RC07 - Women and Politics in the Global South

Women in Politics in the Global South
Panel: RC07.01
13-07-2025 11:00 UTC+9 (1 hour 45 minutes) 
Convenor: Dr. Swarna Rajagopalan
Chair: Dr. Tuseku Dieudonné Tumba
Discussants: Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes
Rapporteur: Priyanka Patra

Overview
 
The panel "Women in Politics in the Global South" featured a diverse range of presentations that critically examined women's participation in politics across multiple arenas, including campus activism, social movements, formal parliamentary politics, and informal political practices. The papers offered both empirical and theoretical insights, drawing on case studies from countries across the Global South, including India, China, and the Philippines. These comparative perspectives analysed the nature of women's political agency, shaped by intersecting factors such as gender, class, caste, and regional political cultures.
The session generated dynamic and thought-provoking discussions, fostering meaningful dialogue among the presenters, discussants, and audience members. Participants engaged with each other’s work in a collegial yet critical manner, raising pertinent questions about the methodological, epistemological, and political dimensions of researching women’s political participation. The discussant provided nuanced and constructive feedback on each paper, highlighting both their contributions and areas for further development. The Chair skillfully facilitated the session, ensuring an inclusive discussion that allowed for a rich exchange of ideas.

Violence and Vulgarity: Female politicians and public servants under fire
Prof. Cleo Anne Calimbahin

Professor Calimbahin’s paper gave critical insight into the growing political culture of violence against women, public servants, and elected officials in the Philippines from 2016 to 2022. Within the larger context of President Rodrigo Duterte’s controversial populist rule, the paper attempted to bring to the fore the issue of erasing women as political actors. Using the framework of semiotic violence, it interrogated dominant male populism as a threat to the legitimacy and accountability of democratic institutions.

Beyond Quotas: The Political, Social, and Economic Marginalization of Women in Indian Politics
Author Dr Sumant Kumar

Dr. Kumar’s presentation critically examined the limitations of gender-based quotas in addressing women’s political marginalisation. Despite the progressive intent of the Women’s Reservation Bill, he argued that factors such as patriarchal norms, gender-based violence, cultural constraints, economic dependency, and limited political awareness have hindered women’s effective participation in parliamentary politics. His findings noted a rise in women’s engagement in non-voting political activities—such as rallies and campaigns—without corresponding influence on policymaking. He emphasized the compounded impact of class, caste, and gender, underscoring the need for structural reforms and an inclusive political culture. The presentation concluded with a call to develop an enabling ecosystem that fosters women’s political capabilities and agency.

Investigating the Hyperfeminisation of Women Politicians: The Madonna-Whore Binary in Indian Politics
Ms. Soumya Mathew

Mathew’s paper traces the historical and contemporary perceptions of women political leaders in India, highlighting how they are framed within the Madonna–Whore complex. Through case studies of leaders such as Mamata Banerjee (Didi), Mayawati (Behenji), Jayalalithaa (Amma), as well as Smriti Irani, Kangana Ranaut, and Sonia Gandhi, she illustrates how women navigate this binary to maintain political relevance. These leaders strategically align their public personas with prevailing cultural expectations shaped by misogyny, caste, religion, and tradition. Mathew observes that the glorification of hyperfemininity, relational political branding, and the disaggregation of gender from intersecting identities are central to how women in Indian politics are perceived and represented.

Redefining Political Priorities: The Shift toward Female-Centric Policies in India
Ms. Sheefa Kasar

Kasar examined the rise of women-centric policies in Indian politics since 2009, highlighting a strategic shift in electoral campaigns that increasingly recognize the political significance of women voters. This recalibration has influenced party agendas and manifestos, reflecting a broader prioritization of women in governance. Kasar’s fieldwork also underscored the growing role of political strategists in implementing evidence-based campaign methods. The study concludes that women’s votes represent more than demographic weight, calling for deeper analysis of their diverse identities as caregivers, workers, homemakers, and aspirational citizens rather than treating them as a homogeneous unit.

Discussion and comments

The session concluded with brief remarks by discussant Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes, who began by addressing Prof. Calimbahin’s paper, noting the authoritarian and violent nature of President Rodrigo Duterte’s regime, marked by extrajudicial killings and the drug war, and its implications for women’s political participation. She requested further clarification on Dr. Kumar’s use of abbreviated constitutional references. Prof. Pinderhughes observed that the forms of political violence against women discussed—ranging from abuse and semiotic violence to entrapment within the Madonna-Whore binary—echo patterns seen in other populist regimes globally. The audience contributed reflections on the case studies, offering additional evidence that supported and enriched the presenters' findings.

Panel Title: Gender, Politics, and Development
Panel Code: RC07.03
Track: RC07 Women and Politics in the Global South
Date and Time: 15 July 2025, 11:00 UTC+9
Room: 3F 317C
Convenor: Dr. Swarna Rajagopalan
Chair: Dr. Simone R. Bohn
Discussant: Dr. Anju Gupta
Volunteer Rapporteur: Diana Chacón

Panel Overview

This panel explored the gendered dimensions of development policy, practice, and resistance across multiple regions and institutional settings. Drawing from diverse methodologies and disciplinary traditions, the presenters engaged with questions of power, marginalization, and transformation. Topics ranged from the technopolitics of urban governance and campus-based feminist activism to the intersections of caste, care work, and climate vulnerability. A shared thread running through the presentations was the tension between exclusionary institutions and the resilience and creativity of feminist actors working to subvert them.

Paper Presentations

1. A Black Unicorn in the Academe: A Testimonial of a Black Feminist Scholar in Political Science

Presenter: Dr. Caroline Shenaz Hossein

Dr. Hossein delivered an impactful testimonial on her lived experience as a Black Caribbean feminist economist working in Canadian higher education. Using Audre Lorde’s poem The Black Unicorn as both metaphor and anchor, she reflected on the systemic exclusion and epistemic violence faced by Black women in academia. She detailed her early background in international development and her decision to return to university as a mature student, only to encounter a deeply racialized and gendered environment.

A key intervention in her presentation was the creation of the Diverse Solidarity Economies Collective (DISE Lab) in 2017, an initiative aimed at building culturally diverse, community-centered economic models. The Collective, now comprising over a dozen feminist scholars, conducts research and advocacy to challenge the whiteness and elitism of mainstream economic theory. She also described how institutional racism manifested through administrative retaliation and selective union protections. Despite experiencing a human rights violation and a reverse discrimination claim from a PhD student, she continued to center Black feminist scholarship and teaching as tools for justice. Her parting message was one of solidarity: build community, speak truth, and disrupt exclusion through collective teaching and activism.

2. Gender in the Datafication of Smart Cities in the Global South

Presenter: Dr. Geeti Das

Dr. Das offered a rigorous and deeply theoretical examination of how smart city technologies and data infrastructures marginalize women, queer people, and informal workers in Global South cities. She argued that smart urbanism operates through an “epistemic politics” that privileges legibility, predictability, and data extractability. Using frameworks from Ananya Roy and Naeem Inayatullah, she showed how informality is not merely a condition but a political strategy used by states to govern selectively.

She explained how machine learning systems tend to "see" objects and movements rather than relationships or contexts, thereby rendering invisible the care work, kinship ties, and informal networks that underpin women’s urban livelihoods. Continuous sensing and surveillance technologies, particularly in the transport and public safety sectors, promote male-dominated notions of public space and ignore feminist urban research. Informal economies, often central to women's economic survival, are erased or criminalized.

Dr. Das further argued that smart city governance introduces new bureaucratic regimes that are overwhelmingly male and technocratic, creating additional barriers to participation for gender minorities. The "smartness" paradigm, she warned, is frequently exported as a solution without attention to local needs, often displacing existing democratic practices. Her call was for feminist engagement with infrastructure politics to reclaim urban futures centered on care, equity, and collective life.

3. Understanding Climate Change Perception and Impacts Among Female Subsistence Farmers Living with Physical Disabilities in Kaliro District, Uganda

Presenter: Dr. Lisa Thorley

Dr. Thorley presented a grounded qualitative study that gave voice to an often overlooked group in climate discourse: rural women with disabilities. Conducted in collaboration with Rosemary Nakijoba from Muteesa I Royal University, the research involved nine in-depth interviews with women with physical disabilities and albinism in Uganda’s Kaliro District. These women were subsistence farmers whose lives and livelihoods were increasingly disrupted by erratic rainfall, droughts, and floods.

Her presentation highlighted multiple intersecting vulnerabilities: women with disabilities are more likely to live in isolated areas, lack access to health services, and face stigmatization and violence. The interviews revealed a deep sense of disempowerment, particularly in relation to food insecurity, water scarcity, and the physical strain of farming in extreme heat. One participant noted that walking long distances to collect water or reach markets became a major challenge, with no infrastructural alternatives provided.

Dr. Thorley also examined how climate adaptation programs, including those run by the NGO IDIWA, often fail to reach women outside of organized networks. She critically reflected on the ethical dimensions of conducting research as a white foreign scholar, emphasizing humility and reciprocity. The study called for more inclusive, participatory approaches to climate resilience that center disability, gender, and local knowledge.

4. Contagious Media Mobilization: Dynamics of Anti-Harassment Activism on Campus

Presenter: Dr. Wei Chen

Dr. Chen introduced the concept of “contagious media mobilization” to analyze feminist student activism in Chinese university campuses. Her case study focused on campaigns against sexual harassment and illustrated how digital and physical spaces are tactically used by students to circumvent censorship and institutional inertia.

One illustrative case involved a female student who was secretly photographed in a university restroom. She posted about the incident on a student forum, and the post quickly spread across platforms such as WeChat, Weibo, and Douban. This digital visibility led to offline conversations and eventually a student-led symposium where students demanded accountability from university officials, despite there being no formal invitation or recognition from the administration.

Dr. Chen described how activists used symbolic actions, such as poster campaigns, performance art, and live-streamed dialogues, to build momentum. She outlined three key mechanisms of this mobilization: the dissemination of emotionally resonant personal narratives, the use of semi-private digital spaces to build trust, and the strategic framing of discourse to achieve symbolic power.

The presentation illuminated how campus-based feminist movements in China use both informal networks and performative visibility to create action spaces, even in highly restrictive environments. Dr. Chen emphasized that while repression is real, so too is the capacity for decentralized, emotionally driven resistance that connects individual pain with collective demands.

5. Investing in Equality: A Comparative Analysis of Legal and Policy Frameworks for Gender-Responsive Banking in Southern Europe

Presenters: Prof. Dr. Bertil Emrah Oder and Dr. Ilayda Eskitaşcioğlu Karavelioğlu

Dr. Eskitaşcioğlu presented a comparative legal and policy analysis of six Southern European countries, Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Greece, and Türkiye, focusing on how these states promote (or fail to promote) gender-responsive banking practices. Their approach combined a desk-based review of laws, national action plans, ESG frameworks, and corporate reporting by twenty-four influential banks.

They found significant disparities between regulatory ambition and actual banking practice. Portugal and Italy have implemented binding gender quotas and offer certification schemes, but uptake by financial institutions is inconsistent. France has the most robust legal infrastructure, including the Duty of Vigilance Law, but its gender provisions are largely absent from banking regulation. Spain’s progressive strategy has little traction due to poor enforcement. Türkiye stood out as a paradox: while the state has grown more anti-gender in rhetoric, private banks have become more gender responsive due to external ESG pressures.

The presentation emphasized that symbolic commitments are insufficient. Real progress depends on enforceable mandates, meaningful oversight, and mechanisms that embed feminist values into corporate governance. They also highlighted the colonial and exclusionary legacy of many banking institutions and called for transformative change grounded in feminist storytelling, lived experience, and structural accountability.

6. Community Health Workers and the State: Intersections of the Care Economy and Social Policy in India

Presenter: Miss Priyanka Patra

Miss Patra presented a critical feminist analysis of the role of community health workers in India, particularly ASHAs (Accredited Social Health Activists) and Anganwadi Workers. These women, often from marginalized castes, form the backbone of India’s rural health system but remain severely underpaid and institutionally invisible.

She traced the origins of these roles through the lens of gendered familialism, showing how state policies assume that care work is a natural extension of women’s roles within the family. Eligibility criteria often require ASHA workers to be married and locally embedded, which reinforces patriarchal norms and limits mobility. Patra drew from social reproduction theory to argue that the Indian state actively extracts care labor from these women while denying them professional recognition, labor rights, or decision-making power.

She also highlighted the expanding scope of their duties, including COVID-19 outreach, maternal health, immunization drives, and nutrition education, often with no increase in compensation. Despite these constraints, many workers have begun to unionize and advocate for better working conditions. Patra’s research revealed how care work is a site of both exploitation and feminist resistance.

Discussant Reflections and Audience Dialogue

Dr. Anju Gupta praised the intellectual originality of the panel and encouraged cross-regional dialogue between the cases. She noted that while the contexts differed, the presentations shared a commitment to centering marginalized voices and interrogating the gendered structures of power.

Audience questions were similarly wide-ranging. One participant asked about the role of institutional complicity in the racial marginalization of women scholars. Another inquired into the ethical implications of North–South research partnerships. There were also questions about the tension between informality and surveillance in urban planning, and how digital feminist movements protect themselves from backlash in authoritarian settings. Several attendees reflected on how caste, class, and gender intersect in both labor and finance systems to uphold exclusion.

Conclusion

This panel offered a compelling exploration of the multiple ways that gender operates in development politics. It moved beyond technocratic understandings of policy to highlight the lived realities of those excluded by formal systems, and the innovative strategies they use to resist and reimagine these structures. Together, the presentations underscored the value of feminist research that is contextually grounded, intersectionally informed, and politically committed.

Chair & Convener: Dr. Swarna Rajagopalan, Krea University
Speaker: Prof. Amanda Gouws, Stellenbosch University (South Africa)
Speaker: Prof. Cleo Anne Calimbahin, De La Salle University (Manila, Philippines)
Speaker: Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes (University of Notre Dame, USA)
Volunteer Rapporteur: Dr. Debangana Chatterjee
Synoptic Overview
RC07.08 roundtable explored the persistent structural inequalities in academia, particularly for scholars from the Global South. Speakers highlighted disparities in access to resources, recognition, and authorship, as well as the gendered and racial dimensions of exclusion. Discussions called attention to the dominance of Global North frameworks, the marginalisation of critical and local knowledge, and the barriers posed by language, publishing costs, and institutional hierarchies. The session ended with a strong consensus on the need for sustained, collective efforts to make academia more inclusive, equitable, and globally representative.

Chair: Dr. Swarna Rajagopalan, Krea University—Opening remarks
This roundtable addresses the barriers in academia and the prevailing inequalities within it, especially how scholars from the Global South experience it. While this is not a new phenomenon, this issue requires intermittent rediscovery and reflection. With changing times, new and different challenges emerge. Therefore, this roundtable aims to reiterate some of those challenges and identify the pressing concerns regarding structural inequality that academia is currently grappling with. These challenges include, but are not limited to, accessing academic resources (e. g. journals are behind paywalls and institutions in the Global South often have limited subscriptions), infrastructural barriers (e. g. funding for conferences), lack of a level playing field (e.g. language barriers) and other intersectional dimensions pertinent to gender which includes the uneven burden of care responsibilities
among women.

Speaker: Prof. Amanda Gouws, Stellenbosch University – South Africa
Prof. Amanda Gouws opened the discussion by highlighting the invisibility of Global South voices and the unequal burden placed on these scholars to engage with Global North literature—an expectation not reciprocated in most Global North scholarship. This asymmetry reinforces epistemic hierarchies and limits intellectual exchange. She further critiqued the tendency to categorise Global South research under the broad and often reductive label of “development,” regardless of the actual content. Such framing restricts the theoretical potential of Global South scholarship and confines it to a peripheral
academic role. The conversation also emphasised material and institutional barriers, such as weak currencies, high travel costs, and limited access to journals, which disproportionately affect scholars from the Global South. Graduate students, in particular, face challenges participating in global academic spaces. Prof. Gouws spoke of the extractive nature of academic publishing, where the Global South often serves as a source of data without equitable
recognition or authorship. These dynamics reinforce structural inequality and hinder meaningful collaboration. Publishing barriers were another key concern—many Global South institutions cannot afford journal subscriptions, limiting scholars' ability to engage with current research. The panel stressed the need for constructive feedback in peer review to support, rather than discourage, emerging scholars. She noted that these discussions must move beyond the already-convinced and challenge the entrenched core-periphery divide to create a more equitable global academic environment.

Speaker: Prof. Cleo Anne Calimbahin, De La Salle University, Manila – Philippines

Prof. Cleo Anne Calimbahin shared a compelling and reflective account of her academic journey as a scholar from the Global South navigating Global North institutions. Speaking from personal experience as a PhD student abroad and a visiting scholar at the Australian National University, she underscored the often-invisible structural burdens placed on Global South academics. She critically unpacked the notion of the “model” international student—one who appears successful and hardworking, sustaining herself on a modest scholarship and juggling extra work to survive. Prof. Calimbahin emphasised that behind this veneer of achievement lies an exhausting and isolating struggle, marked by structural inequality. Events such as the Asian Financial Crisis and racial othering in the post-9/11 context further compounded the emotional and material hardships, exposing the racial and geopolitical vulnerabilities
embedded in global academic systems. Separately, she discussed the invisibility of women in academic spaces, particularly in the Philippines. Female scholars face persistent challenges, including being undermined in intellectual settings, navigating gendered assumptions, and facing implicit threats in
politically volatile environments, especially for those in political science. The portrayal of women as lacking authority or legitimacy in public and academic discourse reinforces this marginalisation. Prof. Calimbahin also addressed academic hierarchies and labour disparities, noting that while one may hold a professorial role in the Philippines, that status is often not seen as equivalent or credible in Global North contexts. She reflected on classroom demographics
shaped by economic and political elites, and the self-censorship academics must exercise under populist and repressive regimes. Finally, she highlighted how within the discipline, the Global South is often treated as a source of cheap labour, where intellectual contributions are welcomed but rarely afforded the
same recognition, authority, or institutional support as those from the Global North.

Speaker: Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes (University of Notre Dame, USA)
Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes offered a historically grounded reflection on the structural inequalities within American academia, particularly through the lens of race and political exclusion. Growing up and entering academia in the post–World War II era, she highlighted the limited access to education for African Americans during much of the 20th century—a privilege she acknowledged was not widely available to many in her community. She traced the systemic absence of race-related scholarship in U.S. political science, despite the country’s deep history of segregation and racial injustice. At a time when African- Americans were largely disenfranchised and the broader society was openly segregated, mainstream political science failed to engage with questions of race, civil rights, or inequality in any meaningful way. Even landmark events—such as the Civil Rights Act and the creation of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in 1957—found little parallel development within the discipline. Prof. Pinderhughes juxtaposed the physical labor historically imposed on African-Americans with the ongoing marginalization they face in intellectual labor. Referencing W.E.B. Du Bois and the push for African-American access to higher education, she noted that as late as the 1970s, only about 5% of African-Americans were attending college. Even with advanced degrees, job opportunities remained limited, reflecting both structural exclusion and the failure of academia to recognise these barriers as central problems worthy of disciplinary
attention. She emphasised that civic engagement as a field must contend with the fact that African- Americans were historically excluded from democratic participation, and that democracy in the U.S. has never been experienced equally. In this context, she noted, the inequalities faced by Black Americans in a country which boasts of its democracy present a uniquely painful contradiction. Prof. Pinderhughes concluded by raising concerns about how these issues continue to evolve under contemporary political conditions, especially under the shadow of Trump-era politics, which has intensified racial and democratic anxieties. She stressed that this is a particularly painful and pressing moment, one that demands further dialogue and critical engagement from the discipline of political science.

Discussion and Q&A
Dr. Swarna Rajagopalan opened the discussion by inviting the audience to reflect on the structural barriers outlined by the speakers. She emphasised the need to ask: “Where are we building the bridges?” While structural inequality may seem entrenched, she argued, “it is not unmitigable.” Drawing on the Indian context, Dr. Rajagopalan pointed out the persistent lack of support structures, debt incurred to attend academic events, and the benefits of remote
access (e.g., Zoom) in reducing exclusion. She noted the commonality of structural challenges across geographies, from the absence of institutional support to routine marginalisation.

Q1: How can we better identify these systemic issues on a larger scale?
 Prof. Calimbahin suggested conducting an extensive survey. Prof. Rajagopalan mentioned that perhaps it is possible through IPSA. The strategy could be targeting those who do not attend its events, and examining reasons such as geographic location, economic constraints, or institutional barriers.
 Prof. Amanda Gouws responded that while surveys are helpful, they cannot capture the full picture. She highlighted the power of academic journals in dictating scholarly values and stressed the need to “put politics back on the agenda” in political science. Comparative research projects—especially those focused on gender, South-South cooperation, and Women in Political Science—could offer critical insights, though she acknowledged funding constraints.
Q2: In Japan, many scholars are staying back. What is the role of indigeneity in academia versus global academic engagement?
 Dr. Rajagopalan reflected on the challenge of teaching global politics in India to students who are simultaneously hyperconnected (via social media) and yet disconnected from local languages and contexts. She highlighted the tension between validating local knowledge and conforming to global academic expectations, remarking: “We are not valid until we know the white people.”
Q3: Is there any advocacy to bring more women into academia in the Philippines?
 Prof. Cleo Calimbahin shared that there is no strong or organised effort to encourage women’s academic careers in the Philippines. She mentioned informal connections with female political scientists across universities, but pointed to systemic issues like sexual harassment and fear of reputational damage, which deter women from attaining a level playing field.
Q4: How can we build better infrastructure and awareness, particularly among those less exposed to these structural inequalities?
 Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes observed that in the U.S., language education is poor, and current political leadership has only worsened this situation. She noted that IPSA has become increasingly English-centric, despite earlier efforts at inclusivity.

 Prof. Calimbahin stressed the importance of introspection within academia: “Who is part of the problem, and who is part of the solution?”—a necessary question for institutional reform in the Philippines and beyond.
Q5–6: On the marginalisation of certain questions in political science, the politics of publishing, and structural barriers to access
Several audience members raised concerns about:
 The technocratization of political science and its drift away from critical theories (e.g., Marxism, psychoanalysis).
 The continued marginalization of questions on inequality.
 The dominance of academic publishing in English and high article processing charges (APCs). Often, for one article, the APC could be as high as a person’s two months of salary.
Key responses:
 Prof. Amanda Gouws advocated for restoring historical consciousness in teaching, especially regarding colonial legacies.
 An audience member proposed the idea of multilingual abstract submissions and recommended that reviewers be instructed not to penalise non-native English writing. She also proposed that IPSA’s Research Committee 07 (Women and Politics in the Global South) draft journal guidelines and recommendations, including questions about why Global South journals remain unread or undervalued.
 Prof. Cleo Calimbahin reiterated that resource inequality is a major barrier, especially for early-career researchers, who often lack the means and platforms to be heard and published.
 Prof. Dianne Pinderhughes raised the issue of open access fees, noting that funding limitations block many scholars from publishing in high-visibility outlets. She questioned how IPSA plans to engage with such challenges, especially as major events (like the World Congress in Seoul) are held in expensive cities. She also pointed to invasive U.S. visa processes, including the requirement to disclose social media activity, as further deterrents to Global South participation.

Closing Reflections:
The session ended with a strong consensus: this is only the beginning of a much-needed conversation. Structural inequalities in academia require sustained, collective, and intersectional strategies—not only to highlight exclusion but also to reimagine inclusion on more equitable terms.

Panel Title: Gender Dynamics in the Global South

Panel Code: RC07.10Track: RC07 Women and Politics in the Global South

Date & Time: 13 July 2025, 17:30–19:15 (UTC+9)

Convenor: Dr. Meenakshi Bansal

Chair: Prof. Dr. Mamta Chandra Shekhar

Co-chair: Dr. Marijke BreuningDiscussants: Ms. Srabastee De Bhaumik, Dr. Amarnath Paswan

Volunteer Rapporteur: Dr. İlayda Eskitaşcıoğlu Karavelioğlu

Panel Overview:

The panel “Gender Dynamics in the Global South” addressed the multifaceted issues impacting gender politics in various contexts across the Global South.  Presenters for both “Role of Women in Politics of Jharkhand” and “Transgender Representation in Indian Politics: Post-1990s Era” were not in attendance. As a result, these presentations were not delivered during the session and the panel was concluded with 4 presentations. The only available discussant was Ms. Srabastee De Bhaumik, who provided thoughtful commentary on the four papers that were presented. The rapporteur would like to note, however, that due to time constraints and Chair Dr. Shekhar’s decision to conclude the session early (partly in response to overlapping scheduling with the Opening Ceremony) several panelists were asked to significantly shorten their presentations. This led to the omission of planned discussion segments and limited audience engagement, ultimately constraining the depth of exchange the session aimed to foster. A slightly more prepared and coordinated facilitation could have allowed for a more balanced allocation of time and smoother session flow. Having said this, the session brought together a diverse, excellent group of scholars analyzing different case studies and theoretical approaches to better understand gendered experiences, systemic challenges, and evolving political roles.

Paper Presentations

1. Asking the ‘Woman Question’: Pathways for Political Leadership of Mizo Women under Customary Legal Frameworks

Presented by: Ms. Melody Hmangaimawi 

The presenter delivered a compelling analysis of women’s political participation in Mizoram, a state in Northeast India governed under the country’s asymmetric federal structure. Although the presentation was unfortunately interrupted multiple times and had to be concluded earlier than anticipated, it effectively conveyed the empirical depth and critical insights outlined in the abstract. Governed by Article 371(G) of the Indian Constitution, Mizoram enjoys special legislative autonomy that reinforces the authority of its customary laws, particularly in matters related to land, religion, and social practices, without requiring parliamentary approval. Within this framework, the study interrogates the deeply entrenched patriarchal and patrilocal norms that continue to restrict women’s roles in political leadership and land ownership, despite their visibility in social life and their numerical dominance as voters.

Using ethnographic observations, questionnaires, documentary analysis, and the conceptual framework of the “woman question” of Bartlett, the researcher interrogates how masculinist norms are embedded in customary legal structures and social expectations. The paper maps both continuity and change in gendered political spaces in Mizoram, focusing on how the abolition of chieftainship and the reservation of seats for women in local governance have opened up new (albeit limited) pathways for women’s leadership. Religious institutions, particularly the Church, are shown to play a pivotal role in shaping political imaginaries and defining social respectability for women. Key case studies include Lalrinpuii, who strategically leveraged church networks to contest local elections, and Meriam L. Hrangchal whose legal and social identity was contested due to her marriage to a non-Mizo man, invoking Chapter 3:74 of Mizo customary law. These narratives illustrate the ongoing negotiations between inherited patriarchal structures and emerging feminist aspirations. Despite the presentation’s premature ending, it powerfully captured the complex intersections of gender, law, tradition, and regional autonomy that define and constrain the contours of women’s political participation in Mizoram.

In conclusion, the study emphasizes two key insights. First, Mizo women’s political participation reflects a continuous negotiation between inherited structures and emerging aspirations. Second, institutional reform and grassroots mobilization (illustrated through case studies of women leaders who rise via church networks, contest legal hierarchies, or mobilize digitally) demonstrate the plural strategies women employ to claim space within and beyond formal political systems. For Mizo women, the journey toward political leadership is not solely about accessing power; it is about transforming the very structures that define who can lead. Despite the presentation’s premature ending, it powerfully captured the complex intersections of gender, law, tradition, and regional autonomy that shape the evolving terrain of political participation in Mizoram.

Searching for the Missing: Women’s Struggles in Kashmir

Presented by: Mr. Aarash Pirzada

This presentation, though regrettably interrupted the most and concluded far earlier than scheduled, offered a rich and nuanced glimpse into the gendered dimensions of legal agency amid the ongoing Kashmir conflict. Drawing from the presenter’s thesis, the study explores how prolonged militarization and the gendered construction of legal spaces have shaped the lived experiences of Kashmiri civilians, particularly women, since the intensification of conflict in the 1990s. While men have been the primary victims of enforced disappearances and preventive detentions, the burden of navigating legal and bureaucratic systems in search of missing male relatives has disproportionately fallen on women. Following the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019, the imposition of curfews and mass detentions further entrenched administrative borders, severely restricting mobility and access to legal institutions. Against this backdrop, the study employs legal ethnography, including interviews with 25 participants, to uncover the gendered language and structural biases embedded in legal processes. The findings reveal how law, historically shaped by Victorian notions of sexuality and gender, continues to marginalize women through moderated behavior, institutional apathy, and an enduring male-centric legal lexicon. Crucially, the paper challenges prevailing narratives that frame women’s legal activism solely through the lens of motherhood or familial obligation. Instead, it theorizes women's everyday legal navigation as a form of dissent and assertion of independent agency. Despite the session’s abrupt ending, the presentation definitely had the potential for a powerful intervention into existing scholarship by re-centering Kashmiri women’s legal struggles as acts of political and social reclamation, rather than passive extensions of male victimhood.

3. Breaking Barriers: Women Redefining Power, Sexuality and Feminism

The paper titled “Breaking Barriers: Women Redefining Power, Sexuality and Feminism” was presented solely by Dr. Anju Gupta, who delivered a passionate and theoretically rich account of how feminism in India and in many Global South contexts has evolved through intersectional resistance rather than through linear waves. Although the session was cut shorter than expected, the key insights were drawn from both the presentation and the abstract. Dr. Gupta emphasized that Indian feminism cannot be fully understood through Western feminist wave theory; instead, it should be seen as a plural and regionally diverse revolution shaped by overlapping structures such as caste, religion, class, colonial legacies, and cultural taboos. Feminist resistance in countries like India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Bhutan has long operated at the intersections of gender and religion, and also class, producing varied expressions of dissent and empowerment. Unlike dominant upper caste feminist narratives that often erase the lived realities of marginalized women, Dr. Gupta highlighted the critical work of Dalit, Muslim, disabled, and menstruating bodies in challenging ritual exclusion and social silencing. These feminisms focus on bodily autonomy, care work, and access to justice, and they manifest across poetic, legal, and personal registers.

Drawing from the paper’s abstract, Dr. Gupta also examined how Indian women have historically been confined to roles that idealize submissiveness, docility, and divine femininity, while the articulation of sexuality remained a male-dominated space. In contrast, contemporary Indian feminism has emboldened women to speak openly about their desires and challenge norms that restrict their biological and psychological well-being. Suppressing these fundamental aspects, she noted, obstructs healthy personal and collective growth. The presentation underscored that the original political aims of feminism (like voting) have since expanded into deeper challenges to structural inequality. Feminism is not about achieving perfection but about addressing urgent societal needs. It encourages us to reimagine society through complexity, embrace dialogue across differences, and create multiple pathways to justice. Grounded in the Indian Constitution’s promise of equality for all, feminism becomes both a legal and moral project to dismantle patriarchal hierarchies and promote inclusive citizenship. Dr. Gupta concluded by calling for a feminist future that resists homogenization, embraces pluralism, and boldly redefines power and agency in all its diverse forms.

4. Household Water Security for Women in Nalanda: A Case Study of Ganga Uplift Program Presented by: Dr. Smita Agarwal

Dr. Smita Agarwal’s presentation explored how large-scale water infrastructure projects intersect with the lived experiences of women in South Bihar. The region, already geologically divided and historically water-scarce (particularly in the southern districts) has seen its groundwater levels decline drastically due to both climate variability and rising consumption demands. As Bihar now falls under the ‘severe’ water stress category, the Government launched the Ganga Uplift Canal Program in 2022, aiming to redirect surplus monsoonal floodwaters from the north to the drier southern districts. The project lifts excess water from the Ganga River at the district border and channels it toward towns like Rajgir, a tourism hub in Nalanda district that heavily depends on rapidly depleting underground water reserves. Although officially, around 8000 out of 12000 households in Rajgir are said to be receiving piped water, the researcher found significant gaps between reported coverage and on-the-ground realities. Many households still lack regular access, and government statistics often contradict local experience, highlighting the need for accurate, disaggregated data.

The study takes a gendered lens to investigate how this infrastructural intervention has affected water security at the household level, especially for women, who bear the primary responsibility for securing water. Using random stratified sampling across caste and class categories, the study engages with households through focused group discussions to understand women’s daily experiences, coping mechanisms, and perceptions of state accountability. Preliminary findings show that while some improvements have occurred, water access remains uneven. Many women report receiving water for only two hours in the morning and two in the evening, yet official narratives portray the system as fully functional. In the absence of reliable infrastructure, community networks of mutual aid have emerged: for example, women often share water with neighbors in acts considered moral and religiously virtuous. Yet the systemic challenges persist. Groundwater recharge has not kept pace with demand, and the rainwater harvesting efforts envisioned by the government remain largely aspirational. Women, particularly housewives with limited access to information, are not only excluded from formal decision-making but also often unaware of their rights and entitlements related to water. Dr. Agarwal concluded by stressing that water security in the Global South cannot be assessed through infrastructural output alone. It must be rethought through the lived realities of those most impacted women navigating scarcity, bureaucracy, and social expectations. Her presentation makes a strong case for grounding development policy in participatory, gender-responsive frameworks that prioritize not just water delivery, but water justice.

Discussant’s Remarks and Audience Discussion Summary:

Ms. Srabastee De Bhaumik offered insightful and thought-provoking reflections on all the presentations. She particularly engaged with the Kashmir paper, questioning the assumption of law as a neutral or universally applicable construct, noting instead that law often operates as a masculinized and Western-centered space of power. The presenter responded by briefly discussing whether it is possible to reconceptualize law from a feminist and marginalized standpoint, urging the inclusion of women’s lived experiences in order to challenge the internalized masculinity of legal institutions. They also reflected on the role of religion as another structure of patriarchal control and encouraged a rethinking of legal justice from more inclusive and experience-based perspectives.

Turning to the Nalanda water security paper, she raised critical questions around who defines and measures "development," and how development programs affect women's intimate lives, particularly in terms of domestic violence and child marriage. The presenter expressed skepticism toward Western development models and stressed the importance of recognizing geographical and social variation, such as the role of landlords, local conflict over access, and inconsistencies in household registration, especially where renters are excluded from official data. She also pointed to the manipulations required to obtain local data and raised objections to feminist movements that rely heavily on Western blueprints, arguing for locally rooted frameworks.

For the Mizoram paper, she posed a thoughtful question on how women are perceived both publicly and privately within restrictive cultural frameworks. She emphasized that external constitutional mandates may be insufficient in deeply traditional societies like Mizoram, where transformation must emerge from within the community. She asked how women can negotiate with tradition to expand the boundaries of political behavior.

To Dr. Anju Gupta, she posed a compelling question on how we might avoid universalizing feminism, suggesting that moving beyond liberal frameworks is essential, especially when considering disabled or queer feminist movements in India. She also highlighted the potential of digital platforms as spaces for new feminist expression in the Global South.

During the open discussion, an audience member asked Dr. Gupta how lesbian and queer women, who are minorities within minorities, can be included in broader feminist discourses in the Global South. Dr. Gupta responded by acknowledging that sexuality remains a major taboo despite the progress made by the MeToo movement and legal reforms for the LGBTQ+ community. She emphasized that public awareness campaigns and grassroots movements are vital to challenging embedded religious and cultural restrictions, especially when led from within marginalized communities themselves.

Closing Note 

The panel successfully shed light on the nuanced gender dynamics of the Global South, offering rich insights into the intersections of tradition, political representation, and structural inequality. From legal ethnographies in Kashmir to feminist resistance in Mizoram, and the gendered realities of water access in Bihar to the plural trajectories of Indian feminism, the panelists delivered deeply thoughtful and well-researched contributions that invited critical reflection and further inquiry. The diversity of cases and methodological approaches significantly enriched the conversation, offering an important challenge to Western-centric narratives and reaffirming the value of context-specific feminist scholarship.

While the quality of the presentations was exceptional, the session unfortunately suffered from time constraints and a lack of smooth facilitation, which resulted in multiple interruptions and limited several panelists’ opportunities to present their work fully. A more structured approach could have allowed for a more balanced and engaging exchange. Nevertheless, the panelists navigated these challenges with professionalism, ensuring that their key messages resonated with the audience. However, the need to maintain a feminist approach to facilitation in spaces like this, which respects especially the labour of young scholars, should be noted by the rapporteur.
 

Register to attend: https://cutt.ly/2025precongress

RC07 has accepted five open panel proposals for the World Congress program. You can see them here and direct your paper proposal to them but we are sharing the ones we have proposed here for your convenience.

Gender, politics and development

RC07’s original area of interest was ‘gender and development’ and we are delighted to host a panel on the gender politics of development debates and policies. We understand development debates and policies to include a vast range of topics from urban governance, city planning (including smart cities and safe cities projects) and civic rights to land rights, labour force participation, rural development and livelihoods. Papers on disaster consequences, climate change and relief will also be considered under this rubric.

Recent research on gender, law and human rights

Law and legal reform have been commonly advocated and adopted routes to gender equality in countries around the world. We invite proposals that discuss laws promoting or undermining gender equality as also research around legal advocacy campaigns, feminist jurisprudence and precedent-making cases. The laws in question might involve family, workplace or violence-related or reproductive issues. We are also interested in papers that tie human rights law and gender equality discourses.

Recent research on gender, peace and security

We invite researchers to submit paper proposals based on their work in progress on topics related to gender, peace and security–both the official UN discourse around UN Security Council 1325 as well as issues raised by feminist security studies scholars and women’s peace movements. The adoption of National Action Plans, the implementation of the four pillars, challenges of implementation and the potential for broad-based advocacy are possible topics. Research that queers the gender, peace and security area is also welcome.

We are also interested in the role of gender and gender politics in conflict resolution and conflict transformation. Possible topics include the participation and role of women in specific peace processes, official and unofficial, as well as the implementation of Resolution 1325. Feminist approaches to conflict transformation in specific “Global South” contexts are also welcome.

Women in politics in the Global South

We invite researchers to submit paper proposals based on their work in progress on topics related to women’s participation in politics, gender issues in inclusivity discussions, women in social movements (especially women’s movements), violence against women in politics as well as against women human rights defenders. The research needs to be situated in the geographical South, but discussions of political marginalization in a comparative context are also welcome.

You will need to submit your proposal via the IPSA World Congress interface at https://wc2025.ipsa.org/wc/submit-paper, marking rc07 as your track of choice. We look forward to hearing from you!

The 2025 World Congress Call for Papers is out! RC07's theme is "WOMEN’S POLITICAL PARTICIPATION AND ACTIVISM
ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM"! Plan your papers and panels today! 

Register to attend: https://cutt.ly/rc070624

RC07 would like to organise a panel at the IPSA 75^th anniversary conference in Lisbon, “Democratization and Autocratization." This is a call for papers. Deadline: April 8, 2024.