Border Patrol’s Not-So-Secret: the Normalized Abuse of Migrant Women on the U.S.-Mexico Border

I am delighted to announce that a version of Valeria Vera's research paper for the Davies Forum has been published in USF's International Affairs Review (fall 2013).

Abstract:
The aim of the United States Border Patrol is to prevent terrorists, weapons, and illegal immigrants from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. Now heavily militarized, is the Border Patrol out of control?

Read more here.

Future of Feminist Security Studies

Although we discussed many different approaches to the future of feminist security studies, one particular quote from Carol Cohn's article really stuck out to me because of how it related to our recent class discussions and because it, in my opinion, really represented the future of feminist security studies. When I read the final words of Cohn's article "Feminist Security Studies’: Toward a Reflexive Practice," her quote "...it is also likely true that no one is more likely to push a change in agenda than the organized women who live in the shadows of those elite men's decisions" (2011, p.585) made me think of one of our class discussions. I connected the term "organized women" to the organized and masculinized nature of the military.  

The quote seems to make a point that the future of feminist security studies rests in the hands of women who are often directly or closely related to a masculinized society, where they are often in the shadows and discredited (sectors like the military). And in a way I believe this opinion. Although I am not saying that only women who have these experiences will be the ones who are at the forefront of the feminist security studies, I believe that those who are will play a vital and important role. 

One of the main reasons I believe this is because of one of her earlier quotes, where she says that "...this involved asking questions such as how and why the masculinist institutions at the heart...if we study men in these institutions as men, then what can we learn? (Cohn, 2011, p. 585). She stresses the importance of studying men and masculinity as a way to progress and learn more about feminist security studies. Those who are in environments where masculinity and the masculinized society are prevalent are able to take vital experiences in order to learn more about the culture. For example, how and why these masculine institutions function the way they do, how they define masculinity and where this notion of "power" comes from. For me, this is where the future of feminist security studies lies.  

Cohn, Carol (2011) “‘Feminist Security Studies’: Toward a Reflexive Practice” Politics & Gender 7 (4): pp. 581-586.

FSS-- future?

"The first task of a feminist security scholar should then be to develop a willingness to listen and to consider another view of the world" (Wibben, 2011, p.111).

The future starts with one simple word: curiosity (Enloe). Developing curiosity, as I have learned in the past two semesters, is necessary in the path towards establishing a feminist curiosity and to questioning everyday aspects of the political, because "feminism is political" (Wibben, 2011, p.113).

I think a big danger to the future, not just of Feminist Security Studies, but to society and people in general, is the same danger that Wibben identifies as "the myth of the empowerment narrative, the idea that we could be 'giving a voice' to someone (who am I to give a voice?)." She claims, instead, that "we need to 'ask ourselves the hard questions about what we are doing and why we are doing it'" (2011, p.110, quoting Andrews). This is the threat; that instead of perpetuating hegemony, knowledge, and power hierarchy, a critical aspect to the future of Feminist Security Studies is to understand that realities are all different, to question, and to tackle issues using the narrative perspective as a way to inform the general. As Cynthia Enloe said, the particular is the general, and the general is the particular, just a lot of particulars.

Wibben, A. (2011). Feminist Security Studies: A Narrative Approach. New York: Routledge.

Reflections on the future of feminist security studies

There are several points made by Prof Wibben in the last chapter of her book, Feminist Security Studies, which I believe are critical to the field and academia more generally. I especially agree with her suggestion that scholars must recognize the relationship between identity and narrative. Much too often, studies are considered "real", "valid", and "important" only if they are "objective" (is anything ever really completely objective anyways?). As scholars, feminists, and citizens more generally, I think its critical to "Ask ourselves the hard questions about what we are doing and why we are doing it", as Andrews states (quoted in Wibben 2011: 110). This is a topic which has interested me all semester, and which was widely discussed at the workshop. Whether one uses the term self-reflexivity, subjectivity, or positionality - I think the main point remains the same - the ability to acknowledge that we are all "situated" beings - from a certain class, race, sexual orientation, gender, political affliation, nation, and so on. Secondly, we must recognize how these subject positions inform our research.

Though I generally agree with Prof Wibben's analysis of the 9/11 narrative, and I agree that binary, totalizing rhetoric is both unproductive and inaccurate, I don't believe that the "other" in this case - those responsible for 9/11, should at all be considered political agents, as so doing (I believe) assumes that those responsible have some sort of rational, intelligible motive, which I don't believe is the case. Nonetheless - I agree with the overall point being made - that in the future of FSS and feminism more generally, anytime that an incident like 9/11 takes place, there are always multiple possible narratives, multiple possible meanings, which cannot be reduced to simple binary terms of "us" and "them".


Wibben, A. (2011). Feminist Security Studies: A Narrative Approach. New York: Routledge

Future of Feminist Security Studies : CURIOSITY

Our discussion about the future of Feminist Security Studies brought up some important ideas, many that were reiterated in our readings. I particularly found our discussion regarding how we could continue to cultivate our initial feminist studies. An important idea we touch on was that “it implies a radically different ontology based on an acceptance of vulnerability and uncertainty where ambiguity and strangeness are embraced, or at least acknowledged” (Wibben, 2011 p.113). There is a deep-rooted aversion to admitting one’s vulnerability and uncertainty, especially in the academic field. This class has taught me, it’s okay to admit you don’t know the answer or that you’re not comfortable with some material. I think this is extremely important to understand moving forward. We should be finding more questions than definite answers. Just the act of realizing those questions exist and are important is a critical step in feminist studies.
Similarly, the idea that “how open a researcher is to engaging in (self-) reflexive research processes, interrogating their own positionality and privilege, questioning its impact on what can be perceived, being willing and able to be surprised, and adopting a stance of curiosity” (Wibben, 2011 p.111) has made me realize things before that I accepted as givens. Recognizing what we are not questioning is what I will concentrate on in the future. It has made me look back on so many papers, presentations and classes I have taken in the past in a new light, which is what I think feminist studies as a whole is all about; recognizing certain aspects that are left unquestioned and maintain a curiosity to identify them.

Wibben, A. (2011). Feminist Security Studies: A Narrative Approach. New York: Routledge

The Future of Feminist Security Studies: The Answer is Blowin’ in the Wind

       Feminist Security Studies (wherever the semantic emphasis falls) seems to be a field with a bright, if not clearly one-directional future.  What I mean by this is that of all of the academic disciplines, those I respect the most are those which are constantly questioning their goals, methods, and terminology.  Just like research which is bettered by changing the research question to fit the results, rather that squeezing the results into some pre-conceived theory, I believe that academic disciplines should not take their fundamental tenets (or their names) as divinely written in stone.  I see nothing wrong, and, in fact, everything right, about a field writing to question and evaluate their practices, values, methodology and even its name. 

           Ann Jones (1994) would agree with me, stating “Researchers…commonly present [their ‘subjects’] with a list of predetermined questions, designed to elicit the information the researchers want, and keyed for quick reduction to faceless numbers – a ‘scientific method’ very different from listening to what women have to say for themselves” (pg. 155). 

The feminist curiosity that Cynthia Enloe writes about would appear to be a useful perspective for any academic, because by approaching everything, even one’s dearly held “traditions” with a critical mind, one can discover new links, new theories, and new conclusions. This is why I feel confident about the future of Feminist Security Studies.  If many people in the discipline are utilizing this feminist curiosity, the discipline will remain alive and vital.  (One hopes that their curiosity might puncture any egos unwilling to keep changing.)

I am still undecided about whether I think that sticking with the conventional definition of “Security Studies” is a positive approach; it does allow for those unfamiliar with feminist theory to grasp the ideas with a familiar framework. If such a framework were discarded, how would analysis be carried out, and how would anyone outside FSS be able to understand it?

            On the other hand, changing existing power structures from the inside can be arduous and ultimately an exercise in futility.  Perhaps the solution would be to continue to grow and expand FSS, drawing on both reframed traditional academic practices of the discipline of Security Studies, and also new academic practices created by FSS scholars.  This could, hopefully, grow to such proportions that it would seriously rival traditional Security Studies. 

            While perhaps an overly optimistic view, I think that a re-definition of the term “Security” has such far-reaching consequences that it is worthy of much academic (and policy-makers’) attention.  Because so far, to me “Feminist” Security Studies is simply a more holistic view of “Security Studies.”  It is not a niche, it is a view of International Relations that includes, and focuses on women.  And this does seem like a good idea, doesn’t it, given that over 50% of the global population is, guess what: women!

            Women already play an enormous role in “war” and “peace-”time International Relations.  It’s about time we started studying that role in detail.  Perhaps then we would be able to see things in a light that is clear and piercing enough, that we would be able to break the cycle of history and head off in a new direction.

Ann Jones'  "Why doesn't she leave?" In: Next Time She'll Be Dead. Boston: Beacon Press. 1994.

Women All Day Everyday:The Future of Feminist Security Studies

Feminist Security Studies. What loaded words! How can one word be political, social and economic all at the same? I'll tell you how. We live in a world where everything is on the table for the taking, to benefit individuals. The days of tribal societies are long gone. Now, our minds are in "me, myself and I" mode, because it's an option. We have to work twice or thrice as hard to make sure people are never comfortable are that. Once that state of individuality is reached its hard to go back. People get one taste of the sweetness of security and vow to never let it go, even though we learn over and over again through out history that we need one another.
Regardless of public opinion, I don't see the major progress women have made. Why have women become stuck in fake security? Yes, we have made strides, but at least in the past, violence against women was right there, open for the world to see. Now women don't even realize when violence is being enacted on them. In fact, American women have this idea that they "are so free", while women in other parts of the world are "so oppressed". I think that is where the future of Feminist Security Studies lies, because I know I live in an educated bubble where me and people around me somewhat understand this.
Waking women up to the reality that is right in front of their noses. Don't settle, don't be satisfied, and don't leave it someone else. Don't compare yourself to women across the nation because at the end of the day, we are all women. Don't complain about your salary that is still less than your male counterpart in the 21st century, and then talk about how crazy feminism is. Feminism isn't a special passion that only some acquire. It isn't the famine in Somalia, or the Arab Spring. This is about 51% of the world who deserve to be treated with same  respect and dignity as the other 49% and aren't. Easier said than done, but we have the privilege to do so, why not? "What is more, feminists insist that the question of identity and security are fundamentally interwoven: Any security narrative is also a narrative of political identity"(Wibben 2011, p. 109).

In the words of Betty Hutton to Howard Keel: "Anything you can do I can do better."

The Future is Just the Start

This reflection is kind of bittersweet because it reminds me of everything I have learned this semester and how much I will miss coming to class and hearing other perspectives on FEMINISM.

One quote that really stood out to me was that, "[the] narratives of security, told from outsiders' standpoints, offer a very different account of security than the dominant state-centered security narrative" (Wibben 2011, p. 100). When it comes to security, it is a very individualist concept. Our American idea of security varies from state to state. Not even that. I think that it varies from person to person.
In Communication, we have qualitative research methods, in which we interview individuals to gain their perspective. Using that as a tool, it's a way to better understand where the research is going and what still needs to be done. There is also the argument that because we are not personally involved in other countries' politics, that we shouldn't give our input because there is no possible way to relate. Our "solutions" might not be the best way to solve the problem but it's a starting point. It's like a self-fulfilling prophesy. Because we can never achieve equality between genders, why should we even try? No! Any progress, as small as it may be, is still progress. We might not see it in our lifetime, but at least we strived for change.
Along with that argument, any perspective is valid. Even if we may not want to accept or agree, we, as students, are extremely privileged and we might not have the same perspective, but that doesn't mean we should not try to understand others. Our personal experiences, whether they be negative or positive, shape us and help us join the feminist conversation. Our negative experiences are the most valuable because those are the ones that makes us want to change. Like Stern said, "[she] [had] lived through a difficult time in [her] life" (Wibben 2011, p. 104) but that's what makes her angry. Like Swati said, that's what we need to make change, for us and for other women. So really, it is because we look to the future that we can start changing our present.

Make Your Own Damn Sandwich: The Future of Feminist Security Studies

I'm tired. It's the end of the semester, what else do you expect?

The future, the future... let's be honest, I don't know what to expect of the future, let alone what I'm going to wear tomorrow, what I'm going to eat for breakfast, or how I'm going to get my eye to stop twitching. It's insane and overwhelming to think that our class and some other people in the world have their eyes open to the many problems that surround us, yet there are still people who believe gay marriage is a sin and people who continue to say some woman deserve to be raped. *facepalm forever*

But despite my tiredness, I remain an optimist. Maybe it's because I'm a reader, but I believe stories are everything. A story can change your mind and show you a perspective you never considered. How do we get these narratives out there and start changing people's minds? There are so many angles to tackle these problems from - education, media, and politics all need major changes. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but Americans definitely seem to have very close-minded, uneducated notions about the world. For a country with so much influence in the global community, maybe we should start focusing our attention inward to fix the many domestic issues we have before we try and "spread democracy" around the world. Furthermore in order to learn about the narratives, of survivors (or anyone else), we have to develop the skills that will allow us to remain "attentive over time"... "The story might evolve, depending on location... as trust and friendship are developed... and as time passes" (Wibben 2011, p. 111). We need to be patient and aware of these changes. Never assume you know anything about someone's story or experience. Perhaps feminism needs to not just be "reaction to dissatisfaction with the way women have fared" but a way of life, a way of thinking that allows us to improve the state of the world (Wibben 2011, p. 111). 

In short, stories matter. I think in order for the future of FSS to be successful, we have to continue sharing/listening/telling these stories. It will be exhausting work... so somebody get me an energy drink!

- Jillian

Stop, Look and Listen: Feminist Security Studies and its Bright Future

Though I'm no expert in feminism, I think it's safe to say we've seen strides in reframing the way people think about women's issues. The recent Steubenville rape case brought justice to the victim and persecuted the perpetrator. Women are no longer excluded from combat in the US military. Women's rights came to the forefront of the 2012 elections. Grassroots movements like Slutwalk and student-led sexual assault protests across university college campuses have been sprouting since 2011.

Now I know that each of these examples pose and have posed other consequences that conflict with Feminist Security Studies. Yes, women can now serve all positions in the military, but how is that an answer to mediating hegemonic masculinity and violence in the US military system? Of course, the Steubenville rape case was a win for proving that the absence of "no" is not consent, but what about the sympathetic media portrayal of these sexual offenders? Even though women's rights were at the center of the political process during elections, were they truly being acknowledged or just used as tactical strategies for winning over female voters? And do these student movements correctly and effectively bring forth these women's issues to the political conversation?

The silver lining amidst these flaws and imperfections, I think, is the fact that these issues are more visible than they were even five years ago. Women's issues are featured on TV, print sources like newspapers and magazines, and most definitely the Internet - especially on blogs like this one! We have the great pleasure of accessibility to free publishing via social media and have the power to spread the feminist perspective that early feminists didn't have - and I think this is largely why these issues have risen to the front of politics in recent years. The feminist perspective is more prevalent than it once was. No one can pretend that women's issues don't exist. No one can pretend that Feminist Security Studies isn't a "real thing." The truth is that more feminist narratives are put out there, and - despite the fact that there is indeed tension when someone even tries to mention feminism in conversation - society is growing more comfortable with acknowledging the feminist perspective.

Maybe it's not that more people are willing to stop, look for and listen to the feminist narrative, but it's definitely becoming more visible... and maybe even unavoidable. People are now given a plethora of information to see that the intersectionality of our identities truly affect our experience of the world - all women do not necessarily share the same kinds of oppression (Wibben 2011, p. 107). We already see change domestically in the framework of the United States (hoping that breaking the record of women elected into our legislative branch will soon begin to change things!), so perhaps this is the first stepping stone into looking past our borders and pursuing feminist narratives in International Relations as well. If we continue to progress in the way we already are, it may not be a far reach from getting a hand in IR - but before we do so, society must continue to "develop a willingness to listen and to consider another view of the world" (Wibben 2011, p. 111).

I should acknowledge, however, that this is coming from my perspective - my narrative. I am, after all, in the lovely city of San Francisco, and also a college student in an institute with a largely liberal population. I always wonder if my views are skewed simply because I'm in one of the most liberal parts of the country - but I digress. I still would like to believe that Feminist Security Studies is moving towards a brighter future, and I hope I get to learn more about it and grow with it as the time comes.

Wibben, A.T.R. (2011). Feminist security studies: A narrative approach. London, Routledge.

Future of Feminist Security Studies

As someone who is new to feminist security studies in general the question of where it will go is an interesting one. For me the evolution has not been especially apparent since my studies have involved all aspects of feminist security studies, including thoughts and approaches from older generations. My hope is that feminist security studies is incorporated into all fields. What field would not benefit from curiosity, empathetic cooperation, and exploring intersectionality (Wibben, 2011, p. 112)? I think that feminist security studies will have a hard time, and currently does have a hard time, being incorporated into other fields because there is the widespread misconception that feminism and its principals support the advancement of crazy, bra-burning, man-hating women.

Usually when I talk to people about feminism, they immediately becomes tense when I mention the word "feminism." However, when the word is eliminated from the conversation but the principals of feminisms are being discussed, generally people are willing to engage in the conversation. It is sad that the word produces so much hostility when all that it stands for is actually amazing and beneficial for so much of the global population. I feel like if the field of feminist security studies is going to really advance and be influential in all fields, especially those in the social sciences, people will need to be educated about its principles, what it stands for, and why it is important.

Moving forward, not allowing arguments of tradition to maintain patriarchal hierarchies and social structures, and drawing from experience to inform global and national policies alike should be the aim of all social science fields, not just feminist security studies. What I hope becomes the next focus of FSS is the idea and concept of change. That the change from our current masculinized and militarized political and social structures is nothing to fear, that the redistribution of power in civil society is not equivalent to that of a zero-sum game, and that change away from gender stereo-types will not render our society a genderless state, but rather a gender neutral state in which all members can participate effectively regardless of their biological differences. A true implementation of "Feminism is the political" (Wibben, 2011, p. 113)

References:

Wibben, A. T.R. (2011). Feminist Security Studies: A narrative approach. New York: Routledge.

The Future of Feminist Security Studies Starts in Your Own Backyard

I think that the future of feminist security studies hinges on the future of more localized, day-to-day feminism. I think that before we look at IR, or while we look at it, we must also reflect on your own daily lives and communities. In order to build up feminist practices and ideologies abroad and on a global scale, women and men around the world must first start a discourse and critical thinking about gender within their own homes, schools, and local governments.

This localized feminism is looking dismal here in the US, or at least in my own communities. Feminism has become a dirty word, associated with radicals, lesbians (in a derogatory sense, as if "lesbian" is an insult), and "bitchy" women who take everything too seriously. In the US, particularly in my generation, we are living in a post-feminist world, where people seem to be under the impression that the movement--along with the gender inequality--is either over or no longer worth fighting for. 

I think it's easy for those of us who live in affluent countries and communities to look at women living in war-torn countries and see them as victims who need our help. I think that for the future of feminist security studies, we need to focus on moving even further away from white savior narratives and enter communities not to lead, direct or teach, but to show solidarity and provide support for the women and men within the community to help themselves. The best way that we, as feminists, can further the movement is to keep being curious, keep asking the tough questions, and to keep the discourse going within our own communities. When we do this, then we will actually have something to offer when we engage in dialogue with other feminists and other communities. 

To Infinite, and Beyond

If I rubbed my crystal ball, seeking to decipher the future of feminist security studies, what would I be met with?

Nothing, probably, not being so inclined with divination. But where soothsaying denies, my mind supplies (or, at the very least, offers biased opinions and a few haphazard guesses). 

Chiefly, one day, I would like feminist security studies not to have that first qualifier. I would like the lives of women to be taken seriously and their experiences of violence, and war, and peace to be considered general experiences of violence, and war, and peace. Not general in that it is widespread, but general in that we don’t need to consider it the concern of a special interest group. Because rape, and sexualized violence, and structural violence, and although those other entities and forms of being which aren’t peace (and lets not getting started on what, exactly, peace is, anyways), concern everybody. And while I don’t advocate that color-blind or race-blind or inserttheroppressedandmarginalizedgroup-blind approaches are the way to go, at moment (because we first have to dismantle centuries of overt and institutionalized oppression, not to mention continuing prejudices and stereotypes, as well as all possible effects derived from these ugly histories--- and who knows long that will take), I hope we get to a place in the future where its not even an intentional choice but the norm.

Personally,  I agree with Professor Wibben on the potential harms of too many “feminisms” (after all, if feminism is inherently political, it has to have an agreed-upon agenda to cultivate a constituency). I also think it would behoove feminism and feminist critical security studies to adopt a wide variety of methods and to explore the bounty of disciplines. To “leave no stone unturned,” as it were. After all, systems of oppression poison all dynamics of our world, so it only makes sense to be equally comprehensive.  I believe there is a place for personal testimonials and a place for empirical observations. For participatory observation and covert reconnaissance. For assertions and for silence. This is, in part, because of my last wish regarding the future direction of feminist security studies. I think our understanding of security needs to be broadened. As nearly all of our reading has elucidated, the current US conception of security is defined by imperialist hegemonic masculinity. Security starts with the self, runs through the home, and colors relationships, cultures, societies, international networks. And as we further conceptualize a colony on Mars, I'll go ahead and assert that it'll define intergalactic life as well.


Cohn, C.(2011) “‘Feminist Security Studies’: Toward a reflexive practice” Politics & Gender 7 (4): pp. 581-586.


Wibben, A.T.R. (2011a) Feminist Security Studies: A narrative approach. Routledge.
(2011b) "Feminist politics in Feminist Security Studies" Politics & Gender 7 (4): pp. 590-595.


-Laur

Our Workshop on Storify...

I storified my tweets about the workshop, take a look here: 

... and remember to post your own impressions of the workshop!

Prof. Wibben

Davies Forum "Feminist Perspectives of Studying Women, Violence & War"

TODAY:  9:30am - 4pm in Berman, Fromm Hall

Facilitators include: Sarai Aharoni, Caron Gentry, Swati Parashar, and Elina Penttinen

We've started (and I'm tweeting it @ATRWibben) as much as possible...

Feminist Security Studies and Today’s Challenges

I was recently interviewed by The Globalized World Post - I thought you might find this interesting as well:

Feminist Security Studies and Today’s Challenges: A Q&A Session with Annick T.R. Wibben

Annick T.R. Wibben is an Associate Professor of Politics and International Studies at the University of San Francisco, California and an expert in Feminist Security Studies. She has written extensively on feminism and security and has published a very influential book on the field of Feminist Security Studies, ‘Feminist Security Studies: A Narrative Approach’. On the first Q&A Session of The Globalised World Post she talked with Marianna Karakoulaki, editor of the magazine, about Feminist Security Studies in general as well as specific issues that have been under discussion recently. The discussion began on a more theoretical level but then moved to more specific issues, from the importance of specific UN resolutions to rape as a weapon of war, from the gang rapes in India to third wave feminism, and finally to women in combat in the USA.

Comments very welcome!