This paper critically examines a twenty-first century online, social movement, The Everyday Sexism Project (referred to as the ESP), to analyse resistance against sexism that is systemic, entrenched and institutionalised in society, including organizations. Our motivating questions are: what new forms of feminist organizing are developing to resist sexism and what are the implications of thinking ethico-politically about feminist resistance which has the goals of social justice, equality and fairness? Reading the ESP leads to a conceptualisation of how infrapolitical feminist resistance emerges at grassroots level and between individuals in the form of affective solidarity, which become necessary in challenging neoliberal threats to women's opportunity and equality. Our contribution conceptualises affective solidarity as central to this feminist resistance against sexism and involves two modes of feminist organizing, the politics of experience and empathy. By addressing the ethical and political demands of solidarity we can build resurgent, politically vibrant feminist organizing and resistance that mobilises feminist consciousness and builds momentum for change. Our 2 conclusion is that an ethico-politics of feminist resistance moves away from individualising experiences of sexism towards collective resistance and organizes solidarity, experience and empathy that may combat ignorance and violence towards women.

While gender very much holds a place in organization studies, this is primarily in relation to being an object of study. Still largely silent and inexplicit is the gendered nature of what organization studies researchers themselves do when they research and write. Our overarching project in this essai is to render the gendered character of organization studies writing open for discussion, to disturb the taken-for-granted gender neutrality of the ways that organization studies is written, as well as to outline how it might be otherwise. The specific contribution we are led to is the setting out of the possibilities for, following Hélène Cixous, a bisexual writing of organization studies. We suggest that organization studies has been dominated by a participation in what Cixous calls a 'masculine libidinal economy'. This is a system of exchange where science, mastery and rigour are not so much an effort in inquiry, but more a form of (rough) trade through which to appease the fear of castration; the fear of not-knowing. In looking for alternatives we review recent developments in narrative methodology in organization studies and extend this through the idea of the feminine libidinal economy and towards a consideration of Cixous's practice of bisexual writing -a writing that challenges masculine orthodoxy by confusing it rather than attempting to replace it with another (feminine) orthodoxy.

This article offers an understanding of organizational ethics as embodied and pre-reflective in origin and socio-political in practice. We explore ethics as being founded in openness and generosity towards the other, and consider the organizational implications of a ‘corporeal ethics’ grounded in the body before the mind. Shifting focus away from how managers might rationally pursue organizational ethics, we elaborate on how corporeal ethics can manifest in practical and political acts that seek to defy the negation of alterity within organizations. This leads us to consider how people’s conduct in organizations might be ethically informed in the context of, and in resistance to, the dominating organizational power relations in which they find themselves. Such an ethics manifests in resisting those forms of organizing that close down difference and enact oppression; a practice we refer to as an ethico-politics of resistance.

This article joins recent critical diversity studies that point to an urgent need to revitalize the field, but goes further by showing the inherent contextual issues and power relations that frame existing contributions. Based on a theoretical reading inspired by Michel Foucault, diversity is presented as discourse that is not independent of the particular research exercise of which it is part but, rather, remains contingent on the prevailing forms of knowledge and choices made by researchers. By attending to more refined understandings of power and context within diversity discourse, this article makes visible and calls into question the categorization and normalization of diversity and its management. It contributes to existing research by suggesting that the knowledge produced by mainstream and critical diversity scholars alike is biopolitical and governmental. To do diversity research differently or ‘otherwise’ requires finding ways to develop theorizations and practices that turn this modality of power against itself.

Woman. Active. Passive. Erased, In writing and thought. KeywordsWriting, woman, feminine, activism I write to speak. Writing extends me, it reaches well beyond the confines of myself. At a very basic level, I would like my writing to speak from me, of me, when I am able to.Spaces have been created for embodied writing, leaky writing, dirty writing, feminine writing … yet I am asking whether this is a place that is assigned to women and what are the terms of being in the organisation studies community? Do we need to be more subversive, transgressive? Are we at risk of losing this space unless writing becomes activism, until we change the regulatory systems that assign this place for us and hold us accountable for our writing? This activism starts by speaking of writing, and women's place within it. This activism arises from relations between us -it is not something we do in isolation except that I am writing this text alone, but I am constantly imagining you in front of me. I am working through how what I write will be received, and whether I should edit myself. I am also mindful that much confidence stems from writing this text by myself. Speaking these words, speaking me, breathes, lives, connects. Writing exposes, and with this exposure, we get cast in a sea of risk, insecurity and vulnerability.There is a need for radical engagement with women's bodies and their relationship with writing. Given the power of women's writing, what can we do to challenge and change the systems that govern us? Women's bodies as sites of radical transgression through writing differently. For writing to touch, we need to establish the affective sociality between writers and readers -it touches by promoting an ethico-political relationship between us. This again seems quite simple until we remember the context in which we write, and when we remember women's place non-place, presence absence and abjection in the system? How can we create relationships of mutual care, respect,