To Örebro University

The relation between different forms of oppressive structures has been an object of dispute throughout the history of feminism. One of the most influential debates devoted to this issue is the one between Judith Butler and Nancy Fraser during the 1990s. Although the debate attracted a great deal of attention, and both thinkers have subsequently developed their theories by introducing novel concepts to describe oppression as well as the conditions of contemporary emancipatory movements, they have not continued to engage in each other's work. This article offers a critical reading of the positions that Fraser and Butler took in the 1990s debate, as well as an identification of shifts in their thinking ensuing from the debate. A particular interest of the article is their conceptualisations of the grounds for political alliances among groups with distinct experiences of oppression. The article not only offers a critique of both Butler's and Fraser's positions in the 1990s debate but also argues that the way in which Fraser's trajectory has come to directly address the issue of the capitalist social order, and which can also be read as an implicit self-critique, is more satisfactory than Butler's later work on precarity.

There is a growing field of research dedicated to online incel communities, gathering men identifying as involuntary celibates or ‘incels’. A distinctive aspect of the incelosphere is the elaborate ‘theoretical framework’ communicated in the forums, portraying incel men as voiceless losers at a (hetero)sexual market ruled by women and biologically superior men. While the content of this incel worldview is relatively well-studied, a notable gap exists in the examination of the way knowledge production taking place within these communities is epistemologically legitimized. This article aims to fill this void by scrutinizing the epistemic logics and practices used by members at incel forums to validate their knowledge production on gender relations. By shedding light on how incels mobilize science as well as counter-hegemonic forms of knowledge production to legitimize their knowledge claims, the article offers a nuanced understanding of the intricate relation between the knowledge production of movements and counter-movements. This exploration can, we believe, form a basis for challenging and contesting claims made by incels.

This article contributes to the growing corpus of knowledge concerning the incel movement by scrutinizing how claims of marginalization are mobilized in online incel communities to present incels as privileged subjects of knowledge. The study elucidates how incel marginalization is wielded as a legitimizing experience, conferring epistemic privilege upon self-identifying incels by distinguishing between an ‘us’ of marginalized and enlightened incels, and a ‘them’ consisting of duped and privileged ‘others’. It also examines the role of partaking in incel discussions and incel ideology to achieve an incel standpoint, where lived experience is transformed into counter-hegemonic knowledge. Inspired by social movement theory, the article points to similarities between the incel movement’s political mobilization of marginalized experience and feminist standpoint theory and feminist practices in consciousness-raising groups. It argues that this affinity can be understood from the perspective of the dynamic between movements and counter-movements and their tendency to mimic and copy each other’s tactics.

Starting from the tension between scientific autonomy and state governing in research policy, the aim of this article is to examine how researchers who apply for funding in Sweden perceive the legitimate grounds for a new research policy in which sex and gender perspectives are integrated as criteria in assessing scientific quality. Our results show that researcher’s perception of themselves, and of the purpose of research, is compatible with dominant ideals in contemporary academic landscape, where knowledge is treated as a deliverable to external stakeholders or to meet politically formulated goals. However, according to researchers, the legitimate sources of policy influence originate from their own profession or the common interest of the people, explicitly expressed by citizens. Researchers are questioning, and find strategies to avoid, top-down state governing.

In a 2016 bill, the Swedish government tasked state-governed research councils with incorporating sex and gender perspectives (SGP) into their assessment of research quality. The present article examines the response to the bill and subsequent measures in Swedish public debate from 2016–2021, as well as justifications for such measures in preceding policy documents. The analysis focuses on how different arguments in the debate articulate the relationship between research, politics, and quality and how these articulations can be analysed with the help of theoretical perspectives on the contemporary production of knowledge as well as previous scholarly work on gender mainstreaming. The article demonstrates that most critics describe politics, research, and quality as incompatible. The defenders argue for the implementation of SGP by invoking either a quality perspective and/or an equality perspective. While some actors argue that SGP is of significance only when it enhances quality, others point to the political value of the criteria, adhering to a post-academic emphasis on the societal value of science.

In recent years, men identifying as involuntary celibates, or 'incels,' have been involved in serious incidents of violence against women. This group is characterized as a poltical sub-culture or onlinecommunity, marked by misogyny and driven by emotions such as resentment, shame, and revenge. The research on online incel communities is expanding, revealing their promotion of sexist, anti-feminist, and pro-violence worldviews, along with hegemonic and toxic forms of masculinity. A notable feature of the incel community is its intricate 'theoretical framework' used to elucidate the plight of its members. Within this framework, incel men are depicted as voiceless, excluded victims and losers in the (hetero)sexual market. This marginalization is atributed to their perceived biological inferiority and increased subjugation of men within a context shaped by hegemonic feminism. While existing research has extensively studied the content of incel theorizing, litle atention has been devoted to understanding how the incel community constructs its worldview. Our article aims to fill this gap by examining the incel worldview through a sociology of knowledge lens. A netnographic study of the digital incel forum Incels.is reveals how users establish their knowledge claims and the sources and methods they employ. Additionally, we explore the implicit or explicit epistemic paradigms at play, emphasizing the interactions and tensions between different paradigms. Notably, we investigate how incels leverage both conventional scientific principles and personal experiences, mirroring feminist approaches, to make claims about societal structures.