In reflecting upon the divergence of Feminist Political Economy (FPE) and Feminist Security Studies (FSS) one feels puzzled and perhaps even a little embarrassed. How could such a schism occur and be sustained for seemingly so long? This divergence certainly did not appear to characterize the founding of feminist International Relations (IR) when scholars such as Cynthia Enloe (1983, 1989) and Ann Tickner (1992) were attentive to both dimensions and carefully connected issues of gender to the global economy and to understandings of security and militarism. Moreover, to my mind, there is no immediate epistemological or ontological schism between FSS and FPE of the sort that has characterized other feminist divides. The security studies/International Political Economy (IPE) split seems to be more one of empirical focus that does not require a painstaking and perhaps ultimately futile attempt to suture the feminist IR body back together. Indeed, recent and highly illuminating work on the connections between gender violence and global and local political economies (Meger 2014; True 2012a) would suggest no reason why we should not simply press ahead with the task of reconnection and driving feminist IR forward to new and insightful places.

Through the War on Terror the United States developed a seemingly enlightened understanding of Muslim women. In contrast to Orientalised representations of Muslim women's passivity and victimisation within brutal Islamic cultures these emerging representations posit Muslim women in terms of their modernity and liberation. The emergence of this new Muslim woman illuminates an attempt to secure an Occidental self through the negotiation of conflicting impulses towards Islam. Islam is recognised as the repository from which the US enemy other emerges yet the WoT also reflects a particular desire for a cosmopolitan inclusivity. The presence of the Muslim woman acts to assuage these tensions. Her oppression confirms the barbarity of the enemy yet the combination of her intrinsic agency and religiosity posits her as an acceptable Islamic other whose presence confirms the pluralistic tolerance of the US and the universal validity of its project.Katherine Allison is University Teacher in Politics at the University of Glasgow.After America was attacked, it was as if our entire country looked into the mirror and saw our better selves. 1

Increasingly, corporations are championing the cause of gender equality and women’s empowerment in the Global South. Tapping into notions about women’s role as caregivers, empowerment promotion is simultaneously meant to lead to family and community development, profitability for those who invest in women and girls and economic growth. While emerging feminist scholarship on this kind of ‘transnational business feminism’ (TBF) (Roberts, 2012, 2015) has largely scrutinised gender governance based on visual and textual materials produced by corporations themselves, this article expands the methodological engagement with TBF by reflecting on how we translated the concept into two distinct field-based research projects. The article compares and contrasts our situated fieldwork experiences, focusing in particular on accessing corporate elites and development partners and the epistemological rifts that emerged in conversations with them. It documents how our experiences of blockages, hostile relations and miscommunications have shaped our critical feminist research, and points to some of the power relations at work within TBF.

No abstract

No abstract