Josefa Maria Stiegler
LightNews LightNews
banner
josefastiegler.bsky.social
Josefa Maria Stiegler
@josefastiegler.bsky.social
220 followers 290 following 55 posts
Feminist researcher _ working on urban violence _ interested in the intersections of coloniality, security and urban space _ postdoc at the Institute for Urban and Regional Research (@oeaw.bsky.social) _ she/her
Posts Replies Media Videos
josefastiegler.bsky.social
🌷Last chance to submit something to the EUGEO congress @oeaw.bsky.social in September!
Propose a paper for my panel "The urban dimension of violence and (in)security: a view from European cities"
Submit here: www.eugeo2025.eu/eugeo-2025-s...
January 20, 2025 at 10:46 AM
josefastiegler.bsky.social
#CfP
🏙️ Urban violence researchers! I am organizing a panel on "The Urban Dimension of Violence and (In)Security: A View from European Cities" for the EUGEO Congress 2025 @oeaw.bsky.social in #Vienna (8-11/9/2025)

🏙️ Call is open until 20/1/2025
www.eugeo2025.eu/eugeo-2025-s...
152: The Urban Dimension of Violence and (In)Security: A View from European Cities Category: Human Geography, Urban Studies Keywords: urban violence, urban (in)security, everyday experiences, gender (In)Security and violence have become pressing issues in big and small cities across the globe; safety issues are put at the top of the political agenda and are recognized by urban planners and the market alike, as military expenditures are skyrocketing even in times of peace. Culminating in a new military urbanism, cities are not merely the backdrop for this development, but they increasingly function as laboratories for contemporary (urban) security governance. Security measures are usually based on a notion of security as a good or condition that is achievable through adequate means; most often, surveillance, police presence, access control, the privatization of security services and, put simply, the restriction of democratic freedoms in exchange for a promise of security. While in the prevalent urban security discourse, there is usually a demand for “more security”, there is in fact little knowledge about the mundane, long-term effects of security measures and how groups of people are affected differently by security practices. Particularly feminist researchers from the fields of urban studies and security studies have problematized narrow and simplifying definitions of security because they fail to account for the complexity and ambiguity of how security “works” in everyday urban spaces. Complicating urban security knowledge, critical and feminist research centers on how (in)security is experienced and constructed in the everyday lives of urban dwellers who are affected or targeted by security measures. What happens, for instance, when security efforts do not curb violence, but instead lead to a simultaneity of violence and security measures that neighborhoods and their residents are confronted with? What kind of security is implemented in what kind of spaces? How are spaces of violence, (in)security and peace dynamically intertwined and exist next to each other? In addition to addressing these questions, possible themes for this session include: • Empirical studies of different European contexts, e.g., French banlieues, Swedish suburbs or the recent far-right riots in the UK • Community-based security initiatives and bottom-up security • Innovative methodological approaches to studying long-term effects of urban violence and (in)security • Theoretical frameworks for studying urban violence and (in)security particularly in European cities • Interdisciplinary contributions
December 6, 2024 at 11:15 AM
josefastiegler.bsky.social
I dug up this old interview from 2018 with feminist security scholar Sarai Aharoni, lecturer in Gender Studies at Ben-Gurion University. Could be a great opportunity for some to take a step back from oversimplifying, anti-feminist we-against-them-mindsets.
fathomjournal.org/women-and-fe...
Screenshot of Sarai's answer in the interview: Talking about the boycott is very dangerous for Israeli academics because any engagement with the question of boycott is considered very harmful for the ‘nation’ and is framed as a ‘strategic threat’. But I don’t view it that way. Rather, I find it is legitimate for academics to decide the conditions of cross-national partnerships they want to engage with. I think that it is totally legitimate for academics on a personal level to decide that they do not want to have professional contact with Israeli researchers if they don’t want to be associated with the Occupation, or with other issues related to discrimination or militarisation. I can understand that. However, for feminists and feminist scholars there is another question to be considered. Alliances between women that are cross-national are not only necessary, they are existentially important for women. So, there is a real price that is being paid for breaking those alliances and those who pay the price are women, namely, a group that is relatively under-represented in national politics and decision making. Due to the boycott, in the last ten years the most progressive and interesting feminist scholars in the world have not come to Israel. Consequently, our students do not have a chance to see or hear about anything that’s happening in terms of feminist thought in the world, which makes it easier for them to remain isolated in a closed society. This is quite harmful on the long term, because local women’s groups all over the world flourish and thrive when they can foster direct connections with similar groups in other places.
November 22, 2024 at 9:51 AM