Gender studies have been questioning scientific research for many years, whether in the biomedical field, in the humanities and social sciences, or in technological development. The history of biomedical research, for example, reveals numerous research biases linked to sex and gender. Some studies have shown how the male body has often been taken - consciously or unconsciously - as the norm, with detrimental consequences for both women’s and men’s health, and even more so for people who do not neatly fit into a binary sex and gender distinction .
Similarly, male bodies and biographies, as well as the traditional division of economic and political labour between men and women have often unquestionably been taken as the norm also in the social sciences. The consequence has been research that has long invisibilised women and sexual minorities, issues that disproportionally concern them (such as sexual violence), and the socio-political and economic dynamics that produce gendered norms, hierarchies, identities and realities in the first place . Gender-blind research has for instance contributed to legitimising a social value system in which visible and paid labour is valued more than invisible and/or unpaid labour (such as cleaning work, care work or emotional labour). It has also long failed to question the gendered nature of urban spaces, political institutions, policies, organisations and social practices. Thereby it has contributed to normalising (if not altogether essentialising) a world that values straight men in power positions more than women, sexual minorities or non-gender-conform groups.
Since the 1990s though, Gender Studies and gender-sensitive scholars across disciplines have produced a considerable body of research on the gendered aspects of society, research and research ethics. Research had made gendered structures and dynamics, as well as implicit biases visible (including in their intersectionality with other vectors of social inequality). In parallel, social movements, national and international institutions, as well as individual people have contributed to pushing gender issues to the forefront of public attention and onto the political agenda (most emblematically maybe #metoo and the recent Pélicot trial in France).
Social tolerance for gender discrimination has been declining in the western world since the 1990s, and many western countries have undertaken efforts to improve legislations and policies in fields such as gay marriage, political representation, violence against women and sexual minorities, transgender rights, harassment or social policies. Scholars and (more rarely) political practitioners have also proposed critical reflections on policy fields that are not as “obviously” gendered (such as foreign affairs, defence policy or economic policy).
However, as every time in history when gender equality has been successfully promoted, backlash has surfaced too: on the part of conservative women; most recently on the part of right-wing populists in Europe and of evangelical-religious conservatives in the United States; and of misogynistic “manosphere” influencers (such as Andrew Tate) online. In France for instance, a controversy over the alleged imposition of “gender theory” in schools emerged in 2011 in the context of the debate over gay marriage .
More worryingly even, some western governments have launched a frontal attack against Gender Studies, gender equality institutions and gender-sensitive scholars. For instance, in 2018, the Hungarian government launched a rhetorical and institutional attack against gender studies and withdrew accreditation to Gender Studies Programmes. More recently, the US government barred DEI programmes and cut funding to any research – and international research cooperation - mentioning gender, including on issues that cannot possibly be rendered “gender neutral” (women’s reproductive health for example, or gender inequalities).
In many other countries too (including France, Germany, Italy or Brazil), attempts have been made to turn gender into a controversial signifier meant to attract a disparate collection of grievances against a supposed “gender theory” – a nebulous concept that does not as such exist in the academic world .
The LISER Research Ethics Committee (REC), together with the competence center for experimental and participatory research (ccEXPAR), in collaboration with the Luxembourg Gender Working Group, proposes a day-long event intended as a forum where to discuss “gender” in research and civil society practice, and foster dialogue between researchers and civil society organisations. We would like to take stock of where we stand today in terms of both achievements and challenges; raise pertinent questions for the future; and contribute to connecting interested researchers and practitioners.
The workshop is open to all interested participants regardless of status or affiliation. It is structured in two parts, that can be attended individually or as a whole.
The first part (9:00-12:45) focuses on academic and applied research. It aims to illustrate and discuss why gendering research and research ethics matters: how it can be done; what (theoretical, methodological and ethical) implications come with the intention to explicitly and systematically take into account the gendered nature of society, institutions, organisations, policies and daily practices. We would also like to discuss what is to be gained from gendering research it, such as: new and exciting research questions; a new perspective or a crucial re-evaluation of existing research; new methodological and ethical concerns, etc.). We would also like to discuss the importance of participatory approaches to gender-sensitive research.
The second part (14:00-18:00) focuses on civil society action and how systematically and explicitly taking into account the gendered nature of society and research changes what we see, how we act, and how we frame our actions. The aim of this half-day is to bring together and foster collaboration between researchers and civil society organisations that promote gender equality and awareness. We would like to create space for discussing the realities, challenges and priorities faced by these organisations, and for how evidence-based analysis could strengthen advocacy and policy influence. We would also like to discuss how scientific research can benefit from insights from civil society organisations that are in close contact with the needs and concerns of relevant groups. By adding a gender perspective to the world café with civil society members (associations, foundations, gender equality officers in municipalities), our intention is to give voices to groups often left out of traditional research (LGBTQ+ communities). Integrating a gender-sensitive approach supports empowerment and transformation (policy advocacy and action). Researchers have the opportunity to reflect on their own gender biases and challenge power dynamics in the research process.
The whole workshop will be interactive in nature and will leave space for participants to speak of their own projects, initiatives and concerns.
Our seminar “Who’s afraid of Gender?” integrates a gender perspective into participatory research. Gender roles and power dynamics affect how individuals participate, express themselves, and are impacted by decisions. If gender is not considered, participatory methods can unintentionally reinforce existing inequalities.
To make participatory methods gender-sensitive, the seminar is led by facilitators who are trained in gender sensitivity and who recognize that all genders contribute valuable perspectives, even if informal or traditionally overlooked. They also guarantee ethical safeguards.
By adding a gender perspective to the world café with civil society members (associations, foundations, gender equality officers in municipalities), our intention is to give voices to groups often left out of traditional research (LGBTQ+ communities). Integrating a gender-sensitive approach supports empowerment and transformation (policy advocacy and action). Researchers have the opportunity to reflect on their own gender biases and challenge power dynamics in the research process.
