Militarized humanitarianism meets carceral feminism: the politics of sex, rights, and freedom in contemporary antitrafficking campaigns.

IF 1.7 2区 社会学 Q2 WOMENS STUDIES
Signs Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI:10.1086/652918
Elizabeth Bernstein
{"title":"Militarized humanitarianism meets carceral feminism: the politics of sex, rights, and freedom in contemporary antitrafficking campaigns.","authors":"Elizabeth Bernstein","doi":"10.1086/652918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Over the past decade, abolitionist feminist and evangelical Christian activists have directed increasing attention toward the “traffic in women” as a dangerous manifestation of global gender inequalities. Despite renowned disagreements around the politics of sex and gender, these groups have come together to advocate for harsher penalties against traffickers, prostitutes’ customers, and nations deemed to be taking insufficient steps to stem the flow of trafficked women. In this essay, I argue that what has served to unite this coalition of \"strange bedfellows\" is not simply an underlying commitment to conservative ideals of sexuality, as previous commentators have offered, but an equally significant commitment to carceral paradigms of justice and to militarized humanitarianism as the preeminent mode of engagement by the state. I draw upon my ongoing ethnographic research with feminist and evangelical antitrafficking movement leaders to argue that the alliance that has been so efficacious in framing contemporary antitrafficking politics is the product of two historically unique and intersecting trends: a rightward shift on the part of many mainstream feminists and other secular liberals away from a redistributive model of justice and toward a politics of incarceration, coincident with a leftward sweep on the part of many younger evangelicals toward a globally oriented social justice theology. In the final section of this essay, I consider the resilience of these trends given a newly installed and more progressive Obama administration, positing that they are likely to continue even as the terrain of militarized humanitarian action shifts in accordance with new sets of geopolitical interests.</p>","PeriodicalId":51382,"journal":{"name":"Signs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/652918","citationCount":"447","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Signs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/652918","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"WOMENS STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 447

Abstract

Over the past decade, abolitionist feminist and evangelical Christian activists have directed increasing attention toward the “traffic in women” as a dangerous manifestation of global gender inequalities. Despite renowned disagreements around the politics of sex and gender, these groups have come together to advocate for harsher penalties against traffickers, prostitutes’ customers, and nations deemed to be taking insufficient steps to stem the flow of trafficked women. In this essay, I argue that what has served to unite this coalition of "strange bedfellows" is not simply an underlying commitment to conservative ideals of sexuality, as previous commentators have offered, but an equally significant commitment to carceral paradigms of justice and to militarized humanitarianism as the preeminent mode of engagement by the state. I draw upon my ongoing ethnographic research with feminist and evangelical antitrafficking movement leaders to argue that the alliance that has been so efficacious in framing contemporary antitrafficking politics is the product of two historically unique and intersecting trends: a rightward shift on the part of many mainstream feminists and other secular liberals away from a redistributive model of justice and toward a politics of incarceration, coincident with a leftward sweep on the part of many younger evangelicals toward a globally oriented social justice theology. In the final section of this essay, I consider the resilience of these trends given a newly installed and more progressive Obama administration, positing that they are likely to continue even as the terrain of militarized humanitarian action shifts in accordance with new sets of geopolitical interests.

军事化的人道主义与专制的女权主义相遇:当代反贩运运动中的性、权利和自由政治。
在过去的十年里,废奴主义女权主义者和福音派基督教活动家把越来越多的注意力集中在“贩卖妇女”上,认为这是全球性别不平等的危险表现。尽管在性和性别政治问题上存在着众所周知的分歧,但这些组织还是联合起来,呼吁对人贩子、妓女的顾客以及那些被认为在遏制被贩运妇女流动方面采取措施不足的国家进行更严厉的惩罚。在这篇文章中,我认为,将这些“奇怪的同床异梦者”联合起来的,不仅仅是对保守性理想的潜在承诺,就像之前的评论员所提出的那样,而是对正义的冷酷范式和军事化人道主义作为国家参与的卓越模式的同样重要的承诺。根据我与女权主义者和福音派反贩运运动领袖们正在进行的人种学研究,我认为,在构建当代反贩运政治方面如此有效的联盟是两种历史上独特且相互交叉的趋势的产物:许多主流女权主义者和其他世俗自由主义者从正义的再分配模式转向监禁政治,与此同时,许多年轻的福音派教徒向左转,转向面向全球的社会正义神学。在这篇文章的最后一部分,我考虑了新成立的、更进步的奥巴马政府的这些趋势的弹性,假设它们可能会继续下去,即使军事人道主义行动的地形根据新的地缘政治利益而改变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Signs
Signs WOMENS STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: Recognized as the leading international journal in women"s studies, Signs has since 1975 been at the forefront of new directions in feminist scholarship. Signs publishes pathbreaking articles of interdisciplinary interest addressing gender, race, culture, class, nation, and/or sexuality either as central focuses or as constitutive analytics; symposia engaging comparative, interdisciplinary perspectives from around the globe to analyze concepts and topics of import to feminist scholarship; retrospectives that track the growth and development of feminist scholarship, note transformations in key concepts and methodologies, and construct genealogies of feminist inquiry; and new directions essays, which provide an overview of the main themes, controversies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信