Feminisms, Structural Violence and Transitional Justice: A one-day conference
This conference has been put together by Yorku graduate students Emily Rosser & Jessica Chandrashekar, supported by the Nathanson Centre, Osgoode Institute for Feminist Legal Studies, Centre for Refugee Studies, Centre for Feminist Research, Faculty of Graduate Studies, Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies, and Graduate Program in Gender, Feminist and Women’s Studies.
Open to All: please RSVP to email@example.com (inquiries welcome)
Transitional justice is a field that brings together academic and practitioner approaches to post-conflict, peace-building and post-authoritarian settings considered to be ‘transitioning’ towards democracy. Since the early 1990s, there have been significant developments around sexual violence and women’s rights in international legal and rights-based frameworks, impacting a range of processes, from International Criminal Tribunals to truth commissions and reparations programs. Critical feminist interventions on peace-building advanced this agenda within the UN Security Council, beginning with S.C.Res.1325 in 2000. Despite the increased visibility of gender and sexual violence, observers have denounced the marked disconnect between symbolic progress at the international level and the more disappointing material realities of survivors on the ground. Critical work around gender in the field increasingly proposes a more complicated critique of various forms of structural violence, and engagement with redistributive politics that may extend beyond a reparations agenda. This conference aims to facilitate and continue such discussions across feminisms, disciplines, histories and theory-practice divides.
Some key questions with which the conference will engage:
How has the legacy of liberal legalism shaped or circumscribed feminist possibility in transitional justice?
What strategies of accounting for gender violence can avoid reproducing narratives of hyper-victimization?
How have processes such as truth commissions supported or resisted feminist analyses of structural violence or feminist counter-histories of struggle?
How can anti-racist feminist critiques of neoliberal “rule of law” agendas better intervene in this field?
How can feminists of many stripes and others working in the margins of this field engage in more productive dialogue?