how framing can be applied to examine the concatenation of different discourse levels as strategies to establish gender power relations in authoritarian regimes.
Katharina Obuch introduces the second part of the volume with her chapter titled “Between Militancy and Survival? The Case of the Nicaraguan Women’s Movement.” She presents findings from her interviews with women’s activists and civil society experts in Nicaragua, a country historically known for its strong and belligerent women’s movement. Examining the movement’s historical evolution, its major wings, and the particular challenges faced by Nicaraguan women’s organizations in the context of today’s hybrid regime structures, she highlights the movement’s ambiguous potential: it is a pioneer of societal democratization yet often promotes traditional gender roles. More precisely, her findings demonstrate that civil society can play an important role in the overcoming of power relations (e.g., as an agent of change, school of democracy, or democratic watchdog) as well as in their reinforcement – in the form of conservative and unprogressive (antifeminist) movements, dubious entanglements with government structures, or simply as depoliticized service providers.
[20] In “The Tunisian Constitution between Democratic Claim and Constitutional Reality” Gabriele Wilde and Jasmin Sandhaus consider the implications and effects of Tunisia’s constitutional process for democratic gender relations. Focusing on the development process of the constitution and constitutional texts, they reflect on the integration of women’s associations and the significance of gender equality and question the prevalence of struggles for gender equality and to what extent the views of actors and interest groups were portrayed and unequal gender relations discussed and negotiated. This chapter concludes that the Tunisian Constitution can be understood as a hegemonic construction using traditional ideas to establish gender relations as domination relations and confirms the subordinate role of women.
The contribution by Joyce Marie Mushaben provides a multifaceted picture of the women’s movement in Turkey. The article draws our attention to the fact that Turkish society is extremely heterogeneous, which is reflected by numerous factions and diverse groups of the women’s movement, as well as by a multitude of very different NGOs and civil society organizations working on behalf of women’s issues. Despite many hurdles and significant difficulties related to class, ethnicity, and regional provenience of women activists and key protagonists, the author clearly identifies space and opportunities for the development of a shared and coherent identity of the Turkish women’s movement. The title of Mushaben’s contribution, “‘I’m here too, Girlfriend …’: Reclaiming Public Spaces for the Gendering of Civil Society in Turkey,” signals a positive development toward a further empowerment of women in Turkey with the goal of standing up for their rights. However, in between the lines there are also indicators of how fragile and vulnerable the Turkish women’s movement still is. It is an open question whether the heterogeneous women’s movement that is furthermore divided along class and ethnic cleavages will be able to speak up and to build a more or less uniform bulwark against repression, nationalism, and arbitrary use of power.
Stephanie Bräuer’s chapter, “Between Provocation and Incorporation – Social Gender Activism in the Hybrid Regime of the PRC,” focuses on the Beijing anti-domestic violence (ADV) movement as a case study of social gender activism in China. Analyzing the evolution and tactical alignment of ADV activists in the capital, she highlights how traditional, professional [21] organizations with well-established links to the political system have laid the ground for the recent awakening of a provocative and confrontational activism seeking to raise public awareness. Still, she concludes that in the given context of autocratic structures and recently increasing hard crackdowns on social gender activists, a non-confrontational, unprovocative tactical approach seems to be better suited to influence policy decision-making in China.
Finally, Patricia Graf shows in her chapter, “The Shadow of Autocracy. Gender Politics in Chile,” how the authoritarian gender regime in Chile was only partially reformed in the country’s transition process, as traditional gender roles are extremely persistent up until today. While access to positions of power and resources have changed, the conservative discourses and gender images of the old military dictatorship were carried over to the new democratic regime. Analyzing the particular role of women’s movements during the transition, she points out how feminist demands were successfully weakened by establishing a state feminism and enforcing the division between radical groups and “institutionalists.”
References
Bargetz, Brigitte et al. (2017): Geschlechterverhältnisse als Machtverhältnisse. In: Femina Politica 26, 1, pp. 11-24.
Adloff, Frank (2005): Zivilgesellschaft. Theorie und politische Praxis. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Studium.
Al-Ali, Nadje (2012): Gendering the Arab Spring. In: Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication 5, 1, pp. 26-31.
Albrecht, Holger/Frankenberger, Rolf (Eds.) (2010): Autoritarismus Reloaded. Neuere Ansätze und Erkenntnisse der Autokratieforschung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Albrecht, Holger/Frankenberger, Rolf (2011): Die „dunkle Seite“ der Macht: Stabilität und Wandel autoritärer Systeme. In: Albrecht, Holger/Frankenberger, Rolf/Frech, Siegfried (Eds.): Autoritäre Regime: Herrschaftsmechanismen, Legitimationsstrategien, Persistenz und Wandel. Schwalbach: Wochenschau Verlag, pp. 17-45.
Al-Rebholz, Anil (2014): Das Ringen um die Zivilgesellschaft in der Türkei: intellektuelle Diskurse, oppositionelle Gruppen und Soziale Bewegungen seit 1980. Bielefeld: Transcript.
[22] Antonakis, Anna (2017): In Transformation? – Renegotiating Gender and State Feminism in Tunisia between 2011 and 2014: Power, Positionalities and the Public Sphere. Berlin: Freie Universität.
Bank, Andre (2009): Die Renaissance des Autoritarismus. Erkenntnisse und Grenzen neuerer Beiträge der Comparative Politics und Nahostforschung. In: Hamburg Review of Social Sciences 4, 1, pp. 10-41.
Barber, Benjamin (2004): Strong Democracy: Participatory Democracy for a New Age. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
Carothers, Thomas (2002): The End of the Transition Paradigm. In: Journal of Democracy 13, 1, pp. 5-21.
Cohen, John L./Arato, Andrew (1997): Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge/Mass.: MIT-Press.
Croissant, Aurel (2002): Einleitung: Demokratische Grauzonen – Konturen eines Forschungszweigs. In: Bendel, Petra (Eds): Zwischen Demokratie Und Diktatur. Zur Konzeption und Empirie Demokratischer Grauzonen. Opladen: Leske und Budrich, pp. 9-47.
Croissant, Aurel/Merkel, Wolfgang (2004): Introduction: Democratization in the Early Twenty-First Century. In: Democratization 11, 5, pp. 1-9.
Dahrendorf, Ralf (1991): Die gefährdete Civil Society. In: Michalski, Krzysztof (Ed.): Europa und die Civil Society. Castelgandolfo-Gespräche 1989. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, pp. 247-263.
Dahrendorf, Ralf (1999): Impulse für die Bürgergesellschaft. Die Kraft des Dritten Sektors. In: Reflexion und Initiative. Hamburg, pp. 10-15.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Osteuropakunde (2003): Osteuropa. In: Zeitschrift für Gegenwartsfragen des Ostens 53, 5, pp. 633-733.
Diamond, Larry (2008): The Democratic Rollback. The Resurgence of the Predatory State. In: Foreign Affairs 87, 36, pp. 36-48.
Diamond, Larry (2015): Facing up to the Democratic Recession. In: Journal of Democracy 26, 1, pp. 141-155.
Cavatorta, Francesco (2015): Civil Society Activism under Authoritarian Rule. A Comparative Perspective. London: Routledge.
Etzioni,
