Frances Negrón-Muntaner Profiled on Univision

Frances Negrón-Muntaner, director of CSSD's working group on Unpayable Debt and award-winning filmmaker, writer, curator, scholar and professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University, was profiled on Univision.

Professor Negrón-Muntaner's books and publications include: Boricua Pop: Puerto Ricans and the Latinization of American Culture (CHOICE Award, 2004), The Latino Media Gap (2014), and Sovereign Acts (forthcoming). Her most recent films include "Small City, Big Change" (2013), "War for Guam" (2015) and "Life Outside" (2016).

Watch the Univision profile here.

Reframing Gendered Violence Project Featured in EuropeNow Journal

CSSD's project on Reframing Gendered Violence was featured in the July issue of EuropeNow, which was dedicated to "The Gender of Power."

EuropeNow, an art and research journal published by Columbia's Council for European Studies, showcased the project's four public events and workshops this past academic year, which focused on the issues surrounding the discussion of violence against women and gender-based violence.

Read the full article here.

Alice Kessler-Harris Launched Second Half of MOOC

The second part of a MOOC created by Alice Kessler-Harris, past director of CSSD's working group on Social Justice After the Welfare State and Professor of American History Emerita at Columbia University, was recently launched by Columbia and the Center for Women’s History at the New-York Historical Society. "Women Have Always Worked: The U.S. Experience 1700 – 1920" started this past fall and is available free to the public. View the MOOC here.

Susan Meiselas' "A Room of Their Own" featured in The Guardian

Susan Meiselas, photographer and member of CSSD's Women Mobilizing Memory and Reframing Gendered Violence working groups, was recently featured in an article in The Guardian about A Room of Their Own, her new book of photos documenting residents of women's refuges in Black Country, England.

Meiselas says that she hopes her haunting, quiet pictures have a cumulative emotional power and she says they make a political point, which is that the work of a refuge is never done: “The deep, sad reality is that the need isn’t ever going away."

Read the article and see images from A Room of Their Own here.

Narratives of Debt Conference Surveys Puerto Rican Debt and Beyond

On April 21st 2017, CSSD's Unpayable Debt working group and the Oikos working group at New York University’s Institute for Public Knowledge hosted the “Narratives of Debt” conference. Organized by project co-directors Sarah Muir and Frances Negrón-Muntaner, the day-long event focused on the case of Puerto Rico’s debt crisis and explored debt’s relation to intimacy, kinship, sovereignty, and history in other contexts.

The morning session featured scholar and artist panelists that focused on Puerto Rico’s debt crisis from multiple perspectives and media. In her presentation on “Puerto Rico’s American Dream,” Associate Professor of Latino and Caribbean Studies and Anthropology at Rutgers University Yarimar Bonilla discussed how the statehood movement has transformed in light of Puerto Rico’s debt and economic crises. Bonilla drew on her ethnographic work to detail the complexities of statehood claims in terms of race, citizenship, and sovereignty., arguing that the notion of statehood as the “pragmatic” status option relates to a broader relinquishment of the idea of postcolonial sovereignty.

Journalist and documentary photographer Huascar Robles presented a captivating series of photographs that are part of his project “Los Silencios de Santurce.” The photographs document the local and palpable effects of the debt crisis and a controversial “urban revitalization” project (Law 212) that began in Santurce in 2002. The photographs reflect a rapidly changing urban environment and residents’ daily lives amid increasingly unequal urban spaces.

Sarah Molinari, a doctoral student in Anthropology at the CUNY Graduate Center, discussed three circulating narratives of debt and Puerto Rico’s debt crisis: the scapegoating narrative of Puerto Rico’s fiscal irresponsibility; the narrative of debt incredulity; and the narrative of debt protest. Molinari argued that Puerto Rico’s debt is a key site of struggle and open to multiple interpretations with consequences for how debt politics unfold.

Drawing from the recent BRIC exhibit “Ride or Die,” independent artist Miguel Luciano presented photographs of the exhibit’s vintage Schwinn bicycles, which are meant to invoke questions about the colonial relationship between Puerto Rico and the U.S. at the centennial mark of U.S. citizenship for Puerto Ricans. Luciano displayed different bikes, including the notable “Se Acabaron las Promesas” bike with the black Puerto Rican flag in the backdrop. This bike reflects a key question: how might PROMESA have provided a rupture with a long-held imagined stability of the ELA (Estado Libre Asociado)?

The rich discussion following the morning session centered around the variety of resistance projects in Puerto Rico and the ambiguous new vocabularies that activists are conjuring, including among proponents of Puerto Rico’s citizen debt audit and art activism. Building on the intensive focus on the Puerto Rican debt crisis in the morning session, the afternoon panel titled “Debt and Intimacy” brought together an interdisciplinary group of scholars exploring narrations of debt across a range of time periods and cases.

In his presentation titled “Commercial Affiliations” Associate Professor of Social and Cultural Analysis at NYU Michael Ralph made an intervention into current debates over race and the carceral state through a historical reflection on debt as an instrument for incarceration. In his talk, Ralph presented a fascinating history of how banking crisis in the erstwhile debtors’ haven of antebellum Kentucky (debtors from neighboring Virginia whose whereabouts were unknown were presumed “gone to Kentucky,” the audience learned) shifted investor attention from manufacturing to incarceration. As Ralph detailed, this banking crisis, coupled with legislative and court reforms, made incarceration of Kentucky’s white population a template for the 13th amendment in the postbellum era.

In his presentation titled “Debtors’ Sanctuaries and the Sovereign Exception,” Associate Professor of Anthropology at the New School Gustav Peebles likewise animated current debates over deregulated tax havens and offshore finance by illuminating their historical roots in debtors’ sanctuaries. Cultivated by English sovereigns as a “popular exception” to their power, London was dotted with such sanctuaries between 1600 and 1850. As Peebles detailed, however, it was the increasing democratization of access to these exceptional spaces that eventually scared the capitalist class into moving them into what are now postcolonial territories such as the British Virgin Islands and Gibraltar. Far from “aberrant,” Peebles suggested that, then and now, these spaces of sovereign exception have structured the entire system of modern capitalism, but from the margins.

Liv Yarrow, Professor of Classics at CUNY’s Brooklyn College, in her presentation titled “Private Debt and Public Foreign Policy, 51-50 BCE” took the audience back to the times of the Roman Empire to detail how two different kingdoms, one in Cyprus, and the other in what is now the Cappadocia region of Turkey, sought to negotiate their debts to private Romans. The affair was documented in the letters of the Roman Cicero, who was sent out from the capital to become a provincial governor. Initially intent on curbing the debt extraction practices in the area under his purview, Yarrow detailed how Cicero’s own entanglement in the web of debt relations that was the Roman Empire ultimately allowed him to reproduce its predatory logic. The story thus offered lessons on the perils of constituting society on the model of debt.

In her presentation titled “Dreamworlds of Debt” Assistant Professor of English at CUNY’s Baruch College Amina El-Annan explored literary representations of debt in Confessions of a Shopaholic. Building on a quip, attributed to Ernst Bloch, that “the bourgeoisie dreams only of money,” El-Annan sought to (1) interrogate the relation between dreams and debt, and (2) probe the ways in which debt is imagined (i.e. in fiction). Exploring the paradox that the main character writes a column on responsible saving while falling into debt via her own uncontrolled consumption, El-Annan highlighted how the slippage between reality and fantasy occasioned by debt offers fertile ground for literary representations of contemporary society as imagined from a particular (bourgeois) vantage point.

The panel was followed by a lively Q&A session that covered topics including the possibilities and limits of regulating offshore finance and interdisciplinary approaches to developing languages and methodologies for effectively theorizing and researching debt. These conversations will continue next academic year in events coordinated by the Unpayable Debt working group.

--Contributed by Charles Dolph and Sarah Molinari

Rural-Urban Interface Working Group Uses Humanities to Analyze Interviews with Migrants in Accra and Nairobi

On April 21st, the Center for the Study of Social Difference sponsored a presentation and discussion of work in progress by the CSSD working group The Rural-Urban Interface: Gender and Poverty in Ghana and Kenya, Statistics and Stories.

This public event featured a conversation among Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, University Professor in the Humanities at Columbia University; Reinhold Martin, Professor of Architecture at Columbia University; and Ben Baer, Associate Professor of Comparative Literature at Princeton University, followed by a presentation of work by Helen Yitah and Aloysius Denkabe, Professors of English at the University of Ghana-Lagon; and Wanjiru Gichuhi, Professor of Population Studies at the University of Nairobi. Juan Obarrio, Associate Professor of Anthropology at Johns Hopkins University, served as discussant.

The Rural-Urban Interface: Gender and Poverty in Ghana and Kenya, Statistics and Stories project is an Africa-led research endeavor that brings together the humanities and the social sciences. Professors Yitah, Denkabe, and Gichuhi have for the past two years been conducting interviews with rural-to-urban migrants in Accra and Nairobi. They showed a selection of video clips from these interviews that featured migrant women narrating experiences of their rural background and current urban situation. In their analysis, Professors Yitah, Denkabe, and Gichuhi noted that these interviews are not only about the rural-urban interface but are also constitutive of that space. The entire effort is an enhancement of current interviewing techniques by harnessing the humanities for “development.” The project relates to previous work by all of the African participants.

Professor Spivak opened the occasion by emphasizing that they have been working together, in Africa, in New York, and by Skype to fine-tune the interviewer-interviewee relationship. The idea is to allow interviewees to offer their narratives in response to the interviewers’ new technique of listening rather than presenting prepared questions. She introduced the methodological question of “harnessing the humanities for development.” Rather than produce existentially impoverished statistics to feed into the development stakeholders, the project attempts to draw out narratives from the interlocutors by attending closely to rich moments in their discourse. Professor Spivak emphasized that this process requires an “unlearning” of disciplinary patterns in order to produce the response as genuinely coming from the other’s side instead of determined by the questions.

Professor Martin offered a reading of the term “interface.” Much has been written about what used to be called the city-country relation, and it is by now common knowledge that these spaces cannot be held apart. The interface is not something that can be securely held in place or time—geography or history. It is an event that happens over and over again with repeatable differences for individuals and collectives. In viewing the interviews as events of the interface, Professor Martin addressed the question of the interviews’ staging, whether in a conference room with signifiers of institutional seriousness, or at a less formal home visit with neighbors nearby. He posed the question of what role these stagings play in determining the content of the conversation. Professor Obarrio suggested that the “politics of the interview”—constituted by the signifiers of the setting, the hierarchy between interviewer and interviewee, and the language(s) used—must be attended to alongside the “poetics of the interview”—the format in which the narrative emerges or is imposed.

Professor Baer pointed to a strong counter tradition in existence since the nineteenth century that combined statistics and narrative to promote social justice. He suggested that the many signs of class differences visible in the mises en scène of the interviews constituted an important part of the overall text. Professor Baer also examined the institutional and epistemological differences between the Accra and Nairobi interviews so as to underline the way in which the project is itself a part of the rural/urban interface rather than in an analytic exteriority to it. He suggested that the question-form is an important aspect of the work (having a phatic rather than interrogative function), with potential to open onto unexpected response rather than predicted or anticipated answer.

Professor Denkabe reflected that the self-critique that emerged from the discussions of the first batch of interviews produced a methodological conundrum. He and Professor Yitah had originally conducted interviews with a semi-structured format but eventually concluded that they were really speaking to themselves and transforming the narratives they were hearing into answers to a pre-determined set of questions, rather than listening to the respondents. This led to the question of, What is research? What can the humanities contribute methodologically? In response, Professor Spivak explored existing work on interviewing techniques and shared her findings with the entire group. The second year of interviews was approached with new strategies: not to draw out answers to pre-thought questions; rather, to draw the narrative out with leading questions; to watch out for moments of intensity highlighted by facial expression, tonal shifts, and posture. The gaps and contradictions that emerge give an opportunity for imaginative entry into what it means to be an African entrant into the next megalopolis.

An audience member asked what happens after the end of the interview to the power structure between interviewer and interviewee. Professor Gichuhi responded that after the interview, interviewees are given the opportunity to ask any question, and the implicit question is usually the interviewee wondering what they will get from this process in terms of what it means to them. Professor Yitah added that there is often follow-up after the interviews, with interviewees given the opportunity to add anything they left out. Professor Spivak added that the question perhaps referred to a continuing relationship. The discussion ended with an emphasis on the ongoing nature of this project, and the hope to continue the conversation at another Columbia event the following year.

Photos from the discussion are located here.

CSSD's Unpayable Debt Working Group Releases Digital Syllabus Explaining Puerto Rican Debt Crisis

On May Day, 2017, CSSD's Unpayable Debt working group launched its PRSyllabus, a resource to study Puerto Rico's $70 billion debt crisis in the context of over one hundred years of colonial governance by the United States.

"The syllabus comes at a critical time," says working group co-director Frances Negrón-Muntaner, Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race, Columbia University. Her point was confirmed when the syllabus attracted nearly 7,000 views on its first day.

"Today unions have declared a national strike. Students at the University of Puerto Rico are also on strike to protest extreme budget cuts and support demands for an independent audit while an unelected board with ties to the lending industry supports extreme austerity measures that have been unsuccessful elsewhere in the world. To guide more effective policy, we need to reorient our thinking and become better informed about the roots and consequences of the crisis. Our work suggests that participatory and transparent governance, economic revitalization, and full investment in fundamental human needs like education and health are better ways forward.”

Created by working group members and collaborators Yarimar Bonilla, Marisol Lebrón, and Sarah Molinari, the syllabus provides a list of resources for teaching and learning. The syllabus’s goal is to contribute to the ongoing public dialogue and rising social activism regarding the debt crisis by providing historical and sociological tools with which to assess the crisis’s context and repercussions.

"With this syllabus we tried to highlight how the contemporary debt crisis emerged from a history of extractive colonial practices that continue to produce intense insecurity in the lives of millions across Puerto Rico and its diaspora,” adds Lebrón. “We also sought to emphasize the inspiring and creative ways that Puerto Ricans are coming together to fight against austerity, since these efforts are often invisible in mainstream news coverage of the debt crisis."

PRSyllabus is the first in a series of three syllabi that the working group will release over the next year in relation to the damaging effects of debt on various locations around the world, including Detroit, Greece, and the Caribbean. The Puerto Rico syllabus can be accessed here.

PUBLISHED: Rebecca Jordan-Young Publishes on Current Debates Around Sex and Neuroscience in The Guardian

Rebecca Jordan-Young, Associate Professor of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies at Barnard College and past director of CSSD's working group on Science and Social Difference, recently published an article in The Guardian called "We’ve been labelled ‘anti-sex difference’ for demanding greater scientific rigour."

The article points out that "At a time when both science and feminism are under attack, there are welcome signs that neuroscience is showing new openness to critiques of research into sex differences." Despite this robust debate within the scientific community and its accompanying challenge to existing assumptions, "misplaced fears of the effects of feminism on science potentially threaten this," she writes.

Read the article here.

CSSD Announces Media Fellows for Religion and Global Framing of Gender Violence Project

CSSD recently announced the winners of its competition for media fellows joining its project on “Religion and the Global Framing of Gender Violence.” Supported by a grant from the Henry Luce Foundation, the project brings together an international community of scholars, practitioners, journalists, and activists to study the role of religion in naming, framing, and governing gendered violence, with a focus on the Middle East and South Asia.

The Reporting Grants on Religion and Gender Violence provide each of the four journalists listed below with resources to research and produce innovative media stories to reframe understandings of religion and gender violence.

Yasmin el Rifae is a writer, researcher and cultural producer living in New York and Cairo. El Rifae is a Middle East and North Africa research associate at the Committee to Protect Journalists. As a media fellow, she will report on the civilian groups that intervened during mob sexual attacks against women in Tahrir Square, Egypt in 2013. By focusing on a diverse set of self-organized civilian groups who acted as emergency responders, she will explore how these events have influenced the mainstream discussion of sexual violence and feminism in Egypt and abroad.

Samira Shackle is a freelance British journalist, writing mainly on politics, terrorism, and gender. Shackle writes for The New Statesman, The Guardian, The Times, Vice, and many others. She will focus on gender-based violence experienced by Syrian refugee women based in Lebanon and Jordan, using detailed interviews to examine the intersection of religion, culture and structural economic factors in the abuse these women face. Shackle will report on several issues including child marriage among refugees, sexual exploitation of refugee women by employers and landlords, media representation of sexual violence, and intimate partner violence in refugee camps.

Nafeesa Syeed is an award-winning multimedia journalist with a decade of full-time experience on four continents in spot news and enterprise reporting, editing and producing. She works as a national security reporter for Bloomberg News, based in Washington, D.C. As a media fellow, Syeed will focus on violence against Yemeni women in the midst of U.S. and Saudi-led war campaigns. Through interviews with Jordan- and Djibouti-based Yemeni refugees involved in UN-brokered peace talks, she will ask women to frame their experiences of violence and war while looking at how they engage in political processes.

PUBLISHED: Marianne Hirsch Publishes Op-ed on truthout.org about Growing Up in an Autocracy

Marianne Hirsch, Professor of English and Comparative Literature and Professor of Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies and co-director of CSSD's Reframing Gendered Violence working group, recently published an op-ed on the truthout website titled "Three Lessons About Autocracy I Learned as a Child in Communist Romania."

In the piece Hirsch relates how growing up in communist Romania in the 1950's she acquired a healthy skepticism and a distrust of authority, along with the necessary ability to joke and laugh. Most importantly, the human propensity for passivity and normalization in the face of an autocratic environment was tempting, but must be avoided at all costs, she writes.

Read the piece here.

FORTHCOMING: Tina Campt's "Listening to Images" Investigates Archive of Photos of Black Diaspora

Tina Campt's Listening to Images, soon to be published by Duke University Press, was originally conceived in the CSSD project she co-directed called Engendering the Archives.

Throughout the book, Campt tunes in to the affective frequencies inherent in various photographs of the black diaspora. Images range from late nineteenth-century ethnographic photographs of rural African women and photographs taken in an early twentieth-century Cape Town prison to postwar passport photographs in Birmingham, England and 1960s mug shots of the Freedom Riders.

Read more about the book here.

PANEL DISCUSSION: Gender Roles, Violence and the Refugee Experience in Mexico, the United States, and the European Union

In February, CSSD’s Reframing Gendered Violence working group presented a panel discussion on “Refugees and Gender Violence: Vulnerability and Resistance” that addressed the current conditions of forced migration in various parts of the world and the formations around gender roles and gendered violence it has created.

Wendy Vogt, Professor of Anthropology at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, discussed “Rape Trees, State Security and the Politics of Sexual Violence along Migrant Routes in Mexico.”

Vogt said that along the U.S./Mexico border, Central American immigrants have become simplistically associated with sexual violence and thus used as scapegoats for the consolidation of U.S. political power. Vogt claimed that actually half of all sexual assaults happening at the border are perpetrated by migration employees and not migrants.

Vogt said that a series of assumptions and biases against migrants are employed to justify draconian governmental policies. At the local level, migrant men are customarily viewed as sexual predators and criminals while migrant women are considered suspect as sex workers. Migrant shelters then become marked as alleged rape sites, receiving complaints and threats from local populations, all of which then legitimizes militarized police tactics against migrants. Similarly, conservative news outlets on the national level have reported on “rape trees” along the border that are hung with the undergarments of the alleged victims of rapes perpetrated by Mexican criminals and “coyotes.” These unsubstantiated stories proliferate and are used to confirm the suppositions of sexual violence perpetrated by encroaching migrants.

“Such discourses allow the re-inscription of the US nation as chaste, while erasing the complicity of the US government in long term policies that have caused migration,” said Vogt.

Diana Taylor, University Professor of Performance Studies and Spanish and Founding Director, Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics, NYU, discussed the Madres of Central American Migrants movement.

Starting in the 1970s, these traveling “caravans” of mothers and families of the thousands of Central American migrants who have disappeared as they travel through Mexico on their way to the United States aim to connect families of the missing migrants and raise awareness about their fates. The Madres also speak to the United States’ increased attempts at controlling the tide of migrants coming from Mexico.

Stopping at local jails, brothels, and detention centers, caravans embark on fact-finding missions and have become a crucial part of the human rights strategy in Central and South America, said Taylor.

One key way in which the Madres functions is to create a meme—an image, a movement, a story—that transmits the grief and trauma involved in a direct fashion that is both simple and replicable. Successful memes like the Madres materialize everywhere U.S. state policy is used to “disappear” unwanted individuals. The militarized border, changing labor laws, and the war on terror were all cited as examples.

Taylor said the Madre movements have produced signs of hope, as in Argentina, where many of the people responsible for political killings there have been exposed and imprisoned.

Chloe Howe Haralambous, graduate student in English & Comparative Literature, Columbia University, spoke about “Suppliants and Deviants: Gendering the Refugee/Migrant Debate on the EU Border.”

Haralambous said that recognition of refugee status is the only guarantee of entry into Europe and that those individuals labeled economic migrants are not given that privilege. For example, in the current refugee crisis, unwanted Iraqi and Afghan immigrants have been treated as economic migrants in an attempt to artificially reduce the number of people Europe must protect, she said.

While women are considered “less dangerous” and are usually guaranteed entry over young men, “There is no distinction between helpless refugees and unworthy migrants,” Haralambous protested.

This sorting by gender leads to unfortunate results, such as half of the victims of sexual assault in refugee camps turning out to be young men and women sometimes disowning their husbands so they can improve their odds of gaining entrance. Thus, the refugee is characterized as grateful and helpless while the economic migrant is imagined as sneaky and undeserving, said Haralambous.

“In the mainstream, you are either a compliant and suffering refugee or a rapacious economic refugee,” she said.

Isin Önol, Curator in Vienna and Istanbul, spoke about her exhibit, “When Home Won’t Let You Stay: A Collective Deliberation on Taking Refuge.”

The show attempts to elucidate the journeys of the displaced between their lost homes and the new ones they will have to build, said Onol, but it also seeks to bring people of disparate experiences together.

“It interrogates what it means to be human today, in contrast to the ideals of humaneness and human rights,” Onol said of the exhibit.

While human beings can excel at organizing for evil, they can also organize for good, she said, referring to the structural violence that newcomers can experience and the experience of those who might remain passive in the face of that violence.

In the Q&A period that followed, the panelists were asked what journalists could do to ameliorate the situation. Haralambous said journalists would do well to address the structural causes behind the refugee crisis, since media contributes to the normalization of these events.

Vogt underlined the fact that traditional gender narratives were also being used to distort the narrative and that this actually enabled compassion fatigue. Instead, “We should point to people’s resilience—we should encourage alliance, not empathy. We should be motivated by the possibility of solidarity,” she said.

Photos from the discussion are posted here and a video of the discussion can be viewed here.

Contributed by Terry Roethlein and Liza McIntosh

PANEL DISCUSSION: Photographers and Journalists Document Gendered Refugee Experience

“In recent days, we’ve seen the supposed prevalence of violence against women in Muslim countries used to justify travel bans and immigration prohibitions,” remarked Jean Howard, George Delacorte Professor in the Humanities, as she introduced Refugees and Gender Violence: Media and the Arts, the latest event in a two-year series on Reframing Gendered Violence, co-sponsored by the Center for the Study of Social Difference, and the Dean of the Humanities.

The unsatisfactory state of affairs noted by Howard inspired the panel’s questions about how journalists and photographers can vivify the precarious realties of refugees, reframing conventional narratives to tell stories that disrupt our clichéd understandings of gendered violence.

A photojournalist based in Istanbul, Bikem Ekberzade spoke to this question in her wide-ranging, revealing presentation, entitled “The Refugee Project: Anatomizing Gendered Violence.” Showing photographs of forced migrations in forgotten conflict zones such as Kosovo and Afghanistan, she illustrated the stories of women stranded midway through their journeys toward refuge and the hope of a better life.

Sarah Stillman, a staff writer for The New Yorker and the Director of the Global Migration Project at Columbia School of Journalism, spoke thoughtfully on the ways that narrative can affect our understanding of gendered violence against refugees. “How can we resist binaries in storytelling, which distinguish between ‘worthy’ and ‘unworthy’ victims?” she asked. “When I think about reporting on gender-based violence in this context, one of the most critical things is to show people in the act of being creative, or loving. That has really stuck with me when I think about the families I’ve gotten to know in the context of my reporting.”

Susan Meiselas, president of the Magnum Foundation and author of acclaimed books such as Carnival Strippers and Nicaragua, built on the themes of the two previous speakers, detailing the challenges and discoveries of her latest project, A Room of Their Own. This collaborative endeavor uses photos, testimonies, and original artwork to document the experiences of women in a haven in the United Kingdom. Of her experience working on the product, she explained, “this is hard…I am making something with, and in some ways for, these women…I am trying to tell a story that is fairly complex, building a path for readers to hopefully care about a place they might not be anywhere near. Can what I’m making help sustain the haven?”

The event concluded with a lively Q & A that featured questions on topics ranging from the practical benefits of artistic intervention to the narrative ethics of the journalistic profession. The conversation will continue next year with segments on gendered urbanisms and the gender of global climate change.

Access photos from the discussion here and videos here.

 

Contributed by Liza McIntosh

Jackie Leach Scully Discusses Precision Medicine, Embodiment, Self & Disability

On March 9, 2017, Dr. Jackie Leach Scully, Professor and Executive Director of PEALS (Policy, Ethics and Life Sciences) Research Center at Newcastle University in Newcastle, UK, led a thought-provoking and insightful seminar and discussion on "Precision Medicine, Embodiment, Self & Disability" as part of CSSD's project on Precision Medicine: Ethics, Politics and Culture.

Dr. Scully largely explored biomedical perceptions surrounding disability, and proposed how these perceptions are and will continue to change within the era of precision medicine. Traditionally, biomedical views have largely considered disability as a nominative and quantifiable pathology with less consideration for cultural, environmental, social, economic and political aspects. And while precision medicine remains rooted in this conventional biomedical perspective, rapid advances in the field are posing new bioethical questions and challenges that will continue to shape not only the biomedical but also the social/societal perceptions of disability.

Dr. Scully dove into a variety of such issues that we are currently facing and those that will likely be forthcoming. For example, paradoxically, individualized probabilistic data of genomic abnormalities obtained in the preconception/prenatal setting can effectively uncouple genetics from physical manifestations (the “walking ill”), thereby resulting in unjust discrimination—where the concept of disability exists prior to the individual’s embodiment and identity have taken form. This challenge reflects the central question of how precision medicine’s attitude toward “disability” differs from that of “disease.” While medicine in general rationalizes the avoidance or elimination of disease, will this rationalization inevitably apply to genetic variation associated with disability? And how will our society come to these decisions regarding what type of genomic variation we consider “abnormal” and appropriate for preconception and prenatal modification such as through preimplantation genetic diagnosis or in the near future, gene editing techniques.

With the surge of funding for precision medicine research over the past three years, Dr. Scully makes the case that we should allocate a portion of this funding to monitor the ethical ramifications surrounding these biotechnological advances in effort to keep up with the rapidly evolving landscape of precision medicine.

Contributed by Liz Bowen

KEYWORDS PANEL DISCUSSION: "Justice" defined in legal, institutional, and environmental terms

On March 23rd, CSSD presented its 2017 Keywords Roundtable Discussion featuring panelists from various departmental homes who discussed definitions of the word “justice.” Rachel Adams, Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia University and Director, Center for the Study of Social Difference introduced the group and commented on the challenges the new presidential administration presented to minority groups like people of color and the LGBT community, calling into question the U.S. government’s commitment to social problems and inequality.

Adams said that for people with disabilities, the legal definition of “justice”—the administration of fairness—posed a problem because the definition for “fairness” varies for those with disabilities. The American democratic social contract does not by nature take into account people whose bodies deviate dramatically from the norm or who might possess different capabilities for autonomy or reasoning, she said.

“Are there ways to revise that definition or are these individuals an add-on to those theories?” asked Adams, pointing out that some minority groups like the disabled need much more assistance in claiming their rights.

Adams said that while the new administration’s threats to the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, and education all impacted justice for people with disabilities, the surge in public protests also presented problems for those individuals because of their difficulties with mobility, crowds, marching, and speaking. She concluded with a call for “activism for justice when you don’t have a body for protest.”

Kathryn Kolbert, Director of the Athena Center for Leadership, Barnard College, examined “justice” through the lens of U.S. constitutional law, saying that the Constitution provided “multiple and overlapping guarantees” of justice with legal protections of free speech and press; due process and equal protection; and the protection of liberty. While the Trump Administration threatens all of those freedoms, vigilance against incursions against them by any governmental agent is always necessary, she said.

Kolbert said there were four prerequisites that underpin the notion of American justice and all of them are currently being challenged. First, the system of governmental checks and balances keeps political powers in the three branches separate so they won’t unduly influence the administration of justice. “Today they are totally out of alignment,” said Kolbert, citing the Republican domination of the House and Senate as an example.

Kolbert said civil debate was the second guarantee of justice and that the lack of it in current U.S. politics was problematic. Freedom of speech and the press were also crucial measures that were in danger, according to Kolbert, who claimed that “Americans are totally divided over what facts are and over a common set of measurements for determining what is effective,” she said.

The fourth prerequisite for justice that Kolbert cited was access, which is currently being undermined by the huge income disparities within our society. “The gap between the haves and have nots is now so pronounced that one’s access to freedom and institutions of civil society are defined solely by one’s economic status,” she said, citing healthcare as a classic example.

Carla Shedd, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Columbia University presented herself as an urban sociologist who is intrigued by the power public institutions have over people’s lives.

Shedd described the awesome power within the concept of parens patriae—the legal framework through which the state acts as the surrogate parent for its citizens and through which governmental actors are allowed to intervene in the lives of individuals (particularly those in juvenile court) and their families with the ultimate goal of building better citizens.

She also explained the phrase “carceral continuum” a term she uses to describe the expanding systems of social control and punishment that are experienced at different levels of severity according to one’s social status. She said her work explored how societal structures such as neighborhoods, schools, and courts unjustly shape the trajectory of young people’s lives.

“Steeped in the language of justice, and often in the name of protecting America’s poor and vulnerable, the nurturing arm of the state may also operate like an instrument of punishment,” said Shedd. She explained that the institutions mentioned earlier are often used to distribute criminal justice unequally, with racially subordinated groups receiving a disproportionate amount of the carceral system’s punishments.

Jennifer Wenzel, Associate Professor of English and Comparative Literature and Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies, Columbia University, discussed her work on justice in relation to the environment and climate.

“Environmental justice…is concerned primarily with environmental racism and the toxic burdens borne disproportionately by racialized minorities,” said Wenzel, explaining that current theorists posit the socially marginalized as receiving few environmental benefits like natural resources but receiving more environmental burdens like pollution. The case is similar with climate change, in which the industrialized Global North is responsible for the production of most of the greenhouse gases on the planet but the most severe effects of climate change are felt in the Global South, she said.

Even in the very definition of environmental justice, hegemonic values and conceptualizations of nature also inform the discussion. Thus, mainstream environmental movements in the Northern hemisphere set the norms, eclipsing the actual, specific environmental concerns of those who are suffering environmental fallout in the Global South.

In conclusion, Wenzel called for an "environmentalism of the poor" that would demand a healthy environment for everyone, not just the poor, and said that “One of my concerns as a scholar-citizen is that this newfound interest in geological stratification threatens to displace attention to social stratification.” Overwhelming concerns about future dystopias that currently dominate mainstream dialogues could displace a more practical focus on present injustices and inequalities affecting people now, she said.

Photos from the roundtable discussion are available here.

 

Contributed by Terry Roethlein, Communications Manager

DISCUSSION: Refugees and Gender Violence: Media and the Arts on Thursday, March 30

CSSD presents "Refugees and Gender Violence: Media and the Arts," Thursday, March 30th, 2017, from 4:10 - 6 p.m. in Butler Library 523.  Presenters include Bikem Ekberzade, Photojournalist, Turkey, on "The Refugee Project: Anatomizing Gendered Violence," Susan Meiselas, Photographer, Magnum Photos, on "A Room of Their Own," and Sarah Stillman, Columbia School of Journalism, The New Yorker, on the "Global Migration Project."

Reframing Gendered Violence is a two­-year initiative of Women Creating Change at the Center for the Study of Social Difference, supported by the Dean of the Humanities, the Columbia Global Centers, and linked to the project on “Religion and the Global Reframing of Gender Violence” supported by the Henry Luce Foundation.

This event is free and open to the public. Columbia is committed to creating an environment that includes and welcomes people with disabilities. If you need accommodations because of a disability, please email tkr2001@columbia.edu in advance of the event.

This event will be videotaped.

Image: West end of the border, Chad. Photo by Bikem Ekberzade

Jacqueline Chin Presents on "Precision Medicine: Privacy & Family Relations"

Dr. Jacqueline Chin, Associate Professor at the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore spoke in February on the subject of "Precision Medicine: Privacy & Family Relations" for CSSD's project on Precision Medicine: Ethics, Politics, and Culture.  Dr. Chin's  presentation underscored the leading pillars of privacy and family relations in connection with precision medicine. She espoused several focal points through which a humanistic conceptualization of the relevant issues might be achieved, including: the metaphor of precision medicine itself, the problem of genetic privacy, pragmatism and frameworks of choice, and enabling responsible choices in the context of precision genomics.

The Metaphor of Precision Medicine

"Precision Medicine" (PM) implies a certain model of medical care that is personalized and tailored to the individual. But “precision” itself is a cultural construction. The term connotes accuracy, and favors results that should be shared, generalized, and standardized, as opposed to ones that can be true about an individual case. In acknowledging this tension, Dr. Chin argued that PM amounts not to individually tailored healthcare, but rather to genetically based healthcare. Is precision necessarily a social or physiological “good”?

By all accounts, central to PM is conceptualizing “genetic information.” As the literature makes evident, there is little consensus about what genetic information even is. Indeed, countless debates concerning when and on what basis genetic information is significant and to whom—and when such information should be kept private—continue to proliferate. The group found that these realities bring to light an important tension that should be qualified in our humanistic conceptualization of such emerging medical approaches, which is distilling whether PM is specific to an individual versus to a cohort of individuals that share a particular common trait or disease. On a more granular level within this framework, one might distinguish between the clinical versus research uses of the genome. That is, in the clinical context, the purpose is to deliver diagnostic and treatment information to a treating healthcare provider, and in the research context, a researcher is conducting a genetic analysis to explore a specific hypothesis that is independent of diagnosis or treatment for any one individual. We acknowledged that in these settings, from a privacy/disclosure perspective, the individual human subjects are not necessarily informed of the results of genetic analyses, and it was argued that healthcare professionals and ethicists ought to calibrate such communication practices with deference to ethical guidelines and patients’ rights. Thus, when we conceive of the PM metaphor, such distinctions and considerations are of import.

Precision Medicine & Genetic Privacy

Dr. Chin articulated that the term “genetic privacy” can be problematic when taken at face value (e.g., as if there were something exceptional about genetic information that necessitates special ethical attention or legal protections). Instead, she suggested starting with the observation that a general problem of privacy occurs when technological feats (such as data capture and storage, processing, and retrieval) are accomplished. In reflecting upon this conundrum, an important inquiry surfaced: Given the proliferation of public and private sector genetic databases and genomic research, and in light of function creep (e.g., the benefits of using technology in new ways), how might we reconcile attempts to somehow “draw the line” in crafting regulations/policies that protect identifiable information yet also leave room for advances in genomics? In grappling with this challenge, identifying the stakeholders is key.

Pragmatism and Frameworks of Choice

Chin discussed with the group precision medicine in connection with social and familial obligations. The dialogue centered on (i) reflections of pragmatism and (ii) what medical anthropologist Margaret Sleeboom-Faulkner terms “frameworks of choice.”

Drawing on philosopher Herman Saatkamp’s work, discussants considered the argument that pragmatism prioritizes the good over truth, and the idea that pragmatism is a vehicle for assessing what he terms the “new genetics.” What is perhaps most important here is embracing the complexity of the connection between genes, environment, and culture, and accordingly the urgency to redirect research efforts to developing “responsible” individuals. But many issues remain with regard to this line of thought, and a plethora of questions were raised in our seminar. For example, how might we define a responsible parent, and to what extent is that definition fluid? To what degree is being responsible context-specific, and is it a product of free will exclusively, or a combination of other forces within us, our environment, and our culture? Finally, how possible is it to achieve a pragmatic directive for parents to use genetic information in child rearing? While these issues cannot be solved in a brief discussion, one of the prevailing arguments asserted that given the complex biological and societal nature of human beings, single genetic traits are likely less responsible for determining complex human actions, whereas the perspective that draws upon both genes and environment is more convincing.

The other work we reviewed in this context is that of Sleeboom-Faulkner’s frameworks of choice writings. What was most thematic in our discussion was that while reproductive governance is a function of social individuals and of the state’s regulatory impositions, the reality remains that individual choice and free will wildly varies depending on the context (for instance, in response to community and cultural norms, which may produce coercive or poorer outcomes). Additionally in this vein, one’s choice has the potential to be constrained or restricted by social and economic limitations, such as conflicting religious values or financial barriers that prevent or disable access to a given genetic test or treatment. As Sleeboom-Faulkner argues, the relative bioethical permissiveness of state and local governments influences the degree to which populations participate in, and benefit from, genetic testing.

Precision Genomics and Enabling Responsible Choices

Another issue that Dr. Chin emphasized related to precision genomics and enabling responsible choices. The topics she highlighted included the importance of the force of the law in protecting individuals from being coerced into undergoing genetic or whole genome testing, and the notion of sharing such test results “responsibly.” In considering the latter, for instance, what might be an appropriate way to arrive at decisions to inform next-of-kin in consideration of family members’ interests? In a perhaps-controversial conviction, Dr. Chin posited that individuals who undergo genetic or whole genome testing should be required to consent to sharing relevant results with close family members who desire to access the information. She argued that families should be notified so that they can choose whether or not to apply for access to a family member’s findings and undergo testing themselves. This set of claims produced a wave of skepticism among some working group members, who questioned what the scope of the “family” would entail (e.g., “close” family? Only those with whom one can establish trust? All blood relatives? Would it also include people with whom they are thought to have a reasonable degree of trust in?), and to what extent moral, relational, or other civic duties might bolster or compromise such an obligation to disclose. Another response underscored the notion of risk stratification: as it stands now, PM is more so an issue of risk, as opposed to identifying a particular variant that may be indicative of someone’s potential to inherit or develop a particular condition. So perhaps the extent of the obligation to disclose hinges on the notion of actionability—the degree of information that is actually useful to patients or not. To calibrate, Dr. Chin did acknowledge that the right of individuals not to know and to make their own judgments about the risks to privacy of undergoing genetic testing should be protected. Still, a strong argument in favor of disclosure remains, which is that PM succeeds only if people do share information—in essence, sharing information is part of the “deal” of PM, and without it, PM may not materialize as expected.

 

Contributed by Matt Dias

Alice Kessler-Harris' "Women Have Always Worked" MOOC Launched

The first part of the "Women Have Always Worked" MOOC (massive open online course), led by Alice Kessler-Harris, R. Gordon Hoxie Professor of American History Emerita at Columbia University and former project director of CSSD's Social Justice After the Welfare State, was recently launched on the edX platform.

The Women Have Always Worked course is the first full-length MOOC on the history of women in America and is free and open to the public. A joint venture between Columbia University and the Center for Women’s History at the New-York Historical Society, the course introduces students to historians’ work to uncover the place of women and gender in America’s past.

Read the full story here.

DISCUSSION: Keyword: Justice — Interdisciplinary Conversation on Thursday, March 23!

On Thursday, March 23, 2017 from 4:30 – 6:30 p.m., CSSD and the Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Council will co-host a Keywords: Interdisciplinary Roundtable Conversation on the keyword “Justice” in Butler Library 203, Columbia University.

Keywords programs draw participants together from a wide range of disciplinary homes in order to explore the various ways we think about fundamental critical/theoretical ideas and to generate new vocabularies and new methodologies.

This year's program features:

Che Gossett
Community Archivist and Student Coordinator, Barnard College

Mark Hatzenbuehler
Associate Professor of Sociomedical Sciences and Co­Director, Center for the Study of Social Inequalities and Health, Mailman School of Public Health

Kathryn Kolbert
Constance Hess Williams Director of the Athena Center for Leadership, Barnard College

Carla Shedd
Assistant Professor of Sociology, Columbia University

Jennifer Wenzel
Associate Professor of English and Comparative Literature and
Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies, Columbia University

Rachel Adams (moderator)
Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia University and Director, Center for the Study of Social Difference

CSSD Call for Proposals for Fall 2017 Projects Extended to March 20

CSSD’S deadline for proposal submissions for 2017 projects has been extended to Monday, March 20th. Proposals may be submitted for consideration by any Columbia or Barnard faculty member(s) whose project aligns with the mission of CSSD.

Proposals must be for a new project to begin in 2017. Proposals may be submitted for consideration by any Columbia or Barnard faculty member(s) whose project aligns with the mission of CSSD, although preference will be given to faculty affiliated with one or more of CSSD’s member centers and institutes. Submission deadline is March 20, 2017. Read the full CFP here.