EUROPA. Ragioni e sentimenti/EUROPE. Senses and Sensibilities, DWF (110-111) 2016, 2-3Compra il numero

EUROPA. Ragioni e sentimenti/EUROPE. Senses and Sensibilities, DWF (110-111) 2016, 2-3

Editoriale

Va detto. L’idea di dedicare un numero all’Europa ci accompagna da molto tempo. È stata una lunga gestazione, che ci ha interpellate a più riprese. A volte collettivamente, a volte singolarmente, il sogno del ‘progetto Europa’ ci ha convocate tutte. Chi se l’è ritrovato in testa per una canzonetta dell’infanzia (Carol), chi lo cercava in una rappresentazione che non fosse quella della moneta unica e del ratto d’Europa, tutte abbiamo in qualche modo visto una possibilità, un’occasione, senza rischiare di essere ingenue, nella nascita e nell’evoluzione dell’Unione europea.

Dal Trattato di Maastricht del 1992, il periodo di vita dell’Ue comincia ad essere sufficientemente lungo da vedere ormai adulti i “nativi europei”. Allora noi, femministe, quelle delle relazioni, del partire da sé, europee, che viaggiano senza passaporto e con l’euro nel portafogli, spesso in possesso di tre spazzolini da denti sparsi tra case in mezzo affitto (o in coloc, come dicono i francesi), ci siamo chieste se avessimo da dirci qualcosa e che cosa con le femministe svedesi, austriache, lituane, polacche… Se si potesse parlare, anche un po’ provocatoriamente, dell’esistenza di un movimento femminista in Europa. Le differenze sono molte, ma la sfida è capire se c’è un filo che le lega (Pacella).

E se questo filo ci fosse – ci siamo ancora chieste – il movimento femminista transnazionale sarebbe europeista? E su quali basi, visto che il grande progetto d’Europa unita, quella che voleva tenere insieme le differenze e non appiattirsi su uno standard universale, ha prodotto una governance e un sistema fatto di regole restrittive? Un sistema che ha ceduto alla finanza, ha innalzato muri o, peggio, ha chiesto ad altri di farlo facendosi “fortezza”, insomma che ha preferito le linee definite alle curve meno domabili e più imprevedibili (Gregoratti).

Quello che l’Europa vieta ce l’abbiamo ben presente. In questo numero ci siamo piuttosto chieste – e abbiamo chiesto – quello che l’Europa ha permesso o permette, in primis alle donne. Coscienti del fatto che una prospettiva europea privilegiata la si ha prevalentemente a partire dalle città (Sassen) e che troppo spesso l’Europa stessa (colpa sua) si dimentica che la gente non vive solo nei grandi centri.

Sono riflessioni che, partendo dalle nostre vite, sono arrivate molto lontano (D.A.), hanno fatto esplodere molte domande di cui questo numero di DWF dà conto. Seppure consapevoli di aver lasciato indietro molte questioni, siamo altrettanto certe di aver cominciato ad attraversare la mappa dell’Europa con una domanda politica dai contorni ben precisi.

Abbiamo interrogato gruppi e singole. Gli esiti non sono quelli di un’inchiesta giornalistica che chiarisce questo o quel punto, ma una moltiplicazione di riflessioni e discorsi che consideriamo non meno eloquenti, né meno importanti da presentare e condividere con le lettrici e i lettori di DWF.

I fili intrecciati per capire se è possibile parlare o no di un progetto d’Europa del “movimento femminista europeo” sono principalmente tre:

1. Come costruire una cittadinanza europea: rimettendo ad esempio al centro il discorso sul welfare, sul benessere, sulle possibilità che dovrebbe garantire l’Unione europea (Pacella), sui diritti che alcune hanno e altre ancora no (Björk, Jafari). Non possiamo infatti non constatare che i diritti umani su cui è stata costruita la cultura europea sono da alcuni anni diventati un ostacolo da abbattere in favore delle ragioni del mercato. Possiamo altrimenti dire che l’Europa, per la sua caratteristica disomogeneità, per la molteplicità delle culture di cui si compone, è probabilmente uno dei luoghi votati a pensare una cittadinanza fatta di corpi che abitano un certo territorio, e non di passaporti.

2. Cosa è già cultura condivisa, ad esempio la struttura delle città, e cosa invece ancora non lo è, ossia una figurazione comune diversa da quella della moneta unica e del ratto di Europa.

3. Quali sono le teorie, quali le ragioni e quali i sentimenti per dare un nostro futuro politico all’Europa.

Il risultato di questo interrogare è uno solo, ma determinante: occorrono un nuovo paradigma e un nuovo progetto per l’Europa, che non possono fare a meno di passare dalle donne, come soggetti politici. Le ragioni che vengono esposte sono le seguenti: la costruzione del proprio essere politico per le donne non è mai stata nazionalistica (Virginia Woolf – El Fem), molto probabilmente perché si è radicata nel combattere l’universalismo patriarcale (Braidotti); l’esperienza europea, ossia dell’essere in rete con donne provenienti da altre esperienze, ha prodotto un grande guadagno che è la conoscenza di altre pratiche e il confronto con esse. In altre parole non è soltanto il Programma Erasmus a permettere di conoscerci, ma è anche e soprattutto il confronto tra pratiche diverse. Sono le stesse donne a tessere la rete urbana su cui agiscono i loro conflitti (Sassen), dove si muovono i loro corpi, dove occupano le piazze; sono ancora le donne a conoscere da sempre, sulla propria pelle, il rischio bio politico che oggi riguarda (anche in Europa) molti più corpi, cioè che l’inclusione o l’esclusione può essere ragione di vita o di morte (Braidotti, la lettera alle alte cariche dello stato Italiano e dell’Unione Europea); sono ancora le donne a comprendere ed agire il movimento, la dinamica della contemporaneità tra micro-macro, interno-esterno. Ciò è evidente nei processi migratori (Brinis) che vedono le sindache impegnate sui loro territori, ma anche coinvolte in urgenze europee; le donne inoltre costruiscono la cultura dall’alto e quella dal basso (Spinelli, Hirschman, Warso, Forenza), il che fa dei movimenti femministi l’unica politica che fluisce restando radicata, che percorre le strade, ma sa anche diventare teoria, raccoglie le urgenze e le trasforma in proposte.

Tuttavia, i dati della discriminazione e della diseguaglianza sessuale – nel mercato del lavoro ma non solo – ci dicono che è ancora troppo alto lo squilibrio (inGenere, Squillante, Manca).

Questo numero di DWF è importante, perché mette a tema questioni complicate, ma non dimostra che il nuovo paradigma dell’Europa fondato sui corpi e i saperi delle donne si attui o trovi lo spazio politico per esprimersi. Tutte e tutti ne sentiamo l’urgenza, tanto maggiore se lo spazio europeo è stretto nella tenaglia di una possibile alleanza tra le derive di una democrazia autoritaria (Russia, Turchia, USA), ma non è scontato che la risposta europea ci sia. Il ‘movimento femminista europeo’, qualora ci fosse, potrebbe intanto puntare su altre legittime opzioni: un nuovo internazionalismo, un nomadismo pratico, carovane, le comunità matriarcali, la lotta nei territori comuni.

Il numero non ci offre risposte dirette per avviare già l’agire politico e le alleanze necessarie per costruire il nuovo paradigma all’interno della nostra mappa, quella geografica e culturale in cui viviamo, mare incluso. Sulla nostra esperienza possiamo però proporre un lavoro politico a mosaico che prende forma e forza “tessera dopo tessera”. La proposta è quella di provare a cercare alleanze da subito – l’agire politico – sulle singole tessere del mosaico, invece che rimandare e aspettare di accordarsi sul progetto politico, che è ancora da chiarire.

La prima tessera possiamo già apporla rendendo obbligatorio lo sguardo di genere in tutti i lavori delle istituzioni europee e, a cascata, nazionali. Inserire un pensiero differente e/o una valutazione dell’impatto di genere ovunque e sempre, accanto alle valutazioni di altri impatti. Insomma, bisogna rendere effettivo e dilagante il cosiddetto “Gender mainstreaming” (Forenza).

L’8 marzo del 2016 è stato approvato – durante la plenaria di Strasburgo – un Rapporto proprio sul Gender mainstreaming al Parlamento europeo(1). La relatrice, Angelika Mlinar, liberale, austriaca e membro titolare della commissione FEMM – diritti delle donne e uguaglianza di genere – ha ricevuto il sostegno di una larghissima maggioranza all’interno della Commissione e poi in plenaria con 453 voti a favore, 173 contrari e 79 astensioni. A partire da questo Rapporto gli uffici delle deputate che maggiormente l’hanno sostenuto si sono adoperati perché il Gender mainstreaming fosse appunto una prospettiva trasversale a tutte le politiche dell’UE. È stata anche recapitata una lettera al presidente della commissione AFCO (Affari Costituzionali), in cui viene richiesta la modifica delle regole di procedura del Parlamento europeo, nell’ottica di rendere vincolante l’adozione di una prospettiva di genere diffusa sull’intero lavoro del Parlamento.

L’altra tessera è ridisegnare un’educazione che non ignori il genere, in grado di decostruire gli stereotipi e che abbia programmi europei, manuali europei, per tutti, basati sugli women’s studies con l’esperienza del progetto Athena (2): che punti cioè a implementare una piattaforma mirata a costruire una cittadinanza europea caratterizzata non dai confini nazionali, ma dagli attraversamenti dei suoi territori e dunque sempre soggetta a mutazioni.

Il terzo pezzo del mosaico consiste invece nel continuare a riflettere su tutto quello che ostacola o filtra o provoca il nostro progetto europeo: le derive della sovranità popolare, gli assetti istituzionali, la ripartizione dei poteri, le burocrazie, i beni comuni, la governance dei conflitti, il rapporto città/campagna, l’attualità del patriarcato, le libertà economiche, i nazionalismi.

Le sorelle Dashwood, tutte e tre legittime proprietarie del titolo di questo numero ispirato dal romanzo di Jane Austen, incuranti della Brexit e delle convenzioni della provincia inglese, si sono dette entusiaste del lavoro fatto e di quello che verrà!
(pm e rp)

1 Versione italiana: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP// NONSGML+TA+P8-TA-2016-0072+0+DOC+PDF+V0//IT
English version: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=//EP//NONSGML+TA+P8-TA-2016-0072+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN
2 Athena è un progetto ideato e portato avanti da Rosi Braidotti da Utrecht – e realizzato
con finanziamento comunitario – per una serie di manuali europei sugli women’s and gender’s studies.

Indice

EDITORIALE. English version

Europe. Senses and sensibilities. Editorial
Actually, we had been contemplating dedicating an issue to Europe for a long time. It has been a long gestation, which has made itself felt on a number of occasions. At times collectively, at times individually, the dream of the ‘Project Europe’ has been recurring for all of us. It may have been conjured up by a childhood song (Carol), or pursued in a form other than the single currency or the rape of Europa but, without risking being naive, we have all in one way or another seen in the birth and growth of the European Union a possibility, an opportunity. As from the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, the EU’s lifespan so far is approaching long enough to see adult “native Europeans” by now. So we feminists, we who “relate”, who start from ourselves, Europeans travelling without passports and with euros in our wallets, often with three toothbrushes, each in different share accommodation (or coloc, as the French put it) – we were wondering if we had something to talk about, and if so what, with the feminists in Sweden, Austria, Lithuania, Poland… and whether one could speak, even if to some extent provocatively, of the existence of a feminist movement in Europe. There certainly are differences, but the challenge is to see whether there is a common thread binding them (Pacella). And if there happened to be this thread – we went on to ask ourselves – would the transnational feminist movement be Europeanist? And on what bases, seeing that the great project of united Europe, aiming to keep the differences together without flattening them out on a universal standard, has produced a form of governance and a system put together with restrictive rules? A system that has given way to finance, erected walls or, even worse, got others to, standing as a “fortress”– in short, that preferred straight lines to curves, which are less tameable or predictable (Gregoratti). We are well aware of what Europe has proscribed. The question we ask ourselves – and others – in this number is what Europe has permitted or permits women, in the first place. And we ask it bearing in mind that Europe’s favoured perspectives start from the cities (Sassen), and that all too often Europe itself (its fault) forgets that not all the people live in metropolises. Starting from our own lives, these considerations have gone a long way (Dro), raising many questions and demands which we report in this number of DWF. We are aware that many issues have been left out, but we are equally sure that we have begun to traverse the map of Europe with specific and unequivocal political questions. We have questioned groups and individuals. The result is not that of a journalistic enquiry clarifying this or that point, but rather a burgeoning of considerations and observations that we deem no less eloquent, no less important to present to and share with the readers of DWF. Of the interweaving threads to be examined in order to see whether we can speak of a “European feminist movement” European project, the main three are: 1. How to construct European citizenship: for example, bringing the focus back to welfare, well-being, the opportunities the European Union should guarantee (Pacella), and the rights that some women have and others are waiting to have (Björk, Jafari). There can be no getting around the fact that the human rights that European culture has been built upon have for some years become an obstacle (to break down) favouring a market rationale. At the same time, we may say that Europe, given the heterogeneous characteristics and multiplicity of cultures it embraces, is probably one of those places where citizenship is destined to become a matter of physical human beings inhabiting a certain territory, and not of passports. 2. What is already common culture, such as the urban lifestyle, and what has yet to enter into it, namely a common identity expressed in terms other than the single currency and the rape of Europa. 3. What are the theories, reasons and feelings for us to give a political future to Europe. This questioning leads to one only – but decisive – result: the need is for a new model and a new project for Europe, which cannot but see women in leading roles (as political actors). The reasons adduced for this were: women have never constructed their political identity on nationalistic bases (Virginia Woolf – El Fem), most probably because their cause is rooted in the fight against patriarchal universalism (Braidotti); and their European experience, networking with women of different backgrounds, has proved highly beneficial in terms of learning about other practices and comparing them with their own. In other words, it is thanks not only to the Erasmus Programme that we have learnt about each other, but also, and above all, to comparison between various different practices. It is women themselves who map out the urban context where they take their conflicts (Sassen), where they take their physical presence, occupy streets and squares. Again, it has always been women who have learnt, the hard way, the biopolitical risk now threatening (in Europe, too) many more bodies, for exclusion or inclusion can be a matter of life or death (Braidotti). And again, it is women who understand and exercise the movement, the dynamics of contemporary life between micromacro, inside-outside. This is evident in the migration processes (Brinis), which see women mayors taking on full commitment in their areas, together with involvement in European emergencies. Moreover, women create culture top-down and bottomup (Spinelli, Hirschman, Warso, Forenza), which means that the feminist movements represent the only policy that flows while remaining rooted, which takes to the streets but can also become theory, responding to emergencies and transforming them into new directions. Nevertheless, the data on gender inequality and discrimination (in the labour market, but not only there) tell us that the imbalance is still too great (inGenere, Squillante, Manca). This number of DWF is important because it brings complicated issues into discussion, but it does not demonstrate that the new model of Europe based on the physical and intellectual presence of women is being implemented or finding political scope to emerge. All of us feel the urgency of this, and all the more so if Europe’s scope is hemmed in by currents moving in the direction of authoritarian democracy (Russia, Turkey, USA), but we cannot count on effective response from Europe. The ‘European feminist movement’, as far as there is one, could in the meantime be working towards other legitimate options: a new internationalism, practical nomadism, caravans, matriarchal communities, taking the struggle to common territories. This number does not offer direct answers to start on immediate political action and the necessary alliances to construct the new model within our map – the geographical and cultural map we inhabit (including the sea). On our experience, however, we can propose political action that takes on form and force like a mosaic “piece by piece”. Our proposal is to set about seeking alliances immediately – political action – on the single pieces of the mosaic, instead of delaying in the expectation of coming to agreement on the overall political project, which still needs clarifying. We can put the first “piece” in place now, making the gender approach obligatory in all the proceedings of the European and, in cascade, national institutions,introducing a different attitude and/or a gender impact assessment in all cases, at all times, alongside assessment of other impacts. In short, what is known as. “Gender mainstreaming” (Forenza) must be made effective and widespread. In fact, 8 March 2016 saw approval – during the Strasbourg plenary session – of a report on Gender mainstreaming to the European Parliament(3). The Rapporteur, Angelika Mlinar, liberal, Austrian and full member of the FEMM Committee (women’s rights and gender equality), enjoyed the support of an overwhelming majority within the committee and subsequently in the plenary session with 453 votes in favour, 173 against and 79 abstentions. Starting from this Report, the offices of the women MEPs who had given it most support set to work to make Gender mainstreaming a perspective adopted across the board for all EU policies. A letter was also sent to the chair of AFCO (Committee on Constitutional Affairs) with the request to modify the rules of procedure in the European Parliament with a view to making adoption of a gender perspective binding throughout all the work of the Parliament. Another piece of the mosaic consists in a new design for education taking gender into account, able to deconstruct stereotypes and offering European programmes and European handbooks to all, based on studies by women with experience of the project Athena(4): in other words, working towards implementation of a platform for construction of European citizenship characterised not by national borders but by border crossings, and thus ever subject to mutations. Yet another piece of the mosaic consists in continued reflection on everything that obstructs, filters or raises issues with our European project: wayward populist trends, institutional arrangements, the distribution of powers, the bureaucracies, commons, governance of conflict, town/country relations, patriarchal hangovers, economic freedoms, nationalisms. The Dashwood sisters, all three having rightful claim to the title of this number inspired by Jane Austen’s novel, unconcerned about Brexit and the conventions of the English provinces, have declared their enthusiasm about the work that has been and will be done! (pm e rp) 3 English version: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP// NONSGML+TA+P8-TA-2016-0072+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN 4 http://www.let.uu.nl/womens_studies/athena/ Look at p. 55

MATERIA

UNA POLITICA PER LE INFRASTRUTTURE SOCIALI. INTERVISTA A InGenere - ITALIA
La Redazione
In this interview, the editors of the web-magazine InGenere reply to questions about I) the role of women in renewing hope and interest in the project for the unification of Europe, II) the diffusion of best-practices for gender equality, III) gendering urban planning and IV) the “pink New Deal”, i.e. a list of proposals put forward by InGenere five years ago to fight the economic crisis. The editors of InGenere draw attention to the negative role that some women play in far-right anti-European parties and movements. However, they believe that women are a powerful force for the defense of some of the founding values of the European Union: social protection, democracy and peace. They argue that all these values are at risk and do not seem to be adequately defended by the European Union at political level. As for the diffusion of best practices, they believe that we can learn also from “bad practices”, but too little is done for publicizing the important lessons that can be drawn from past experiences. For example, they complain about the lack of coordination among the European institutions for gender equality which often leads to confusion and duplications. They acknowledge that a gender perspective in urban planning can improve the lives of men and women (and the issue has been often addressed in their magazine) but they grant that there are many “cities” inside the city and that the divide center/outskirts is perhaps more important than the one between cities and countryside. As for the “Pink New Deal”, the proposal still holds. Investing in social infrastructures (education, care and health services) has a higher impact on total employment than investing in physical infrastructures. Moreover, it benefits women twice: as consumers of social services and as workers in the care economy, thus reducing gender gap in employment and income.
VOCI FEMMINISTE IN EUROPA: AUSTRIA, SLOVENIA E SVEZIA / FEMINIST VOICES IN EUROPE: AUSTRIA, SLOVENIA AND SWEDEN
La Redazione
I DIRITTI DELLE DONNE SONO UNA QUESTIONE EUROPEA: IL BLACK MONDAY IN POLONIA// WOMEN’S RIGHTS ARE A EUROPEAN ISSUE: THE BLACK MONDAY IN POLAND
Roberta Paoletti
IL FEMMINISMO AL CUORE DELLA GIUSTIZIA SOCIALE / FEMINISM AT THE CORE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
Lobby europea delle donne (EWL)
IL CORPO E L’INDIPENDENZA ECONOMICA NELLE POLITICHE DI GENERE / BODY AND ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE IN GENDER POLICIES
Malin Björk e Azadeh Jafari
EUROPA, UMANESIMO, FEMMINISMO. INTERVISTA A ROSI BRAIDOTTI
La Redazione
In this interview, Rosi Braidotti reflects on the status of European feminism discussing about its roots, its present difficulties, and about some feminist theoretical experiences and their great potential. From an historical point of view, the European feminisms are deeply connected to Humanism, and rooted in Enlightenment. In recent decades – especially after the so called poststructuralists’ scene – a new wave of radical feminism has recasted this historical and traditional heritage through a series of critical deconstructions, such as the feminist refusal of the enlightments’ idea of humanity (which is recognized as built upon the idea of a universal Man, presented as neutral and “measure of all things”). As alternative to this model, feminists and other social movements, especially environmental and pacifist movements, have developed different critical reflections and currents, that could be ascribed as militant anti- humanisms. Today, it is essential to look back at the contributions of postcolonial theory, since it can help us discovering and unveiling the “in-human” abuses that today are carried on by European policies. Postcolonial theory affirms that the traditional ideals of Reason, Tolerance, and Equality before the law and democratic rules, do not actually guarantee automatic immunity from violence and domination. A critical thinking on humanism must take into account colonial experiences and their unspeakable violence. Europe can be an opportunity, if it is understood and developed in a democratic sense. It might be a resource for the nomadic subjectivity Braidotti has written about (Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory, Columbia University Press, Cambridge 1994 ).We have to be able to imagine Europe as a space where citizenship – meant as a legal and political subjectivity – can be detached from any sense of ethnic identity. What we need today is to take action and work for a change in the social European imagination, in its narratives and representations, as well as in passions and habits of its subjectivities. For us, as European women, this means to put an end to the European implicit nationalism and to the culture it produces. The creation of the “Fortress Europe” is actually the denial of the European dimension as it was processed by Altiero Spinelli and the Hirschman family, which are both today our fundamental genealogical resources to fight the spread of rampant conservatisms. Feminism constitutes a ‘legacy without a will’ (in the words of Françoise Collin): its transmission is an open, vital, and critical project. A new idea of Europe could be based on it. Many feminists are today engaging battles for the defense of environmental commons without appealling to the obsolete nineteenth-century concept of Nature. They understand much of the ecological dimension as a techno-scientific dimension. They are eco-cyborg-feminists, and they know how to use new technologies and new media in viral and effective communication and struggles. Their approach echoes the political theories developed by ‘materialistic feminists’, such as Adrienne Rich’s and Donna Haraway’s, in a very promising and fertile way. We should move in these directions in order to re-think Europe and its new figurations. We have to look – for instance – at experience such as the “manifesto of xenofemminismo”. A masterpiece: a rock opera, a political manifesto, and an ultra-hyper-urban poetry at once. In the feminist approach – as feminism is a trans-historical and global movement - critics and creativity shake hands with each other and are mutually reinforcing. We should count on this theoretical and imaginative power.
ATHENA: LA CREAZIONE DEGLI STUDI DELLE DONNE EUROPEI / ATHENA: THE MAKING OF EUROPEAN WOMEN’S STUDIES
Serena Sapegno
CITTÀ GLOBALI TRA ESPULSIONI E PRATICHE DI RESISTENZA. INTERVISTA A SASKIA SASSEN / GLOBAL CITIES BETWEEN EXPULSION AND PRACTICES OF RESISTANCE. INTERVIEW WITH SASKIA SASSEN
Angela Lamboglia
UNA FEMMINISTA AL PARLAMENTO EUROPEO. INTERVISTA ELEONORA FORENZA
La Redazione
When we met Eleonora Forenza, feminist activist and candidate for European Parliament presidency, we asked Eleonora several question that affect us as feminist and European women. Eleonora answered back to our interrogations and gave us some important replies, highlighting how a feminist approach - both theoretical and practical – is so urgent for Europe today. It is necessary in order to break and dissolve the governance dispositives orienting political decision and individual everyday lives. The idea of Europe is today caught between two opposite narrative dispositives: the one of Sovereignity – neutralizing and identitarian – and the one of abstract and neutral citizenship. Europe, as an hybrid space, can lead us toward a redefinition of practices of citizenship who are not caught between the dispositives implied by the dichotomies of inclusion and exclusion. It can lead us toward citizenship as self-determination. This is what Europe can do for us. At the same time, the European space can offer to women the opportunity and fundamental right to be conflicting. The only revolution possible in these days is a revolution lead by unexpected singularities that fight together. The European struggle against violence and terrorism has not to be reduced to the building of securitarian fortresses. Europe can defy violence inside its boundaries by building spaces which are easy to cross, instead. The crossing of the European space by migrant women and men is an occasion for Europe. It questions gender-based relationships as codified by European culture and those who are codified by a different traditions at the same time. To root the idea of Europe in the migrant experience means to take into account bodies – as gendered bodies - and their materiality: what they need, what they look for, which bodies are political, which are not. That’s what the European demos has to be: a collective subjectivity made by women and men. That’s why we all have to look at feminist critical thinking in its primary role. Eleonora also gave us some brilliant insights about being both in the institutional and activist dimension of politics, explaining how to keep these two dimensions together is for her first of all a matter of responsibility and a personal and political challenge. It is an hard work of incessant translation between two ways of being into politics as a woman. As a member of FEMM commission in the EU Parliament – a commision focused on women’s right and gender equality – and as engaged in Gender Mainstreaming network inside the EU Commission on International Trade, Eleonora underlines the necessity of keeping these two different ways of being feminist in a non-hierarchical but still conflicting perspective.
IL DESIDERIO DI UN’EUROPA FEMMINISTA E UNITA
Cristina Pacella
In the peak of a crisis that is a research of identity, the European Union must identify a common conscience that defines and enables its way forward. Through a mixture of historical analysis and personal experience and perspective, this article tries to explain why this common self is mostly to be found through gendered perspective. Women’ touch can be traced back to the theoretical construction and root ideas of the unification of the old continent. At the same time we can identify a path and progression of the actions undertaken by the EU in gender politics, with the current phase known as the integration of gender perspective in each EU policy. However, is in the practical enact of this goal that the EU needs to be sustained. As women, we should increase the conscience of being a fundamental part of the EU and act in order to shape its policy on the basis of our needs and beliefs, which are mostly undeniably common.
PIECE STATISTICA SUI GENERIS
Daria Squillante
A patriarchal regime continues to exist across Europe. Even though equality between women and men is one of the European Union’s founding values, over the last 60 years the EU has not made enough progress towards fostering equality between women and men through its “equal treatment” legislation, “gender mainstreaming” or specific measures. A patriarchal regime continues to exist across Europe. Although positive socio-economic macro-trends have reduced gender-based inequalities on a multi-dimensional scale over the last decades, according to the Gender Equality Index, Europe is still only halfway there on its route towards true “equality”. A patriarchal regime continues to exist across Europe. Despite the greatness of the history and theory of feminisms, the gender regime is pervasive and enduring, confining women to the continuum of hetero-determined “gender gaps” instead of allowing them to fully explore and live according to selfdetermined “gender differences”. Welcome to a very special process, where The-Gender-Statistics is going to bear witness to how The-Gender-Difference has not been sufficiently protected by the European Union’s policy.
UNA STATISTICA FEMMINISTA ATTERRATA A VILNIUS
Anna Rita Manca
From 2011 to 2016 Anna Rita Manca worked as statistician at the European Institute for Gender Equality, where she was responsible for the development and construction of the Gender Equality Index. The Author describes her arrive in Vilnius, Lithuania with minus 30 degrees. An icy wind has invested her as she descended from the plane, the same that she found from the people in Vilnius when the European Institute for Gender Equality was founded in this city. The EIGE employees had a lot of trouble with the people in the city, and they had to struggle to affirm the importance of their work and in general gender equality. In 2015 the Gender Equality Index was finally published, permitting all Member States of the European Union to monitor the state on art about women’s condition in EU. The Index is up of six plus two domains: work, money, knowledge, time, power and health, contributing to the so-called core Index, while violence and intersectional inequalities are part of the two satellite domains, meaning not participating in the final Index score, not because they are less important than others, but because of data availability. The Index measures the absolute value differences between women and men in all domains of the core Index; that it highlights all differences no matter whether in favour of men or women. It is the first statistical tool that not only measure what can be measured, in terms of data availability, but also shows domains without comparable data such as violence against women and the intersectional inequalities. The message is that gender equality must also include these phenomena, with the hope that soon there are reliable data for effective monitoring. Built with the aim to monitor gender equality in the European Union, reflecting its priorities as it emerges from European policies. It is a robust and reliable tool because it uses data of official statistics (Eurostat) and a rigorous statistical methodology, it is also updated every two years, resulting in a certain sustainability for a serious monitoring over time.
ALLE ALTE CARICHE DELLO STATO ITALIANO E DELL’UNIONE EUROPEA, LETTERA DELLA REDAZIONE / TO THE HIGH ITALIAN AND EUROPEAN REPRESENTATIVES, LETTER FROM EDITORIAL STAFF
MIGRANTI IN ITALIA
Valentina Brinis
Who are migrant women? This article offers a broad framework that keeps into account both individual experiences and statistical data analysis in order to pinpoint those issues of integration, independence, and social disadvantages for women who are now living in Italy - between freelance and precarious jobs, and dealing with care work and mediation between their family and society. This is a precious insight, resulting from the work carried on by Valentina Brinis, Coordinator of the legal department for asylum seekers and refugees in the “A Buon Diritto” NGO, based in Rome.
L’EUROPA SIAMO NOI: UNA BAMBINA QUALUNQUE NEGLI ANNI NOVANTA
Carol

POLIEDRA

CONVERSAZIONI CON LE DONNE DI KOBANE di D.A.
After the liberation of Kobane, images of women warriors have started to be spread and became common worldwide. from the very start of this process it has been clear that those women’s eyes were trying to tell us something more than the representation created by medias. This interview offers us a space for a dialogue and a switch from our westerncentered perspective to the kurdish one. The interviewer, who had the opportunity to spend some time with kurdish women warriors, tries to clarify how these women intend self-defense, women’s strength, how they see patriarchy and how they fight against it. The kurdish women’s struggle is a struggle for every woman in the world, for women subalternity is an issue for every culture, in every moment of history. Fighting for women freedom is a fight for real democracy.

SELECTA

RECENSIONI Cutrufelli/Bonacchi; Guerrini/Fiorletta, Carocci; Venturini/Ammirati