南部非洲妇女与政治重塑:协商自治、合并和代表权

IF 0.3 4区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY
J. Allen
{"title":"南部非洲妇女与政治重塑:协商自治、合并和代表权","authors":"J. Allen","doi":"10.5860/choice.42-6110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Women and the Remaking of Politics in Southern Africa: Negotiating Autonomy, Incorporation, and Representation. By Gisela Geister. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 2004. Pp. 240. $37.50/ £19.95/ euro28.00 / SEK 280 paper. In the 1990s women's representation in many Southern African parliaments significantly increased, and gender issues were forced into public debate. Gisela Geisler attempts to assess the significance and problems of changes in women's formal governmental participation and in policy, focusing on selected countries within the Southern African Development Community. The great strength of Geisler's work lies in her extensive interviews with women in politics. More than a hundred women shared their experiences and their evaluations of their parties, governments, and organizations with her, often in pithy and provocative ways, and she supplements these interviews with extensive culling of local newspapers during the 1990s for additional quotations. Her use of direct statements by African women activists produces lively, sometimes blowby-blow accounts in her chapters on the South African women's movement, on women's leagues/wings, on women's desks and ministries, on women's organizations and movements, and on women politicians. However, her chapter on nationalist and national liberation movements unfortunately tends to blur the differences between these two very different roads to political independence, and there, as in other chapters, we read more about failures than successes. Geisler conveys women's determination to make changes and obviously wishes them well, but her emphasis on \"results to date\" rather than on the direction of change produces a fairly negative picture. From this perspective, women's leagues or wings are captives of parties. Women's desks and gender machinery are underfunded, overextended, marginalized, and distrusted by activists. Women's organizations and movements (NGOs) recruit and encourage women to run for office and then complain that the women elected pursue only party lines but not \"women's interests.\" Women's organizations maintain autonomy from political parties to promote gender issues, but lack unity. They primarily represent urban, professional women and have difficulty reaching rural women. Women in office complain that women's organizations don't support them once they are in office, or don't even support them with money for election, and claim that only they, through their parties, represent rural women. Her accounts of women's political struggles read well. But she tends to generalize in ways that leave out particular countries. Regarding the country I know the most about from my own twenty years of research, I kept writing \"not in Botswana\" in the margins: e.g., in Botswana, the Women's Desk worked closely with NGOs; women's wings of parties were not created during the anticolonial struggle, but only in the 1990s in response to pressures by women politicians and NGOs; and there is considerable overlap of membership and cooperation of women party activists, women in NGOs, and women in the national gender machinery, producing more cooperation than conflict. Missing, unexpectedly for an author who bases part of her claim to authenticity on her twenty years of experience in Southern Africa, is the political context of what being Frontline States has meant for gender policy within Southern Africa (e.g., ignoring security and refugee issues), or the significance of the anti-apartheid struggle for South African feminists' continued loyalties to the ANC or for evaluations of gender representation (e.g., simply counting the number of women in Parliament regardless of the politics of the parties they represent). Geisler's core chapters on women in politics provide much food for analysis, but unfortunately the quality of analysis does not match the quality of her narrative. Geisler is certainly right that more collaboration and cooperation would likely produce both happier women politicos and more gender-sensitive policies and enforcement. …","PeriodicalId":45676,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":"38 1","pages":"550"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2005-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"69","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women and the Remaking of Politics in Southern Africa: Negotiating Autonomy, Incorporation, and Representation\",\"authors\":\"J. Allen\",\"doi\":\"10.5860/choice.42-6110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Women and the Remaking of Politics in Southern Africa: Negotiating Autonomy, Incorporation, and Representation. By Gisela Geister. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 2004. Pp. 240. $37.50/ £19.95/ euro28.00 / SEK 280 paper. In the 1990s women's representation in many Southern African parliaments significantly increased, and gender issues were forced into public debate. Gisela Geisler attempts to assess the significance and problems of changes in women's formal governmental participation and in policy, focusing on selected countries within the Southern African Development Community. The great strength of Geisler's work lies in her extensive interviews with women in politics. More than a hundred women shared their experiences and their evaluations of their parties, governments, and organizations with her, often in pithy and provocative ways, and she supplements these interviews with extensive culling of local newspapers during the 1990s for additional quotations. Her use of direct statements by African women activists produces lively, sometimes blowby-blow accounts in her chapters on the South African women's movement, on women's leagues/wings, on women's desks and ministries, on women's organizations and movements, and on women politicians. However, her chapter on nationalist and national liberation movements unfortunately tends to blur the differences between these two very different roads to political independence, and there, as in other chapters, we read more about failures than successes. Geisler conveys women's determination to make changes and obviously wishes them well, but her emphasis on \\\"results to date\\\" rather than on the direction of change produces a fairly negative picture. From this perspective, women's leagues or wings are captives of parties. Women's desks and gender machinery are underfunded, overextended, marginalized, and distrusted by activists. Women's organizations and movements (NGOs) recruit and encourage women to run for office and then complain that the women elected pursue only party lines but not \\\"women's interests.\\\" Women's organizations maintain autonomy from political parties to promote gender issues, but lack unity. They primarily represent urban, professional women and have difficulty reaching rural women. Women in office complain that women's organizations don't support them once they are in office, or don't even support them with money for election, and claim that only they, through their parties, represent rural women. Her accounts of women's political struggles read well. But she tends to generalize in ways that leave out particular countries. Regarding the country I know the most about from my own twenty years of research, I kept writing \\\"not in Botswana\\\" in the margins: e.g., in Botswana, the Women's Desk worked closely with NGOs; women's wings of parties were not created during the anticolonial struggle, but only in the 1990s in response to pressures by women politicians and NGOs; and there is considerable overlap of membership and cooperation of women party activists, women in NGOs, and women in the national gender machinery, producing more cooperation than conflict. Missing, unexpectedly for an author who bases part of her claim to authenticity on her twenty years of experience in Southern Africa, is the political context of what being Frontline States has meant for gender policy within Southern Africa (e.g., ignoring security and refugee issues), or the significance of the anti-apartheid struggle for South African feminists' continued loyalties to the ANC or for evaluations of gender representation (e.g., simply counting the number of women in Parliament regardless of the politics of the parties they represent). Geisler's core chapters on women in politics provide much food for analysis, but unfortunately the quality of analysis does not match the quality of her narrative. Geisler is certainly right that more collaboration and cooperation would likely produce both happier women politicos and more gender-sensitive policies and enforcement. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":45676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"550\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"69\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.42-6110\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.42-6110","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 69

摘要

南部非洲妇女与政治重塑:协商自治、合并和代表权。吉塞拉·盖斯特著。乌普萨拉:北欧非洲研究所,2004。240页。$37.50/£19.95/ euro28.00 / SEK 280纸。在20世纪90年代,妇女在许多南部非洲议会中的代表人数显著增加,性别问题被迫进入公开辩论。Gisela Geisler试图评估妇女在正式政府参与和政策方面的变化的意义和问题,重点是南部非洲发展共同体内选定的国家。盖斯勒作品的强大之处在于她对政界女性的广泛采访。一百多名妇女与她分享了她们的经历,以及她们对自己的政党、政府和组织的评价,通常以精辟和挑衅的方式进行,她还在这些采访中广泛挑选了20世纪90年代的当地报纸,作为补充。她使用非洲妇女活动家的直接陈述,在她的章节中对南非妇女运动,妇女联盟/羽翼,妇女办公桌和部委,妇女组织和运动以及女性政治家进行了生动的,有时是详尽的描述。然而,不幸的是,她关于民族主义和民族解放运动的那一章往往模糊了这两种截然不同的政治独立道路之间的区别,在那里,正如在其他章节中一样,我们读到的失败多于成功。Geisler传达了女性做出改变的决心,显然希望她们一切顺利,但她强调的是“迄今为止的结果”,而不是改变的方向,这产生了一幅相当消极的画面。从这个角度来看,女性联盟或联队是派对的俘虏。女性办公桌和性别机制资金不足,过度扩张,被边缘化,活动家不信任。妇女组织和运动(ngo)招募和鼓励妇女竞选公职,然后抱怨当选的妇女只追求政党路线,而不追求“妇女利益”。妇女组织虽然在推进性别问题上保持着独立于政党的自主性,但缺乏统一性。她们主要代表城市职业妇女,很难接触到农村妇女。在职女性抱怨说,一旦她们上台,妇女组织就不支持她们,甚至不为她们竞选提供资金支持,并声称只有她们通过自己的政党代表农村妇女。她对妇女政治斗争的叙述读起来很好。但她倾向于以不考虑特定国家的方式进行概括。关于我在自己二十年的研究中最了解的国家,我一直在空白处写上“不在博茨瓦纳”:例如,在博茨瓦纳,妇女服务台与非政府组织密切合作;政党的女性分支不是在反殖民斗争中创建的,而是在20世纪90年代迫于女性政治家和非政府组织的压力而创建的;女性政党积极分子、非政府组织中的女性和国家性别机制中的女性在成员和合作方面有相当大的重叠,产生的合作多于冲突。出乎意料的是,对于一个将自己在南部非洲二十年的经历作为真实性的部分依据的作者来说,作为前线国家对南部非洲的性别政策意味着什么(例如,忽视安全和难民问题),或者反种族隔离斗争对南非女权主义者对非洲人国民大会的持续忠诚的意义,或者对性别代表性的评估(例如,简单地计算议会中女性的数量,而不考虑她们所代表的政党的政治立场)。盖斯勒关于政治中的女性的核心章节为分析提供了很多素材,但不幸的是,分析的质量与她的叙述的质量不相符。Geisler当然是对的,更多的合作和合作可能会产生更快乐的女性政治家和更多的性别敏感的政策和执行。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Women and the Remaking of Politics in Southern Africa: Negotiating Autonomy, Incorporation, and Representation
Women and the Remaking of Politics in Southern Africa: Negotiating Autonomy, Incorporation, and Representation. By Gisela Geister. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 2004. Pp. 240. $37.50/ £19.95/ euro28.00 / SEK 280 paper. In the 1990s women's representation in many Southern African parliaments significantly increased, and gender issues were forced into public debate. Gisela Geisler attempts to assess the significance and problems of changes in women's formal governmental participation and in policy, focusing on selected countries within the Southern African Development Community. The great strength of Geisler's work lies in her extensive interviews with women in politics. More than a hundred women shared their experiences and their evaluations of their parties, governments, and organizations with her, often in pithy and provocative ways, and she supplements these interviews with extensive culling of local newspapers during the 1990s for additional quotations. Her use of direct statements by African women activists produces lively, sometimes blowby-blow accounts in her chapters on the South African women's movement, on women's leagues/wings, on women's desks and ministries, on women's organizations and movements, and on women politicians. However, her chapter on nationalist and national liberation movements unfortunately tends to blur the differences between these two very different roads to political independence, and there, as in other chapters, we read more about failures than successes. Geisler conveys women's determination to make changes and obviously wishes them well, but her emphasis on "results to date" rather than on the direction of change produces a fairly negative picture. From this perspective, women's leagues or wings are captives of parties. Women's desks and gender machinery are underfunded, overextended, marginalized, and distrusted by activists. Women's organizations and movements (NGOs) recruit and encourage women to run for office and then complain that the women elected pursue only party lines but not "women's interests." Women's organizations maintain autonomy from political parties to promote gender issues, but lack unity. They primarily represent urban, professional women and have difficulty reaching rural women. Women in office complain that women's organizations don't support them once they are in office, or don't even support them with money for election, and claim that only they, through their parties, represent rural women. Her accounts of women's political struggles read well. But she tends to generalize in ways that leave out particular countries. Regarding the country I know the most about from my own twenty years of research, I kept writing "not in Botswana" in the margins: e.g., in Botswana, the Women's Desk worked closely with NGOs; women's wings of parties were not created during the anticolonial struggle, but only in the 1990s in response to pressures by women politicians and NGOs; and there is considerable overlap of membership and cooperation of women party activists, women in NGOs, and women in the national gender machinery, producing more cooperation than conflict. Missing, unexpectedly for an author who bases part of her claim to authenticity on her twenty years of experience in Southern Africa, is the political context of what being Frontline States has meant for gender policy within Southern Africa (e.g., ignoring security and refugee issues), or the significance of the anti-apartheid struggle for South African feminists' continued loyalties to the ANC or for evaluations of gender representation (e.g., simply counting the number of women in Parliament regardless of the politics of the parties they represent). Geisler's core chapters on women in politics provide much food for analysis, but unfortunately the quality of analysis does not match the quality of her narrative. Geisler is certainly right that more collaboration and cooperation would likely produce both happier women politicos and more gender-sensitive policies and enforcement. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The International Journal of African Historical Studies (IJAHS) is devoted to the study of the African past. Norman Bennett was the founder and guiding force behind the journal’s growth from its first incarnation at Boston University as African Historical Studies in 1968. He remained its editor for more than thirty years. The title was expanded to the International Journal of African Historical Studies in 1972, when Africana Publishers Holmes and Meier took over publication and distribution for the next decade. Beginning in 1982, the African Studies Center once again assumed full responsibility for production and distribution. Jean Hay served as the journal’s production editor from 1979 to 1995, and editor from 1998 to her retirement in 2005. Michael DiBlasi is the current editor, and James McCann and Diana Wylie are associate editors of the journal. Members of the editorial board include: Emmanuel Akyeampong, Peter Alegi, Misty Bastian, Sara Berry, Barbara Cooper, Marc Epprecht, Lidwien Kapteijns, Meredith McKittrick, Pashington Obang, David Schoenbrun, Heather Sharkey, Ann B. Stahl, John Thornton, and Rudolph Ware III. The journal publishes three issues each year (April, August, and December). Articles, notes, and documents submitted to the journal should be based on original research and framed in terms of historical analysis. Contributions in archaeology, history, anthropology, historical ecology, political science, political ecology, and economic history are welcome. Articles that highlight European administrators, settlers, or colonial policies should be submitted elsewhere, unless they deal substantially with interactions with (or the affects on) African societies.
×
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