Aiko Holvikivi – författare

The practice of "gender training" has gained widespread popularity among numerous professions in the last few decades. Designed to address a range of problems--from corporate advancement, to sexual assault, to economic development--gender training is reliably presented as a solution to gendered disparities. Gender training has even become a requirement for soldiers and police officers deploying overseas as peacekeepers. But what happens when the concept of gender, the analytical purchase of which we owe to feminist activism and scholarship, is taken up by martial institutions shaped by hegemonic masculinity? How is gender training made to work in and for military and police organisations? Is it a normative good from the point of view of intersectional feminist politics?Through an ethnographic study of gender training practices in peacekeeping institutions, Aiko Holvikivi examines how gender is conceptualised, taught, and learned in these settings, and with what political effects. She finds that this training constitutes a deeply ambivalent practice from the point of view of intersectional feminist political commitments. On the one hand, it reinscribes the logic that martial force is an appropriate solution to gendered insecurities, and it affirms attachments to normative heterosexuality. On the other hand, this training simultaneously exposes contradictions that inhere to the logics of martiality, coloniality, and heteronormativity that structure the peacekeeping enterprise. Drawing on queer and postcolonial feminist thought, Fixing Gender examines the contradictory politics of gender training, arguing that we need to develop the analytical tools to grapple with paradoxical practices that are simultaneously good and bad feminist politics.

The practice of "e;gender training"e; has gained widespread popularity among numerous professions in the last few decades. Designed to address a range of problems--from corporate advancement, to sexual assault, to economic development--gender training is reliably presented as a solution to gendered disparities. Gender training has even become a requirement for soldiers and police officers deploying overseas as peacekeepers. But what happens when the concept of gender, the analytical purchase of which we owe to feminist activism and scholarship, is taken up by martial institutions shaped by hegemonic masculinity? How is gender training made to work in and for military and police organisations? Is it a normative good from the point of view of intersectional feminist politics?Through an ethnographic study of gender training practices in peacekeeping institutions, Aiko Holvikivi examines how gender is conceptualised, taught, and learned in these settings, and with what political effects. She finds that this training constitutes a deeply ambivalent practice from the point of view of intersectional feminist political commitments. On the one hand, it reinscribes the logic that martial force is an appropriate solution to gendered insecurities, and it affirms attachments to normative heterosexuality. On the other hand, this training simultaneously exposes contradictions that inhere to the logics of martiality, coloniality, and heteronormativity that structure the peacekeeping enterprise. Drawing on queer and postcolonial feminist thought, Fixing Gender examines the contradictory politics of gender training, arguing that we need to develop the analytical tools to grapple with paradoxical practices that are simultaneously good and bad feminist politics.

The practice of "e;gender training"e; has gained widespread popularity among numerous professions in the last few decades. Designed to address a range of problems--from corporate advancement, to sexual assault, to economic development--gender training is reliably presented as a solution to gendered disparities. Gender training has even become a requirement for soldiers and police officers deploying overseas as peacekeepers. But what happens when the concept of gender, the analytical purchase of which we owe to feminist activism and scholarship, is taken up by martial institutions shaped by hegemonic masculinity? How is gender training made to work in and for military and police organisations? Is it a normative good from the point of view of intersectional feminist politics?Through an ethnographic study of gender training practices in peacekeeping institutions, Aiko Holvikivi examines how gender is conceptualised, taught, and learned in these settings, and with what political effects. She finds that this training constitutes a deeply ambivalent practice from the point of view of intersectional feminist political commitments. On the one hand, it reinscribes the logic that martial force is an appropriate solution to gendered insecurities, and it affirms attachments to normative heterosexuality. On the other hand, this training simultaneously exposes contradictions that inhere to the logics of martiality, coloniality, and heteronormativity that structure the peacekeeping enterprise. Drawing on queer and postcolonial feminist thought, Fixing Gender examines the contradictory politics of gender training, arguing that we need to develop the analytical tools to grapple with paradoxical practices that are simultaneously good and bad feminist politics.

In recent years, attacks on the rise of ‘gender ideology’ and ‘genderism’ as a political force, on gender studies as an academic field, and on feminist, queer and trans individuals seen to be their embodied representatives, have grown in scope and intensity. This edited volume understands such attacks as a global force in need of urgent analytical and political attention. Drawing on contributions from and about a varied range of geographical locations including Argentina, Chile, China, Germany, the Persian Gulf, Hungary, India, Pakistan, Peru, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Uganda, the UK and the US, this book explores how anti-gender mobilisations work as a transnational formation shaped by the legacies of colonialism, racial capitalism, and resurgent nationalisms and how these can be resisted. By transnationalising our inquiries into the epistemic, affective and political nature of the anti-gender phenomenon, this volume troubles the ‘origin stories’ we tell about where anti-genderpolitics come from, and helps to better locate the various sources, actors, and networks behind these attacks, contesting the notion that anti-gender politics derive solely from right-wing nationalist or conservative religious actors, to show how they also derive from more centrist, liberal, leftist and even presumably feminist positions. The book thus invites us to sharpen and rethink the conceptual vocabularies and strategies we use to understand and resist anti-gender attacks, opening up space for envisioning new political imaginaries and transnational feminist solidarities.Chapter 1 is available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com.

In recent years, attacks on the rise of ‘gender ideology’ and ‘genderism’ as a political force, on gender studies as an academic field, and on feminist, queer and trans individuals seen to be their embodied representatives, have grown in scope and intensity. This edited volume understands such attacks as a global force in need of urgent analytical and political attention. Drawing on contributions from and about a varied range of geographical locations including Argentina, Chile, China, Germany, the Persian Gulf, Hungary, India, Pakistan, Peru, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, Uganda, the UK and the US, this book explores how anti-gender mobilisations work as a transnational formation shaped by the legacies of colonialism, racial capitalism, and resurgent nationalisms and how these can be resisted. By transnationalising our inquiries into the epistemic, affective and political nature of the anti-gender phenomenon, this volume troubles the ‘origin stories’ we tell about where anti-genderpolitics come from, and helps to better locate the various sources, actors, and networks behind these attacks, contesting the notion that anti-gender politics derive solely from right-wing nationalist or conservative religious actors, to show how they also derive from more centrist, liberal, leftist and even presumably feminist positions. The book thus invites us to sharpen and rethink the conceptual vocabularies and strategies we use to understand and resist anti-gender attacks, opening up space for envisioning new political imaginaries and transnational feminist solidarities.

Chapter 1 is available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com.