 1153-1174. [E-JOURNAL]

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 24

TO DO BETWEEN WEEK 6 AND 7 SKIM READ THE WHO’S INFORMATION SHEETS ABOUT UNDERSTANDING AND ADDRESSING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN: HTTP://WWW.WHO.INT/REPRODUCTIVEHEALTH/TOPICS/VIOLE NCE/VAW_SERIES/EN/INDEX.HTML (SEE ESPECIALLY THE ‘OVERVIEW’ AND ‘SEXUAL VIOLENCE’ SHEETS)

AND MONITOR THE PRESS FOR REPORTS OF RAPE AND RAPE TRIALS AND BRING EXAMPLES OR NOTES ON DISCUSSION AROUND THEM.

ALSO READ TWO OF THE FOLLOWING FOR CLASS DISCUSSION & MAKE A LIST OF AROUND 4 POINTS THAT YOU THINK IMPORTANT PHIPPS, A AND G. SMITH (2012) ‘VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN STUDENTS IN THE UK: TIME TO TAKE ACTION’ GENDER AND EDUCATION 24 (4) 357-73 [E-JOURNAL] BORAH, RITUPARNA & NANDI, SUBHALAKSHMI (2012): RECLAIMING THE FEMINIST POLITICS OF ‘SLUTWALK’, INTERNATIONAL FEMINIST JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 14:3, 415-421 [EJOURNAL] RINGROSE, JESSICA & RENOLD, EMMA (2012) ‘SLUT-SHAMING, GIRL POWER AND ‘SEXUALISATION’: THINKING THROUGH THE POLITICS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SLUTWALKS WITH TEEN GIRLS’, GENDER AND EDUCATION, 24:3, 333-343. [E-JOURNAL]

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 25

ALSO TO DO NOW ----THINK ABOUT WHICH QUESTION YOU WOULD LIKE TO WRITE YOUR LONG ESSAY ON AND ---IF IT’S ON A TOPIC BEING COVERED IN WEEKS 8, 9 OR 10, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT YOU TALK TO THE LECTURER CONCERNED IN ADVANCE.

WEEK 7: GENDER AND VIOLENCE (LYNN JAMIESON, SOCIOLOGY) Rape and men’s violence against women (VAW) is a central concern of feminist scholarship and activism for reasons which are not diminished by the facts of women’s violence. Women’s violence does not receive the same social support or cultural celebration as various forms of men’s violence and it has not underpinned pervasive social systems in which women have power over men. Historically, many legal jurisdictions have treated rape as a crime committed by one man against another man’s property and rape in marriage was, therefore, not recognised. In feminist scholarship rape exemplifies men’s sense of entitlement to use and abuse women but in contemporary courtrooms lawyers defending those accuse of rape often seek to pass off the events as normal sex. In patterns of domestic abuse of women by men, physical violence and rape are often combined. The politics around the definitions of rape and violence are complicated. Some scholars and activists argue that not all coercive sex should be seen as rape. There are also debates about terms for VAW - ‘men’s gender-based violence’ or gender neutral terms such as ‘family violence’ or ‘intimate partner violence’, which can be carried out by both sexes. After a break, we will consider discussion around and debate about and women’s movement responses to recent rape case in the media, drawing on a selection of newspaper and web articles and discuss ‘slut walks’ as a feminist response to violence against women.

Key reading: Phipps, A., and G. Smith. (2012) "Violence against women students in the UK: time to take action." Gender and Education 24(4):357-73. Borah, Rituparna & Nandi, Subhalakshmi (2012): Reclaiming the Feminist Politics of ‘SlutWalk’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 14:3, 415-421 [E-JOURNAL] Ringrose, Jessica & Renold, Emma (2012) ‘Slut-shaming, girl power and ‘sexualisation’: thinking through the politics of the international SlutWalks with teen girls’, Gender and Education, 24:3, 333-343. [E-JOURNAL]

Further reading:

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 26

WHO’s information sheets about understanding and addressing violence against women: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/violence/vaw_series/en/index.html (see especially the ‘Overview’ and ‘Sexual Violence’ sheets) There are many books on violence against women, ranging from policy-focused to highly theoretical/philosophical. Below is a list of texts to use as an entrée into the literature: Almeida, Rhea V. (2010) ‘Domestic Violence in Heterosexual Relationships’ in Risman, Barbara (ed.) Families as they really are NewYork: WW Norton. Bevacqua, Maria & Carrie Baker (2004) ‘Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain!’, Women & Politics, 26:3-4, 57-83. [E-JOURNAL] http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J014v26n03_03 **Borah, Rituparna & Nandi, Subhalakshmi (2012) ‘Reclaiming the Feminist Politics of ‘SlutWalk’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 14:3, 415-421 [E-JOURNAL] Brownmiller, Susan, (1975) Against our will: men, women and rape, London: Secker and Warburg Corrin, Chris (ed) (1996) Women in a Violent World: Feminist Analyses and Resistance Across ‘Europe’. Edinburgh University Press. Coy, Maddy, and Miranda Horvath. 2011. "'Lads mags', young men's attitudes towards women and acceptance of myths about sexual aggression." Feminism & Psychology 21(1):144-50. Davies, Miranda (ed) (1994), Women and Violence: Realities and Responses Worldwide, Zed Books. Dobash, R Emerson and Russell P Dobash, Margo Wilson and Martin Daly, “The Myth of Sexual Symmetry in Marital Violence,” Social Problems, Vol 39, No 1, 1992, pp71-91 [E-JOURNAL] Dobash, R Emerson and Russell P Dobash (eds) (1998), Rethinking Violence Against Women, Sage Publications. [RESERVE] *Dobash, R P., Dobash, R E. (2001) ‘Violence Against Women: A Review of recent AngloAmerican Research’ Journal fur Konflickt und Gewaltforschung, Journal of Conflict and violence research, 3: 5-23. [E-JOURNAL] Eisikovits, Zvi and Zeev Winstok, (2011) “Special Issue on Current Controversies on the Role of Gender in Partner Violence,” inAggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 277-360 (July-August 2011) [E-JOURNAL] Fawcet, B. (1996) Violence and gender relations: theories and interventions. London: Sage. Fox, Claire Louise, Mary-Louise Corr, David Gadd, and Ian Butler. (2013) "Young teenagers' experiences of domestic abuse." Journal of Youth Studies:1-17. Gupta, Rahila (ed) (2003) From Homebreakers to Jailbreakers: Southall Black Sisters. Zed Books *Gwynne, Joel (2013) ‘Slutwalk, Feminist Activism and the Foreign Body in Singapore’, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 43:1, 173-185. [E-JOURNAL] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2012.721665 Hanmer, J. and Maynard, M. (1987), Women, Violence and Social Control, London, Basingstoke Macmillan. Hanmer, Jalna and Catherine Itzin, with Sheila Quaid and Debra Wigglewsorth (2000), Home Truths About Domestic Violence: Feminist Influences on Policy and Practice, A Reader, Routledge [RESERVE] Harne, Lynne and Jill Radford (2008) Tackling domestic violence: theories, policies and practice, Maidenhead: Open University Press, pp. 1-36 [LEARN] [RESERVE] Hickey, Georgina (2011) ‘The Geography of Pornography’ Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 32 (1): 125-151. [E-JOURNAL] Johnson, Holly, Natalia Ollus, Sami Nevala (2008) Violence against women an international perspective Published: New York: Springer [electronic resource] *Kelly, Liz, and Jo Lovett, What a Waste: the Case for an Integrated Violence Against Women Strategy (January 2005) http://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/resources/18/what-a-wastejanuary-2005 [accessed 22 December 2012] *Kelly, Liz (2005) 'Inside outsiders: Mainstreaming Gender Violence into Human Rights Discourse and Practice' International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7:4, 471-495. [E-JOURNAL]

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 27

*Koskela, Hillie (1997): 'Bold Walk and Breakings': Women's spatial confidence versus fear of violence, Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 4:3, 301-320. [E-JOURNAL] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09663699725369 McKie, Linda (2005), Families, Violence and Social Change, Open University Press [RESERVE] McCaffrey, Dawn (1998): Victim feminism/victim activism, Sociological Spectrum, 18:3, 263-284 [EJOURNAL] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02732173.1998.9982198 *MacKinnon, Catherine c 87 in Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill. Phipps, Alison. (2009). "Rape and Respectability: Ideas about Sexual Violence and Social Class." Sociology 43(4):667-83. Phipps, A., and G. Smith. (2012) "Violence against women students in the UK: time to take action." Gender and Education 24(4):357-73. **Ringrose, Jessica & Renold, Emma (2012) ‘Slut-shaming, girl power and ‘sexualisation’: thinking through the politics of the international SlutWalks with teen girls’, Gender and Education, 24:3, 333-343. [E-JOURNAL] *Sandberg, Linda &Tollefsen, Aina (2010) ‘Talking about fear of violence in public space: female and male narratives about threatening situations in Umeå, Sweden’ Social & Cultural Geography11 : 1, 1-15. [E-JOURNAL] Scottish Government (2009) Safer Lives, Changed Lives: A Shared Approach to Tackling Violence Against Women in Scotland [available online at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/06/02153519/0 ] Skinner, T., Hester, M., and Malos, E. (eds.) (2005) Researching Gender Violence: Feminist Methodology in Action, William Publishing. *Stark, Kio (1994) “I'm O.K., You're O.K. Review of Katie Roiphe The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism on Campus and Naomi Wolf Fire with Fire: The New Female Power and How to Change the 21st Century” Nation (31 January): 137–40. [E-JOURNAL] Stark, E. (2007) Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life Oxford: Oxford University Press. UNIFEM - United Nations Development Fund for Women. (2003). “Not A Minute More: Ending Violence Against Women.” http://www.unifem.org/materials/item_detail86d2.html[accessed 21 December 2012] United States Congressional Research Service, International Violence Against Women: U.S. Response and Policy Issues, 26 July 2011, RL34438, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4e54e8f62.html [accessed 21 December 2012] Wood, M, C Barter, and D. Berridge. (2011). "Standing on My Own Two Feet: Disadvantaged teenagers, intimate partner violence and coercive control." London: NSPCC. Youngs, Gillian (2003) “Private Pain/Public Peace: Women’s Rights as Human Rights and Amnesty International’s Report on Violence Against Women,” Signs 28:4, 1209-1229 [E-JOURNAL] Special Issue of Agenda: Empowering Women for gender equity on ‘Women’s Sexuality and Pornography’ Vol 26 No. 3 (2012). Special Issue of International Feminist Journal of Politicson ‘Rethinking Masculinity and Practices of Violence in Conflict Settings’ Vol 14 No.4 (2012). Special Issue of Aggression and Violent Behavioron ‘Current Controversies on the Role of Gender in Partner Violence’16: 4, 277-360 (2011) [E-JOURNAL]

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 28

TO DO BETWEEN WEEKS 7 AND 8 EVERYONE – READ THE TWO READINGS FOR DISCUSSION & MAKE A LIST OF AROUND 4 POINTS THAT YOU THINK IMPORTANT FOR EACH READING:

CONNELL, R. W., & MESSERSCHMIDT, J. W. (2005). “HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY: RETHINKING THE CONCEPT,” GENDER AND SOCIETY, 19: 829–859 DEUTSCH, FRANCINE M. 2007. “UNDOING GENDER,” GENDER AND SOCIETY 21 (1): 106-127

WEEK 8: CAN HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY BE CHALLENGED? (CLAIRE DUNCASON, POLITICS & IR)

This lecture will discuss feminist debates about men and masculinities, drawing from both feminist literature and Critical Men’s Studies. It will introduce the work of Raewyn Connell and her concepts of hegemonic, subordinate and marginalized masculinities. It will also discuss the postmodern critique of Connell’s framework. The class discussion will focus on the concept of hegemonic masculinity and specifically the question of whether it allows us to envisage change in gender relations. If masculinity shifts and mutates in order to retain power, as the concept of hegemonic masculinity suggests, then can a hierarchical gender order ever be challenged?

Key reading: Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). “Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept,” Gender and Society, 19, 829–859 Deutsch, Francine M. 2007. “Undoing Gender,” Gender and Society 21 (1):106-127

Further reading: Ashe, F. 2007 The New Politics of Masculinity: Men, Power and Resistance, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon & NY: Routledge. Beasley, Chris. 2008. “Rethinking hegemonic masculinity in a globalizing world,” Men and masculinities 11, 86–103. Beasley, Chris (2012) “Problematizing contemporary Men/Masculinities theorizing: the contribution of Raewyn Connell and conceptual-terminological tensions today,” The British Journal of Sociology 2012 Volume 63 Issue 4 SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 29

Brod, Harry, and Michael Kaufman. 1994. Theorising Masculinities: Sage. Carver, Terrell ‘What are the “Manners” that “Maketh a Man”? British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9 (2007): 313-17 Collier, R. 2010 ‘Masculinities, Law and Personal Life: Towards a New Framework for Understanding Men, Law and Gender’, Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 33(2) Summer: 431– 75. Connell, R W. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (and see forum on Connell’s Masculinities in Gender and Society 12 (4), 1998: 469-477.) Connell, R. W. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley: University of California Press. Connell, R. W 2002 Gender, Cambridge: Polity. Connell, R. W 2005 [1995] Masculinities, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Polity. Connell, R W ‘Change among the Gatekeepers: Men, Masculinities, and Gender Equality in the Global Arena’, Signs 30:3 (2005). Connell, R W. 2007. Southern Theory. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Connell, R W. 2008. ‘‘A Thousand Miles from Kind: Men, Masculinities, and Modern Institutions.’’ The Journal of Men’s Studies 16:237-52. Cornwall, A and Lindisfarne (eds) (1994) Dislocating Masculinities: Comparative Ethnographies, Routledge, London Demetriou, Demetrakis Z. 2001. “Connell's Concept of Hegemonic Masculinity: A Critique,” Theory and Society 30 (3):337-361. Edwards, T. 2006 Cultures of Masculinity, London: Routledge. Elias, Juanita and Christine Beasley. 2009. ‘‘Hegemonic Masculinity and Globalization: ‘Transnational Business Masculinities’ and Beyond.’’ Globalization 6:281-96. Garlick, S. (2003). “What is a man? Heterosexuality and the technology of masculinity,” Men and Masculinities, 6(2), 156–172. Halberstam, J. (1998). Female masculinity. Durham: Duke. Hearn, Jeff. 2004. “From hegemonic masculinity to the hegemony of men,” Feminist Theory 5, 49– 72. Higate, P R ‘Peacekeepers, Masculinities and Sexual Exploitation,’ Men and Masculinities, 10 (1), (pp. 99 - 119), 2007 Hooper, Charlotte. 2000. Manly States: Masculinities, International Relations, and Gender Politics. New York: Columbia University Press. Hooper, Charlotte, (1999). “Masculinities, IR and the ‘gender variable’: a cost-benefit analysis for (sympathetic) gender sceptics,” Review of International Studies, 25 Howson, Richard. 2009. “Deconstructing hegemonic masculinity: Contradiction, hegemony and dislocation,” NORMA: Nordic Journal for Masculinity Studies 4, 7–21 Kimmel, M., Hearn J., & Connell, R. W. (2005). Handbook on studies on men & masculinities. Thousand Oaks: Sage McCormack, Mark. 2011. ‘‘Hierarchy without Hegemony: Locating Boys in an Inclusive School Setting.’’ Sociological Perspectives 54:83-101. Messerschmidt, James W. 2008. ‘‘And Now, the Rest of the Story.’’ Men and Masculinities 11:104-8. MesserschmidtJames W. "Engendering Gendered Knowledge: Assessing the Academic Appropriation of Hegemonic Masculinity," in Men and Masculinities, 15 (1) 2012: 56-76. Messner, M. 1997 Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements, Thousand Oaks, Ca.: Sage. Messner, Michael. 2007. “The Masculinity of the Governator: Muscle and Compassion in American Politics,” Gender and Society 21 (4):461-480. Pease, B. 2000 Recreating Men: Postmodern Masculinity Politics, London: Sage. Petersen, A. 2003 ‘Research on Men and Masculinities: Some Implications of Recent Theory for FutureWork’, Men & Masculinities 6(1) (July): 54–69. Petersen, Alan1998) Unmasking the Masculine: 'Men' and 'Identity' in a Sceptical Age Ruspini, Elizabetta, Jeff Hearn, Bob Pease, and Keith Pringle, eds. 2011. Men and Masculinities Around the World: Transforming Men’s Practices. New York, NY: Palgrave. Segal, Lynne, Slow Motion: Changing Masculinities, Changing Men SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 30

West R and F. Lay (eds) Subverting Masculinity: Hegemonic and Alternative Versions of Masculinity in Contemporary Culture, Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. Wetherell, M. and Edley, N. 1999 ‘Negotiating Hegemonic Masculinity: Imaginary Positions and Psycho-discursive Practices’, Feminism and Psychology 9: 335–56. Whitehead, S. 2002 Men and Masculinities: Key Themes and Directions, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Useful website: Men’s Bibliography online: http://mensbiblio.xyonline.net/

TO DO – BETWEEN WEEK 8 AND WEEK 9 EVERYONE – READ THE KEY READING FOR CLASS DISCUSSION & MAKE A LIST OF AROUND 6 POINTS WHICH YOU THINK ARE IMPORTANT ABOUT IT:

BORDO, SUSAN (1993) UNBEARABLE WEIGHT: FEMINISM, WESTERN CULTURE AND THE BODY, CALIFORNIA: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS (PP. 165-184) [LEARN]

WEEK 9: WOMEN’S BODIES - AGENCY OR SELF-OBJECTIFICATION? (FIONA MCQUEEN, SOCIOLOGY) This session will provide an overview of key ways in which feminism has affected and been affected by theorisation about and around bodies. It will highlight and explore important debates within feminism centred around bodies, as well as introducing significant contributions to theorisation about bodies from feminist scholars. Bodies have proved to be important theoretically in the work of many feminists, yet bodies have also proved to be a sticking point in a number of debates. In the lecture, I will introduce some of the history and background to feminist approaches and attitudes towards bodies. I then turn to feminist theoretical approaches to bodies, which I will illustrate through discussing the female sexualised body in order to highlight important debates within feminism regarding the importance and meanings of bodies. In particular I will be contrasting attempts to ‘read’ bodies with attempts to understand lived experience; considering the role of agency within embodiment and; questioning dichotomous/dualist understandings of bodies – body/mind, irrational/rational, nature/culture, woman/man etc.

Key reading: SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 31

Bordo, Susan (1993) Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture and the Body, California; University of California Press (pp. 165-184) [LEARN] Williams, S & Bendelow, G (1998) ‘Uncontainable bodies? Feminisms, boundaries and reconfigured identities’, Chapter 6 in The Lived Body: Sociological Themes, Embodied Issues, London: Routledge [LEARN]

Discussion: To debate issues surrounding ‘sexualised female bodies’ you will need to read the key discussion reading plus at least one other reading from the Further readings for the discussion list. Everyone will be expected to contribute to a class wide discussion on these readings and the overarching themes contained within them. Please make notes on the reading fuelled by the questions below as these will provide the focus, or starting points, of our debate.

Discussion questions: • • • • •

How are women’s bodies represented in this reading, is there any acknowledgement of ‘embodiment’? Are sexualised female bodies being characterised as being essentially powerful or powerless? Is there an element of ‘false consciousness’ portrayed whereby women don’t really know what is best for them or their bodies, if so how is this portrayed or justified? What is the tension between accounts of lived experiences and cultural ‘readings’ of bodies – whose voice is prioritised? How far are these accounts relevant to men, and if you were adjusting the argument to address men directly would the arguments need to be changed?

Additional reading for the discussion: Califia, Pat ‘Feminism and Sadomasochism’ pp. 230-238 AND Jeffreys, Sheila ‘Sadomasochism’ pp. 238-245 in Jackson, S. and Scott, S. (1996) Feminism and Sexuality: A Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. [RESERVE] Dudash, T. (1997) ‘Peepshow Feminism’ in Nagle, Jill (ed) Whores and Other Feminists. New York, London: Routledge. hooks, bell (1997) ‘Selling hot pussy: representations of black female sexuality in the cultural marketplace.’ in Conboy, K., Medina, N., Stanbury, S. (eds) (1997) Writing on the Body: Female embodiment and feminist theory New York; Columbia University Press pp. 113-128. Lorde, Audre (1997) ‘Uses of the Erotic: The erotic as power’ in Conboy, K., Medina, N., Stanbury, S. (eds) (1997) Writing on the Body: Female embodiment and feminist theory New York; Columbia University Press pp. 277-282. Mairs, N. (1997) ‘Carnal Acts’ in Conboy, K., Medina, N., Stanbury, S. (eds) (1997) Writing on the Body: Female embodiment and feminist theory New York; Columbia University Press pp. 296-309. Queen, C. (1997) ‘Sex Radical Politics, Sex-Positive Feminist Thought, and Whore Stigma’ Chapter 11 in Nagle, Jill (ed) Whores and Other Feminists. New York, London: Routledge. Tiefer, Leonore. (1995) Sex is not a Natural Act and Other Essays. Boulder, Colorado; Oxford; Westview Press. Ch. 13 – Feminisms and pornography pp.117-128.

Further reading: Bartlett, A. (2002) Breastfeeding as Headwork: Corporeal Feminism and Meanings for Breastfeeding, Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 373 – 382. Bendelow, G.A. (1993) ‘Pain perceptions, emotions and gender’, Sociology of Health & Illness, 15, 3, 273-294. [E-JOURNAL] SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 32

Bordo, Susan (2003) Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture and the Body, California: University of California Press Brain, J (2002) Unsettling 'body image': Anorexic body narratives and the materialization of the 'body imaginary' Feminist Theory 3, 2 [E-JOURNAL] Conboy, K., Medina, N., Stanbury, S. (eds) (1997) Writing on the Body: Female embodiment and feminist theory New York; Columbia University Press Crowley, H. and Himmelweit, S. (Eds) (1992) Knowing Women: Feminism and Knowledge. Cambridge: Polity Press in association with The Open University. Davis, Kathy (1995) Reshaping the Female Body: The Dilemma of Plastic Surgery, London: Routledge Davis, Kathy (1997) Cosmetic Surgery as Feminist Utopia? In her Embodied Practices: Feminist perspectives on the body. London: Sage Publications. Fabian, C (1997) ‘The Holy Whore: A Woman’s Gateway to Power’ in Nagle, Jill (ed) Whores and Other Feminists. New York, London: Routledge. Frost, Liz (2003) (2003), ‘Doing Bodies Differently? Gender, Youth, Appearance and Damage’, Journal of Youth Studies, 6, 1, 53-71 [E-JOURNAL] Frost, Liz (2005) ‘Theorising the young woman in the body’, Body and Society 11, 1, 63-85 [EJOURNAL] Galtry, J. (2000) Extending the “Bright Line”: Feminism, Breastfeeding and the Workplace in the United States, Gender and Society, 14(2): 295-317. Gimlin, D. (2007), ‘Accounting for Cosmetic Surgery in the USA and Great Britain: A Crosscultural Analysis of Women's Narratives’, Body and Society, 13, 1, 41-60. [E-JOURNAL] Jackson, Stevi, Scott, Sue. (2001) Embodying Orgasm: Gendered Power Relations and Sexual Pleasure. Co-published simultaneously in Women and Therapy Vol. 24, No. 1 /2, pp. 99-110 and: A New View of Women’s Sexual Problems (ed. Ellin Kaschak and Leonore Tiefer) Biningham: NY: The Haworth Press Johnston-Robledo, Ingrid, Wares, Stephanie, Fricker, Jessica, Pasek, Leigh. 2007. ‘Indecent Exposure: Self-Objectification and Young Women’s Attitudes Toward Breastfeeding’, Sex Roles, 56: 429-437. Levy, Ariel (2006) Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture, London: Pocket Books MacSween (1993) Anorexic Bodies: a Feminist and Sociological Perspective on Anorexia Nervosa, London: Routledge (Chapter 3 and Conclusion) Maines, Rachel (1999) Technology of Orgasm: “Hysteria”, the Vibrator, and Women’s Sexual Satisfaction. London : John Hopkins University Press. Marshall, H. (1996), ‘Our bodies ourselves: Why we should add old fashioned empirical phenomenology to the new theories of the body’, Women's Studies International Forum, 19, 3, 253-265. Martin, Emily (2001) The Woman in the Body, Boston: Beacon Press Martin, Emily (1991) ‘The Egg and the Sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles’ Signs 16, 3 (available online at http://www.visibleworld.net/cupajane/articles_people/martin.pdf) Martin, E (2001) Rationality, Feminism and Mind – avail online at http://www.havenscenter.org/files/RationalityFeminismAndMind.pdf McHugh, Maureen (2006) What Do Women Want? A New View of Women’s Sexual Problems. Sex Roles, 54: 361-369. Price, J & Shildrick, Margaret (1999) Feminist theory and the body: a reader, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Shilling, Chris (2007) ‘Sociology and the body; classical traditions and new agendas’, Sociological Review 55, 1-18 [E-JOURNAL] Tiefer, Leonore. (1995) Sex is not a Natural Act and Other Essays. Boulder, Colorado; Oxford; Westview Press. Ch. 13 – Feminisms and pornography pp.117-128. Van Esterik, P. (1994) Breastfeeding and Feminism,International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 47 Suppl. Williams, S and Bendelow, Gillian (1998) The Lived Body; Sociological themes, embodied issues, London: Routledge SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 33

TO DO – BETWEEN WEEK 9 AND WEEK 10 EVERYONE – READ THE KEY READING (TBC) FOR CLASS DISCUSSION & MAKE A LIST OF AROUND 6 POINTS WHICH YOU Wolf, Naomi (1991) The Beauty Myth, London: Vintage THINK ARE IMPORTANT ABOUT IT. Young, Iris Marion (1990) ‘Throwing Like a Girl’ in her Throwing like a Girl and Other Essays. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

THE KEY READING WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE ON LEARN.

WEEK 10: FEMINISM AND ‘GREEN’ ISSUES (LYNN JAMIESON, SOCIOLOGY) (A) Feminist critiques of technology have a long history and there is a branch of feminism referred to as eco-feminism. Much of the social science research literature on current ‘green issues’ – climate change, loss of biodiversity, peak oil, shortages of other key resources for life (water, food, fuel) – does not have a feminist voice, even when gender issues are addressed. Suggested Reading (Key reading TBC) Berg, Anne-Jorunn (1999) ‘A Gendered Socio-Technical Construction: The Smart House’ in D. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman (eds.) The Social Shaping of Technology, 2nd Edition, Buckingham: Open University Press [2 copies Standard Loan T14.5Soc – 1 copy in Reserve T14.5Soc] Cox, Cat (1992) ‘Eco-feminism’ in Kirkup, Gill and Keller, Laurie Smith (eds.) Inventing Women: Science, Technology and Gender, Cambridge: Polity Press Faulkner, Wendy (2001) ‘The Technology Question in Feminism: A View From Feminist Technology Studies’, Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 79-95 Haraway, Donna (1991) ‘A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century’ in Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, London: Free Association Books (also abridged in Kolmar, Wendy and Bartkowski, Frances (eds) (2005) Feminist Theory: A Reader. New York: McGraw Hill Mies, Maria and Shiva, Vandana (1993) ‘Introduction’ in Maria Mies and Vandana Shiva (eds.) Ecofeminism, London: Zed Wajcman, Judy (2004) ‘Technoscience Reconfigured’, from Technofeminism, Cambridge: Polity

(B) Research suggests ways in which families, personal life, gendered divisions of labour and gendered socialization are implicated in people’s everyday orientations to ‘green issues’including denial by both men and women. Yet there are also suggestions of grounds for political alliances between feminist and environmental activism. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 34

Suggested Reading (Key reading TBC) Barr, S. 2008. Environment and Society: Sustainability, Policy and the Citizen: Ashgate. Chawla, Louise. 2009. "Growing Up Green: Becoming an Agent of Care for the Natural World." Journal of Developmental Processes 4(1): 6–23. Chawla, Louise. 2008. "Participation and the ecology of environmental awareness and action." Pp. 98-110 in Participation and Learning, edited by Alan Reid, Bjarne Bruun Jensen, and Jutta Nikel: Springer. Gronhoj, A, and F Olander. 2007. "A gender perspective on environmentally related family consumption." Journal of Consumer Behaviour 6:218-35. Grønhøj, Alice, and John Thøgersen. 2009. "Like father, like son? Intergenerational transmission of values, attitudes, and behaviours in the environmental domain." Journal of Environmental Psychology 29:414–21. Norgaard, Kari Marie. 2006. "“We Don't Really Want to Know”: Environmental Justice and Socially Organized Denial of Global Warming in Norway." Organization & Environment 19(3):347-70. Payne, P. 2005. "Families, Homes and Environmental Education." Australian Journal of Environmental Education 21:81-95. Seyfang, Gill. 2010. "Community action for sustainable housing: Building a low-carbon future." Energy Policy 38(12):7624-33. Shove, Elizabeth, Mika Pantzar, and Matt Watson. 2012. The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes. London: Sage Threadgold, Steven. 2011. "‘I reckon my life will be easy, but my kids will be buggered’: ambivalence in young people's positive perceptions of individual futures and their visions of environmental collapse." Journal of Youth Studies 15(1):17-32. Wells, N.M. , and K.S. Lekies. 2006. "Nature and the Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism." Children, Youth and Environments 16(1).

WEEK 11: COURSE OVERVIEW & CLASS DISCUSSION (MARY HOLMES, SOCIOLOGY & RADHIKA GOVINDA, SOCIOLOGY) In this concluding session, the key ideas from each week of the course will be referred to and pulled together. This will involve whole class feedback, as well as some discussion in the four groups designated earlier in the course. Course evaluation forms will be distributed towards the end of the class; these are to be completed and returned anonymously, as per the instructions given on the form. SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 35

CFD Honours Essay Questions 2012-2013 Short Essay Discuss the relationship between women, feminism, gender and intersectional analyses of multiple inequalities by doing ONE of the following: 1) Imagine Black feminist scholar activist bell hooks and Dalit (ex-untouchable) feminist scholar activist Annie Namala were to meet. What would they say to each other regarding women of color/ Dalit women, about women in Civil Rights/Dalit movements and women’s movements in the United States and in India? Write up this imagined conversation. 2) Write a review of Eva Mulvad’s Enemies of Happiness (2007), a film which is set in Afghanistan. (this can be downloaded from the web; see also LEARN) 3) Write a review of TWO of the following feminist texts: Mary Wollstonecraft (1792) A Vindication of the Rights of Woman Kate Millett (1972) Sexual Politics Angela Davies (1981) Women, Race and Class Audre Lorde (1984) Sister/Outsider Further guidance for each of these questions is available on LEARN.

Long Essay Answer ONE of the following questions: 1. What are the most important debates and issues facing contemporary feminism? 2. ‘Inequality comes in all shapes and sizes.’ What are the key debates concerning equality and inequality and where is feminism positioned within these? 3. ‘Social reality is far removed from the male breadwinner model.’ How far do feminist debates concerning the family and marriage interface with ideas about the male breadwinner? 4. ‘Quotas for women are unfair but effective.’ Evaluate this statement and contrast with alternative ways of thinking about political representation. 5. Does foregrounding men and masculinity in feminist debates challenge feminist ideas about oppression or re-privilege men? 6. What key debates about violence against women surface in the differences between Reclaim the Night and Slutwalk? 7. ‘The body itself is a natural entity and admits no genealogy.’ Evaluate this statement in connection with contemporary feminist debates on embodiment.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 36

PLANNING AND WRITING YOUR ESSAYS Here are some useful points to bear in mind: 1. Start in good time! Don’t rush it! 2. First make sure that you understand the question and have defined any key terms. Draft some provisional headings relating to key points/aspects of the question. There is no single formula for an essay plan, but investing time at the planning stage is always worthwhile, however pressed you feel. Writing the question at the head of your plan may help to clarify your thinking and ensure that you answer the question which has been set. 3. Next, identify and review relevant readings. Remember, at Honours level, the reading list is just the beginning point, and for assessment purposes you need to go beyond this list and do further reading. Make notes and organise the readings in accordance with your plan headings, taking the opportunity to revise the provisional headings in the light of your review of the course materials and other relevant readings. You can go beyond the reading list by following up references in the bibliographies of articles and books you have found particularly useful. You can skim through back copies of relevant journals (see reading list for examples) or search the Library catalogue and E-JOURNALs. Social science gateways are often useful ways to access relevant material: see, for example, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/subject/socsciBy now, you should be formulating an argued response to the question, and organising the relevant material in a way that will support your argument. 4. Once you are clear about the material, and how it will support your argument, you should organise it into paragraphs. You should try to ensure that the main point conveyed by each paragraph is supported by at least one good example selected from your notes on the relevant material. At this stage, you would do well to consider the maximum word length, and allocate the appropriate number of words to each essay section. 5. When you are ready to write, you need to come up with a good introductory paragraph. This should identify the main issue to be addressed, and indicate your chosen approach to it, but try to go beyond a bald re-statement of the question. If you feel stuck, you may find it helpful to write a provisional introduction, then come back and revise it in the light of the completed essay. 6. Be sure to use a recognised system of referencing and citation and be careful to cite all sources clearly. Distinguish between academic sources and other less authoritative sources such as articles, blogs, campaign web-sites etc. DO NOT USE WIKIPEDIA – IT IS

NOT FACT CHECKED AND GENERALLY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CREDIBLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION. 7. Throughout the writing stage, be prepared to prune if it becomes clear that you are writing more for a given section than your plan has allowed for. Always keep the needs of the question uppermost in your mind and ask yourself what work each section is doing in helping you to answer the question. Think of your essay as an argument, progressing by stages, clearly linked, and supported by well-chosen evidence. Ask yourself: What work is each section doing? Have I linked each section? Have I provided enough signposts? 8. Your essay needs to have a well-argued conclusion. Avoid introducing new ideas or arguments right at the end of the essay, or taking off a new direction. Your final paragraphs should draw together the main threads of the argument that you have been developing throughout the essay. 9. Always read through your draft essay carefully and redraft as necessary. By re-reading or re-drafting, you can at least eliminate the spelling mistakes and awkward phrases that will create an unfavourable impression, and do less than justice to all the work that may have SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 37

gone into the essay. Reading your essay aloud will help you to identify any troublesome sentence structures. Longer sentences will probably be easier to read if broken down into shorter ones. Ideally, if you are sufficiently organised, leave your essay to one side for a day or two before returning to it for final revisions. You will almost certainly find that things that seemed clear to you at the time of writing are now no longer so clear, and need to be re-worded. You may also find that your brain has been unconsciously working away at the issues raised, and that you now see a better way of arguing your case, or of organising the material. ESSAY MARKING A copy of the School-wide marking descriptors can be found at http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/undergrad/honours/assessment_and_regs/marking_descriptors EXTERNAL EXAMINERS University Assessment Regulations require that every course be monitored by an external examiner appointed by the University. This nominated person will also attend the Board of Examiners. The External Examiners for this course for session 2013-2014 are as follows: Dr Esther Dermott, University of Bristol, and Dr Michael Halewood, University of Essex.

SSPS 10001Contemporary Feminist Debates 2013-14, page 38