Fatalistic normalisation, daunted managerialism and afflictive condemnation as forms of slow violence

Abstract

Slow violence is an analytical concept that reveals the unseen and unrecognised forms of violence that accumulate over time and space, leading to devastating environmental and social consequences. This paper argues that slow violence involves discursive practices that render violence-producing mechanisms and processes invisible, concealed, and misrecognised and ensure the continuance of violent systems by hindering cognitive and emotional awareness of the links between different forms of violence and social harms, and thus, any potential resistance against them. These discursive practices are identified as fatalistic normalisation, daunted managerialism, and afflictive condemnation, all of which operate in tandem to veil the links between different forms of violence and social harm. The paper provides an operational framework of slow violence to help unveil these links and pave the way towards cognitive and emotional awareness for radical social transformation.

Dis/re-orienting design through norm-critical gender lenses: an educational case in Turkey

“…Frontiers in Sociology 09 frontiersin.org call for solidarity and support through enhanced reach and attraction of a larger audience. S3 focused on NEETs (Not in Education, Employment, or Training), explored the social injustice they experience through the perspective of slow violence (Nixon, 2013;Yetiş and Bakırlıoğlu, 2023) and developed three design interventions (Figure 4). Labyrinth/Compass is a consultancy service entry point for NEETs who would not normally engage with such services, involving a labyrinth-like setup placed in commonly used public spaces, depicting feelings of lostness, disorientation, hopelessness, and injustice by highlighting gendered paths leading to different outcomes between men and women.…”

Intersubjectivity as an analytical concept to study human-animal interaction in historical context: street dogs in Late Ottoman period

“…It was specifically street dogs who were regarded as dirty, and dangerous, in comparison to dogs who were utilised for their labour and/or companionship. Not only does such employment within and proximity to human interests inevitably rank the animal’s value due to its productivity, but also it indicates fatalistic normalisation ( Yetiş and Bakırlıoğlu, 2023 ) within an anthropocentric paradigm encompassing the projections of ableism (dogs without societal functions regarded as naturally dirty, aggressive and dangerous) and racism (favouring certain breeds) onto animals. In this sense, dirt and danger attributed to street dogs, after Samantha Hurn (2012) , could be interpreted to function as distancing devices that eliminate the empathy required to form intersubjective relations between dogs and humans.…”