Can you make the case that resources, political opportunities or cultural factors primarily drove the
emergence of your focus movement? If you can’t, why not?
I INTRODUCTION
How does one understand the simultaneous trajectory of a transnational social
movement in several regions around the world? Modern movements are characterized
by their tendency to extend beyond national boundaries. This paper will consider how
global factors have directly affected the transnational feminist movement, which has
inexorably gained momentum over the past century, in part because of the continuing
diffusion of ideas and norms. This paper will explore the three key concepts of political
opportunities, resource mobilization and cultural factors, discussing how the actors in
the feminist movement were aware of these influences and actively took advantage of
them to achieve their international political goals. Scholars have posited that factors
contributing to the emergence of social movements will be difficult to sustain
transnationally.1 In support of this suggestion, this paper will focus not only on the
emergence of the feminist movement but also on its long term sustainability, in order to
demonstrate the perpetual relevance of culture, resources and opportunities. Ultimately,
it will conclude that a single factor cannot be identified as the primary driver of the
movement and that culture, resources and opportunities have all been instrumental in
the history of feminism’s pursuit of social and economic justice and the struggle against
women’s subordination to men.
II RESOURCES, POLITICAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CULTURAL
FACTORS
The first key concept is the political opportunity thesis, which is rooted in the
cognizance that a movement is likely to emerge and succeed when the political
environment undergoes a transformation that the movement views as a favourable
opportunity to protest.2 As Tarrow states in Power and Movement, ‘the main argument
of this study is that people join in social movements in response to political
opportunities and then, through collective action, create new ones’.3 The basic premise
is that a group that has extensive resources and valid grievances still may not mobilize
unless there are positive openings in the political structure,4 and that external elements
affect the level of influence movements will have on policy, as well as the types of
claims and strategies they employ.5
Doug McAdam has recognized four factors of political opportunity: the political
system’s relative openness or closure, the stability of elite alignments undergirding the
Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, 2002, ‘From Santiago to Seattle: Transnational Advocacy Groups Restructuring
World Politics’, in Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks and Norms, edited by
Khagram et al, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002)13.
2 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory: The case of eugenics’, Theory and Society (2004):
490.
3 Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1994), 17-18.
4 Jeff Goodwin, James M. Jasper, and Jaswinder Khattra, ‘Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias
of Political Process Theory’, Sociological Forum, Vol 14 No 1 (1999): 30.
5 David Meyer and Debra Minkoff, ‘Conceptualizing Political Opportunity’ Social Forces, 82(4) (2004) 1457-1458.
1
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
polity, the presence of elite allies, and capacity and propensity for repression. 6 In terms
of openness, the world polity is more permeable than the institutional avenues of the
state, as movements can work to change the system from inside it by becoming part of
the non-governmental organisation structure.7 Unfortunately for the political
opportunity theory, scholars have struggled to agree on standard definitions on some of
its concepts, for example, it can be difficult to distinguish the elite allies as an
opportunity from elite allies as a resource. However, it is generally accepted that global
political opportunities exist when a movement discovers possible allies or new
institutional access channels, or when the world polity is affected by significant
instability, such as a world war.8
The second concept, resource mobilization, emphasises that the formation and
mobilization of movements requires resources and group organization for the collective
action that is the hallmark of social movements: large gatherings of people who
publicize a claim in a controversial or dramatic way.9 At the heart of this theory is that
social movements simply cannot engage in organized protest without sufficient
resources, whether they are outside contributors or allies, funding, the members
themselves, or the communication tools that support social networks over large
geographical areas. Key resources include platforms on which to expose state behaviour
to international scrutiny,10 and also transnational expertise to legitimize claims on a
national level.11
This paper will consider the third and final key concept, cultural factors, from two
perspectives. Firstly, in the sense of cultural framing of ideas by social movements and
secondly, as the cultural background against which movements operate. McAdam et al
explain that movements create and recreate meaning through ‘framing’, the ‘strategic
efforts by groups of people to fashion shared understandings of the world and of
themselves that legitimate ad motivate collective action’.12 Framing refers to the ways
movements present and persuasively communicate their claims in order to convert
others to their cause.13 Goodwin asserts that a group or individual must know who they
are before they can decide what their interests are and so cultural factors encompass the
‘collective identities, grievances, goals, repertoires of contention, and the sense of
efficacy or empowerment’ possessed by a particular movement.14
Barrett and Kurzman discuss the development of the notion of the world as a single
place and the accompanying proliferation of norms intended to apply to the world as a
Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 492.
Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 492.
8 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 494.
9 Carol Mueller, Salvatore J. Restifo, and Julie Fox Restifo, ‘Liberal States and Print Media Coverage of Global
Advocacy Events: The Case of the UN Beijing Conference for Women’, Comparative Sociology 11 (2012): 117.
10 Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, ‘From Santiago to Seattle’, 16.
11 Kathrin Zippel, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union: The Case of Sexual
Harassment’, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society 11.1 (2004): 62.
12 Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, Mayer N. Zald, Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political
Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996): 6.
13 Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, ‘From Santiago to Seattle’, 12.
14 Goodwin, Jasper, and Khattra, ‘Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine’, 46.
6
7
2
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
whole.15 These norms are defined as ‘shared expectations held by a community of
actors about appropriate behaviour for actors with a given identity’ and the primary aim
of social movements is the institutionalization and monitoring of such norms. 16 Global
culture is relevant to the attempts of movements to ensure their message resonates with
shared values and understandings and will thereby attract popular support.17
III FIRST WAVE OF TRANSNATIONAL MOBILIZATION (1880-1930)
During this period in feminisms’ history, political opportunities and cultural factors
were the primary drivers of the movement’s emergence. This is because, although
women had substantial grievances, the lack of funds made travel, meetings and
communication between states difficult. Also, at this point in time resources such as
male conscience constituencies and transnational expertise were in short supply.
A Political Opportunities
Before the First World War, the world lacked a permanent and universal international
governing organization such as the League of Nations or the United Nations.18 The
world polity was restricted by inter-state disputes, lack of resources and IGOs with
insufficient authority to facilitate multilateral treaties between states.19 However, the
trauma of World War One prompted the formation of the League of Nations, the
overarching aim of which was to ensure that the atrocities of international warfare
would never be repeated. Beneath the League’s umbrella gathered many public and
private bodies in addition to states, generating the ‘emergence of a universal society’
and sparking the beginnings of economic globalization.20
The women of the world saw this developing world polity as a political opportunity,
and the first ever women’s transnational movement, Association Internationale des
Femmes, was formed in 1868. Winning women the right to vote was the focus of the
first wave of international women’s mobilization but organizations concentrated on a
wide range of contexts and issues including temperance, peace, equal pay and
education, religious and social welfare issues.21 Women wanted the ability to assert
themselves on a wide variety of issues, and not just in the West. This transnational
influence was absorbed by local movement in countries like Japan, China, India and
Chile in distinct ways according to their own nation’s circumstances. 22 Decolonization
proved to be a major political opportunity for the feminist movement as it helped to
spread the suffrage struggle around the world from its origins in the Pacific and
Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 489.
Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, ‘From Santiago to Seattle’, 12.
17 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 489.
18 Note: Membership to the United Nations is by no means ‘universal’ but for the present purpose it’s influence is
such that it can almost be considered so.
19 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 500.
20 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 500.
21Aili Mari Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms: Consensus, conflict, and new dynamics’, in Global
Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and
Tripp, Aili Mari. (New York: New York University Press, 2006), 55.
22 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 56.
15
16
3
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Europe.23 However, international mobilization became obstructed from the 1930s by
fascism, the Great Depression and the outbreak of the First World War in 1939.24 All
things considered, the swelling numbers of international organization afforded the
movement increased opportunities, but overall the level of political opportunity for
women’s groups remained low during this period.
B Cultural Factors
The development of the world polity at the turn of the twentieth century was
concomitant with an evolution in global culture regarding ideas of both statehood and
personhood. Citizens began to expect that instead of just defence, regulation and tax,
governments would also intervene in heretofore private realms in order to improve
standards of living.25 Many social movements, including feminism, sought recourse
from the state to achieve their aims. In terms of personhood, in most states only wealthy
adult males held full citizenship and could vote and they were the ones running
governments and the few international organizations constituting the world polity.26
These conditions continued past the First World War for the vast majority of countries,
perpetuating an adverse environment for feminism.
Despite this, suffrage was a concept that appealed to women the world over,
transcending national boundaries.27 Before decolonization, women from the West
worked with colonised women to improve legal status and political representation as
well as health and education.28 The world wars put enormous pressures on this female
solidarity, with some organizations divided by nationalism and patriotism conflicting
with feminism.29 After the wars, transnational mobilization began once again to unify,
focused on democracy and peace building. Significantly, however, the suffrage victory
in the global North slowed down the momentum of women’s movements in these
regions. As will be discussed in more detail later, achieving goals can lead to a lack of
incentive to continue mobilizing. For the global South though, woman’s rights
movements were ramping up.
IV SECOND WAVE OF TRANSNATIONAL MOBILIZATION (1945-1975)
The second phase of transnational mobilization saw a dramatic increase in the number
of women’s organizations around the world, which would tend to indicate that global
conditions were favourable to the feminist movement. Following the Second World
War, the numbers of IGOs and NGOs also exploded and the world polity was indelibly
reconfigured with the formation of the United Nations, which vowed to ‘employ
international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of
all peoples’. The UN constructed a ‘bureaucratic machine’ of IGOs, such as the
Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 56.
Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 57.
25 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 502.
26 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 507.
27 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms,’ 56.
28 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms,’ 58.
29 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 57.
23
24
4
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Commission on the Status of Women, which furnished social movements with a
rallying point.30 The 1960s and 1970s were defined by development, the rise of
feminism in the global South and also contestation about the meaning of ‘feminism’
and ‘development’.31
A Political Opportunities
The new wave of international women’s mobilization was by and large comprised of
feminist organization set up in the 1970s and 1980s ‘on the heels of the flurry of
contemporary feminist activities in the 1960s’ in America.32 However, scholars and
activists have been at pains to demonstrate that these organisations were established
simultaneously, but independent of, their American and European counterparts. Diana
Khor explains that foreign influences probably inspired momentum in these groups but
that the movements themselves were the product of the local political, economic, and
cultural contexts.33 She lists as example the authoritarianism of Latin American
countries, cultural imperialism in Southeast Asia, and independent nation building in
Africa.
Why did so many women’s movements sprout up contemporaneously? Undoubtedly, it
was due to the prevalent political opportunities that accompanied the creation of the UN
and the burgeoning numbers of new independent UN member states. Margaret Snyder
suggests that the UN became an ‘unlikely godmother’ for the feminist movement,
offering a platform for agenda-setting, policymaking, legislation, discussion, research
and the pursuit of justice.34 In the words of Myra Marx Ferree:35
…United Nations’ structures gave political voice to otherwise weak
states and perspectives, the concerns of women from the global South
could be brought to the attention of more privileged women and raise
their consciousness….the structure of representation makes a huge
difference in just whose concerns are heard and how the overall
agenda is set at the global level…United Nations structures were
suitable to be actively used to create empowerment opportunities for
women, a clear case of co-opting and changing the UN as an
institution…
Conscious of the fact that the longevity of a movement can only be ensured when it is
supported and promoted by institutions, UNIFEM and the International Research and
Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 510 -511.
Amrita Basu, ‘Globalization of the Local/Localization of the Global Mapping Transnational Women’s
Movements’ Meridians Vol 1, No 1 (2000): 70.
32 Khor, Diana, ‘Organizing for Change, Women’s Grassroots Activism in Japan’, Feminist Studies; (1999): 644.
33 Khor, ‘Organizing for Change’, 644.
34 Margaret Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother: The UN and the Global Women’s Movement’, in Global Feminism:
Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and Tripp, Aili Mari.
(New York, New York University Press, 2006): 24.
35 Myra Marx Ferree, ‘Globalization and Feminism: Opportunities and Obstacles for Activism in the Global Arena’,
in Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx
and Tripp, Aili Mari. (New York: New York University Press, 2006): 17.
30
31
5
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Training Institute for the Advancement of Women were created at the first global
conference on women in 1975.36 The Commission on the Status of Women and the
Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women afforded individuals,
as well as transnational organizations a way through which to lobby for women’s
rights.37
B Resources
In terms of resources, the feminist movement was bolstered during this period by
increasing evidence that women are central to the economic life of their nations. 38 The
United Nations conferences beginning in 1975 were hugely important for enabling
discussion and raising public awareness. It became easier for movements to publish and
distribute supportive materials, for example in translated copies of Our Bodies, Our
Selves by the Boston Women’s Health Book Collective provided Japanese women with
information about claiming knowledge about women’s bodies for themselves.39
Unfortunately, this period also exhibited tensions between women from the South and
women from the North when it came to identifying shared grievances. Northern women
stressed transnational identities and interests such as equality in the home and
employment, whereas women in the South argued that equality between men and
women cannot be achieve while whole societies are still oppressed.40
C Cultural Factors
Post-World War II global culture worked vehemently against the ‘exclusivist and
hierarchical ideology of personhood’ that had dominated only a few decades before.41
Citizens continued to expect state intervention in society, but now gender equity
became an aim for social improvement. 42 The United Nations Declaration of Human
Rights declared the sanctity and equality of rights, including the right to be free from
discrimination on the ground of sex. A development plan emphasising improved quality
of life for all replaced the notion that newly independent countries would industrialise
and benefits would percolate down to all citizens.43
A key cultural framing development was the movement’s innovation to frame women’s
status as a human rights issue, which began with the Commission on the Status of
Women and eventually culminated in the UN General Assembly adopting the
Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 23.
Karen Brown Thompson, ‘Women’s Rights are Human Rights’, in Restructuring World Politics: Transnational
Social Movements, Networks and Norms, Khagram, Riker and Sikkink. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
2002): 97.
38 Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 26.
39 Khor, ‘Organizing for Change’, 643.
40 Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 32.
41 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 512.
42 Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory’, 511.
43 Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 29.
36
37
6
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in 1979, the
International Women’s Year in 1975 and the Decade for Women.44
Also instrumental was the framing of feminist arguments within critique of whole sets
of cultural values within societies, which reflected the refusal of women to treat gender
inequality as distinct from other injustices.45 By 1985, the global cultural background
had been realigned to such an extent that women in the global South were the real
drivers behind the transnational feminist movement, lending legitimacy and greater
voice to developing countries.46
V THIRD WAVE OF TRANSNATIONAL WOMEN’S MOBILIZATION
(1985-2013)
By the beginning of the third phase of mobilization, the conflicts over agenda-setting
had mostly been resolved, with global development and gender equality being accepted
as relevant concerns by women in the South and North respectively. 47 During the Cold
War, socialist states had co-opted women’s liberation as a communist achievement,
with the unfortunate result that Western democracies felt they had to oppose it.
Ironically, in the present war on terror it is the Western states that claim feminism as
one of their highest accomplishments.48
A Political Opportunities
According to Mueller et al, ‘the opening and closing of media attention is a crucial
element in defining political opportunities for movements’.49 They argue that not only
are International Women’s Year conferences good platforms for discourse and
lobbying, but they are also an opportunity for movements to tell the world they exist
and have successfully mobilised. The conferences in Copenhagen and Nairobi in 1980
and 1985 also proffered the opportunity to increase the transnational networks’ focus on
violence against women, which had been developing since 1974 when Isis was
created.50
Flexible and open channels of opportunity, Kathrin Zippel argues, were enabled by the
European Union, which, as a nascent supranational organization was less
institutionalized than states.51 52She explains that the interaction between those inside
and outside the system have permitted the new institutionalization through EU experts
and equal opportunity committees, commenting that ‘friendly’ members of the
Parliament and Commission have further assisted the feminist cause.
Brown Thompson, ‘Women’s Rights are Human Rights’, 97-98.
Khor, ‘Organizing for Change’, 646.
46 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 60.
47 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 62.
48 Ferree, ‘Globalization and Feminism: Opportunities and Obstacles for Activism in the Global Arena’, 14.
49 Mueller et al, ‘Liberal States and Print Media Coverage of Global Advocacy Events,’ 19.
50 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 62.
51 Zippel, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union’.
52 Zippel, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union’.
44
45
7
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Regrettably, globalisation during this period has had a negative effect on political
openness. The economic integration of national economies caused by the falling cost of
distance restricts the policy discretion of states by forcing them to cut social
expenditure in attempts to remain competitive with international markets.53 The
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank prioritised the market economy over
equity goals and Margaret Snyder remarks that this, combined with increased
conditions on loans to developing countries, caused them to become ‘not unlikely
godmothers [like the United Nations] but evil stepmothers!’54
B Resources
The third wave of feminism is when resources really became a significant driver behind
mobilization. After the 1990s, global networking became much easier and less
expensive, with cheaper airfares, Email, Internet and new communication
technologies.55 The mass media have continued to be essential to the success of
transnational social movements and protest. Perhaps the most startling development has
been the way social media has revolutionised world protest. Ordinary people now have
fast, constant access to the global audience and it is infinitely easier for movements to
convey their messages and form links with other actors in the international community.
Resources continue to flow primarily from the North to the South, as women’s
organizations in the South are heavily reliant on financial support from Northern
affiliates and conscience contributors.56 New foundations have made funding available
in the human rights arena and innovative fundraising endeavours are expanding, such as
the “34 Million Friends” campaign started by Lois Abraham and Jane Roberts in 2002
to get people to donate one dollar each to make up the money that President Bush cut
from the United Nations Population Fund.57 Transnational expertise remains influential,
for example, Michael Rubenstein’s study ‘Dignity of Women at Work’ was an
instrumental tool in the fight against sexual harassment, which culminated in the 2002
EU Directive prohibiting sexual harassment.58
There have been numerous legal and legislative gains since 1985, including the 1995
United Nations Beijing Platform for Action, the 1996 International Labour Organisation
Convention on Homeworkers, the 1999 UN Jomtien resolution on Education for All,
and the 2000 UN SC Res 1325 on the participation of women in peace-building, which
includes women in negotiations and peacekeeping missions.59 Most western countries
can now boast of equal access law and abortion rights, and women’s policy machinery
53
Brian Easton, Globalisation and the Wealth of Nations (Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2007):2.
Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 24.
55 Mueller et al, ‘Liberal States and Print Media Coverage of Global Advocacy Events,’ 114.
56 Basu, ‘Globalization of the Local/Localization of the Global Mapping Transnational Women’s Movements’, 7273.
57 Aili Mari Tripp, ‘Challenges in Transnational Feminist Mobilization’, in Global Feminism: Transnational
Women’s Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and Tripp, Aili Mari. (New York:
New York University Press, 2006): 296.
58 Zippel, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union’.
59 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 65.
54
8
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
has been established in most countries.60 It is important to note, however that such
policy machinery is a tool that requires constant use, and ministries of women’s affairs,
for example, do not achieve feminist goals just by the fact of their existence.61
C Cultural Factors
The paramount cultural achievement of the women’s movement during the 1990s was
the framing of women’s rights as human rights, and violence against women as a
violation of those human rights. An apt example of successful cultural framing is the
way the women’s movement framed sexual harassment as a threat to working
conditions, and therefore an economic problem, in order to make the EU recognise it as
a legitimate concern.62 Human rights had already been accepted as an international
norm, and violence against women became absorbed into this rhetoric. Women’s
movements become increasingly international when they appeal to universally held
values and human rights principles.63 Sati, female genital cutting, and dowry death were
no longer viewed as ‘exotic practice signifying the primitive nature of national cultures’
and the definition of violence against women grew to include economic deprivation,
war, environmental degradation and political oppression.64
The twenty-first century heralded the coming together of two key facets of the global
women’s movement: development issues and human rights concerns.65 The norm of
state responsibility for the status of women is firmly established and gendering human
rights discourse has insured the position of women on the international agenda.66 The
greatest cultural challenge facing the movement today is the loss of momentum
experienced by many women’s movements in the North. Snyder speculates that this
could be because young women take for granted the gains their mothers made in
employment and in the home.67 Young western women especially do not wish to
describe themselves as ‘feminist’, identifying the concept as hostile to men, sexless and
judgmental of young women.68
VI CONCLUSION
Naomi Wolf, ‘How we can connect with feminism’s global future’, The Guardian, 14 March 2012,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/14/ connect-feminism-global-future.
61 Ferree, ‘Globalization and Feminism: Opportunities and Obstacles for Activism in the Global Arena’, 12.
62 Zippel, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the European Union’.
63 Basu, ‘Globalization of the Local/Localization of the Global Mapping Transnational Women’s Movements’, 73.
64 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 62.
65 Tripp, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms’, 63.
66 Brown Thompson, ‘Women’s Rights are Human Rights’, 118.
60
67
Snyder, ‘Unlikely Godmother’, 47.
68
Naomi Wolf, ‘How we can connect with feminism’s global future’, The Guardian, 14 March 2012,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/14/ connect-feminism-global-future.
9
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
So how does one understand the simultaneous trajectory of a transnational social
movement in several regions around the world? This paper has demonstrated the
significance of political opportunities, resources and cultural factors for the emergence
and sustenance of the feminist movement. The distinctions drawn between the three
factors can lead to misunderstanding about the relationship between them. This paper
testifies that the feminist movement could not have progressed without sufficient
resources, or without a dense international arena to support it. Nor could it have
survived without culture mediating between them, ‘an ubiquitous and constitutive
dimension of all social relations, structures, networks and practices’.69
Yes, the feminist movement has proved to be enduring but work remains to be done.
There is continuing polarization on controversial issues such as abortion, sex trafficking
and lesbian rights. There is no question that global feminism is now a phenomenon
based in the global South, as women’s movements in the North have grown
complacent. If feminist goals are to be achieved in future, the organizations of the North
will have to be proactive in garnering support and resources, revolutionising the
feminist culture and consciously identifying political opportunities.
69
Goodwin, Jasper, and Khattra, ‘Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine’, 47.
10
Grace Blanks
Non-State Actors in World Politics
Bibliography

Armstrong, Elizabeth and Bernstein, Mary, ‘Culture, Power and Institutions: A
Multi-Institutional Politics Approach to Social Movements’, Sociological
Theory 26, (2008) 74-99.

Barrett and Kurzman, ‘Globalizing Social Movement Theory: The case of
eugenics’, Theory and Society (2004) 487-527.

Basu, Amrita ‘Globalization of the Local/Localization of the Global Mapping
Transnational Women’s Movements’ Meridians Vol 1, No 1 (2000) 68-84.

Brown Thompson, Karen, ‘Women’s Rights are Human Rights’, in
Restructuring World Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks and
Norms, Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, 96-122. Minneapolis, University of
Minnesota Press, 2002.

Buckley S, Broken Silence: Voices of Japanese Feminism. Berkeley, University
of California Press, 1997.

Brian Easton, Globalisation and the Wealth of Nations Auckland: Auckland
University Press, 2007.

Ferree, Myra Marx, ‘Globalization and Feminism: Opportunities and Obstacles
for Activism in the Global Arena’, in Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s
Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and
Tripp, Aili Mari 3-23. New York, New York University Press, 2006.

Goodwin, Jeff, Jasper, James M., and Khattra, Jaswinder, ‘Caught in a Winding,
Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory’, Sociological
Forum, Vol 14 No 1 (1999) 27-54.

Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, 2002, ‘From Santiago to Seattle: Transnational
Advocacy Groups Restructuring World Politics’, in Restructuring World
Politics: Transnational Social Movements, Networks and Norms, edited by
Khagram et al, 11-17. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2002.

Khor, Diana, ‘Organizing for Change, Women’s Grassroots Activism in Japan’,
Feminist Studies; (1999) 633-661.

McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John D., Zald, Mayer N., Comparative
Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing
Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1996.
11
Grace Blanks

Non-State Actors in World Politics
Meyer, David and Minkoff, Debra, ‘Conceptualizing Political Opportunity’
Social Forces, 82(4) (2004) 1457-1492.

Mueller, Carol, Restifo, Salvatore J., and Restifo, Julie Fox, ‘Liberal States and
Print Media Coverage of Global Advocacy Events: The Case of the UN Beijing
Conference for Women’, Comparative Sociology 11 (2012) 113-139.

Snyder, Margaret, ‘Unlikely Godmother: The UN and the Global Women’s
Movement’, in Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing
and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and Tripp, Aili Mari. 296-312.
New York, New York University Press, 2006.

Tarrow, Sidney, Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious
Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Tripp, Aili Mari, ‘Challenges in Transnational Feminist Mobilization’, in Global
Feminism: Transnational Women’s Activism, Organizing and Human Rights,
edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and Tripp, Aili Mari. 24-50. New York, New York
University Press, 2006.

Tripp, Aili Mari, ‘The Evolution of Transnational Feminisms: Consensus,
conflict, and new dynamics’, in Global Feminism: Transnational Women’s
Activism, Organizing and Human Rights, edited by Ferree, Myra Marx and
Tripp, Aili Mari. 51-75. New York, New York University Press, 2006.

Wolf, Naomi, ‘How we can connect with feminism’s global future’, The
Guardian, 14 March 2012,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/14/
connect-
feminism-global-future.

Zippel, Kathrin, ‘Transnational Advocacy Networks and Policy Cycles in the
European Union: The Case of Sexual Harassment’, Social Politics:
International Studies in Gender, State and Society 11.1 (2004) 57-85.
12