Krizia Nardini (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. UOC)
Krizia Nardini is a Doctoral Candidate in Anthropology and Gender at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (Mediacciones research collective on digital cultures, Barcelona), she is member of the American Men’s Studies Association and of AtGender: European Network for Gender Research and Documentation. Trained in Philosophy (University of Siena) and in Gender Studies and Feminist Theory (MPhil, Utrecht University), with a qualitative ethnographic approach Krizia’s current PhD work addresses the ways in which men’s practices can be reconfigured through the involvement of men into gender justice mobilization. Committed to working through academic-activist engagements, Krizia is part of MenEngageEurope and she has recently been visiting scholar at the Centre for the Study of Men and Masculinities at Stony Brook University (NYC). Her research interests include feminist philosophies, onto-epistemologies, ethnographic theory, digital cultures and anthropology of the body.
Men’s gender-conscious antiviolence activism: moving change, tensions and resistances
Men’s antiviolence activism is a type of men’s “gender-conscious activism” (Hearn, 2015: 36) where the gendering of men “as men” is constitutive to the making of this kind of social justice mobilization. The ethnographic analysis in my research suggests that mobilizing “as men” among Italian and Spanish antiviolence activists holds multiple generative elements: it mobilizes actors involved into antiviolence masculinity activism; it creates a location of political discourse from which activist claims are articulated and from which personal well as social change is envisioned; it offers a material and symbolic separatist space among men where masculinity norms are interrogated and re-negotiated. Indeed, becoming gender-aware among men emerges as a pivotal individual and collective experience within men´s antiviolence engagement. As argued in my PhD research, antiviolence engagement “as men” appears as a material-discursive strategy with interesting ethico-onto-epistemological outcomes, not immune to internal tensions and contradictions. Although the category “as men” is not intended as a static political location nor it is seen as holding essentialist ontological premises, focusing on mobilizing “as men” it does come with problematic questions to address. For example, it could silence a possible intersectional sensitivity and a reflection on how class and generation do affect differently men´s experiences of power and gendered norms. Moreover, while mobilizing “as men” is the operational focus of antiviolence masculinity politics (changing men´s gendered practices) it also acts as a sticky figuration fuelling networking among actors, in which homosocial dynamics of power and visibility are at work.