Sensing Dispossession: Women and Gender Studies Between Institutional Racism and Migration Control...

Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

WSIF-01873; No of Pages 11

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Women's Studies International Forum

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate /ws i f

Sensing dispossession: Women and gender studies betweeninstitutional racism and migration control policies in theneoliberal university☆

Encarnación Gutiérrez-RodríguezJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen, Institut für Soziologie, Karl-Glöckner-Str. 21E, D-35394 Gießen, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

☆ I would like to thankMia Liinason, SabineGrenz, theand Shirley Anne Tate for their thorough observatioprevious versions of this article.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2015.06.0130277-5395/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Encarnación Ginstitutional racism and migration..., Wom

s y n o p s i s

Available online xxxx
This paper discusses the positioning of Women and Gender Studies (WGS) and Gender Studies(GS) within the neoliberal university by focusing particularly on the dynamics of exclusionresulting from institutional racism and migration control policies in British and Germanuniversities. From this angle, the article first discusses the place of WGS/GS within the neoliberaluniversity. In a second step, it looks at critical race debates regarding universities as sites ofhegemonic Whiteness in Germany and the UK. Following this, it discusses the institutionaldiscriminatory effects of migration policies in universities' within a broader context. In a fourthstep, it examines the affective economy of these policies. In this sense, the article explores thefeeling of dispossession transmitted and impressed by migration control policies. It concludeswith some thoughts on relating WGS/GS to the project of building the anti-racist university.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

In 1994 theWorld Bank's strategy paper noted the relevanceof the education sector for the global economy and recom-mended the introduction of tuition fees as well as a loan systemfor students (Hartmann, 2003). No one anticipated at this pointthe speed with which this advice would be followed in highereducation institutions (HEIs) globally. Since then the marketi-zation of education has advanced enormously, taking differentdirections and bifurcations. Privately funded universities in theUnited States and public universities in the United Kingdomwere among the first to engage with this process (Pusser &Marginson, 2013). Here the degree of commodification ofeducation and research has long surpassed the liberal humanistmission of critical education (Apple, 2006, 2010). Instead,education has become a commodity, an exchange good in acompetitive and precarious labor market (Burch, 2009). Borne

anonymous reviewersns and comments on

utiérrez-Rodríguez, Senen's Studies Internationa

by the neoliberal conviction that a good education can only beprivately funded and that free higher education is a relic ofobsolete European Welfare States, this development is guidedby a competitive market agenda (Ball, 2012).

Though emerging from a liberal universal principle ofintercultural learning, set in this context, the internationalizationambitions of universities, are increasingly geared towards profit-oriented goals. Universities in the United States (US), UnitedKingdom (UK), Australia, but also France, the Netherlands andmore recently Germany, have developedmarketing strategies inorder to attract international students (King & Raghuram, 2013).Researchers studying professional global flows, have drawnattention to the increasing international student migration/mobility (IMS) triggered through this development (Bhandari &Laughlin, 2009; Brooks &Waters, 2011; Byram & Dervin, 2008).While this process has been initially promoted by a fine-tuningof migration laws, as King and Raghuram (2013, p. 130) note,after 9/11 and 7/7 “the two main global recruiters of interna-tional students— the US and the UK” have restricted their entryand immigration requirements for international students andacademics.

sing dispossession: Women and gender studies betweenl Forum (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2015.06.013

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2015.06.013

Journal logo


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02775395

Imprint logo


2 E. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Departing from these observations, this article focuses on theimpact of migration control policies on racialized andminoritized international (RMI) students and academics inBritish and German universities. It does so by exploring thisquestion within the context of Women and Gender Studies(WGS) and Gender Studies (GS). WGS and GS tend to attractmainly postgraduate and research students on an internationallevel and represent an attractive sector of employment forinternational academics. Following this argument, the articlefirst discusses the place of WGS/GS within the neoliberaluniversity. In a second step, it looks at critical race debatesregarding universities as site of hegemonic Whiteness inGermany and theUK. Following this, it discusses the institutionaldiscriminatory effects of migration policies in universities'within a broader context. In a fourth step, it examines theaffective economy of these policies. By drawing attention toaffect, this paper stresses how policies do not only govern andregulate social spaces and relations, but also “stick” (Ahmed,2004) to bodies, materializing the emotional injuriesexperienced. In this sense, the article explores the feelingof dispossession transmitted and impressed by migrationcontrol policies. It concludes with some thoughts onrelating WGS/GS to the project of building the anti-racistuniversity.

Theoretically, the article draws on feminist debates on thedismantling and transformation of WGS and GS programs inthe neoliberal university (c.f. Ahmed, 2012; Baird, 2010;Campbell & McCready, 2014; Kahlert, 2007; Liinason, 2011;Nash, 2013; Newson, 2012; Pereira, 2015; Probyn, 2004),affective economy of race (Tate, 2012, 2014), the coloniality ofpower (Quijano, 2000, 2008) and the analysis of institutionalracism in HEIs (Cole, 2009; Law, Turney, & Phillips, 2004).Methodologically, this paper is less interested in discussingsolutions and findings based on a representative empiricalstudy than sharing observations and raising questions. Prelim-inary observations are made on two levels. First, on the basis ofthe discussion of policies, events and studies, some tendenciesin regard to institutional racism and migration policies inBritish andGerman universities are traced. Second, on the basison an on-going small-scale pilot ethnography on affect andinstitutional racism in HEIs, some preliminary thoughts areshared on the feelings of dispossession. This study is based onparticipant observation and conversations with internationaland post/migrant academics employed in WGS/GS programs.The study is not limited to a specific status group of academics,although the respondents introduced in this article are at earlycareer stage. My research relationship to the participants iscrossed by different gendered racialized inequalities, but alsoaffinities. The encounters with the research participants werebased on what I have discussed elsewhere as transculturaltranslation (Gutiérrez Rodríguez, 2006; 2010a). As a daughterof working-class Andalusian migrants in Germany, I haveexperienced institutional discrimination at school and in theuniversity1 Yet, as a White EU citizen, I am not targeted byracism and European migration policies. The encounters withthe research respondents acknowledged these complexities.They shared their stories with me in order to make thempublic. In this sense, the ethical principle followed in thisethnography is one embracing Fals Borda (2013), Precarias a laDeriva (2004) and O'Neill and Hubbard's (2010) attempt tocircumvent a heterogeneous contradictory common place of

Please cite this article as: Encarnación Gutiérrez-Rodríguez, Seninstitutional racism and migration..., Women's Studies Internationa

departure from where an analysis of social injustice and apolitical vision for social justice can be delineated.

Women and gender studies: inside/outside theneoliberal university

Research addressing the marketization of education, and inparticular the commodification of secondary and tertiaryeducation (Kauppinen, 2012; Massey, 2004; Santos, 2010),has drawn attention to the development of academic capital-ism (Education Commission Report 1, Foot in the Door. Profitand Public Education, 2012; Rhoades and Slaughter, 2004;Slaughter & Leslie, 1997, 2001; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2000).Focusing on the impact of this development, research in thisfield has focused on questions of curricula (Apple, 2006, 2014),the implementation of neoliberal policies (Ball, 2007), theinterplay between market and education (Pusser, Kempner,Marginson, & Ordorika, 2012), the institutional impact of auditculture (Shore & Wright, 1999) and the production of“neoliberal academic subjectivities” (Ball, 2012).

Though this research has deepened our understanding ofthe entanglement between education, politics and markets,little consideration has been given in this literature to howgendered racialized inequalities are reshuffled within theneoliberal university. In order to address this question, let usstart by situating the establishment of WGS and GS programswithin the broader context of the transformation of theuniversity in the last decades. This process is determined bythree moments. First, the Bologna agreement (1999) intro-duced a common shared European three year modularizedBachelor's degree in order to create comparable and EU-widequality standards for higher education qualifications (Alesi &Kehm, 2010). Second, the increasing public spending cuts ineducation resulting from the implementation of austeritypolicies, characterizing the state measures of post-2008financial crisis societies. Third, the already mentioned increas-ing marketization of public education initiated in the 1990s(Ball, 2007; Hartmann, 2003; Kauppinen, 2014; Sappey, 2005).In this context, market-driven learning formats, audit-cultureand branding, have been fostered (Maskovsky, 2012; Sayer,2014; Spivak, 2012). Further, the orientation towards interna-tional league table rankings, in which the parameters ofresearch quality and institutional reputation are set by leadingUS and UK universities (Pusser & Marginson, 2013), indirectlyimpose a standardized model of measuring research qualitythrough income, outputs and impact. These institutions arecharacterized by selective admission practices, an internationalfaculty and student body, a considerable volume of researchrevenue and significant publication outputs in internationalhigh impact journals (predominantly 167 US and UK journals).Further, these institutions champion the establishment of eliteprofessional schools as well as make high investments inscience and technology. Occupying the first 100 positions in theglobal league tables, these institutions serve as benchmarks foruniversities competing in the globalmarket in higher education(Pusser & Marginson, 2013). In Britain, for example, positionsin league tables inform state funding decisions, leading in somecases to severe cuts in areas classified as less financiallysustainable. This particularly affects disciplines in Arts andHumanities (Lynch, 2010; Spivak, 2012) and to some extent themore exploratory, ethnographic and qualitative Social Sciences



3E. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

(Chatterton, Hodkinson, & Pickerill, 2010; MacGregor, 2012;Rice, 2011).

Set at the juncture of the Humanities and Social Sciences,Women and Gender Studies (WGS) programs also experiencechallenges. This is even though the incorporation of diversitypolicies into the neoliberal university's management agendahas promoted to some extent the creation of Gender Studies(GS) programs. Some universities in the UK and Germany havesupported the establishment of teaching and research pro-grams in Gender Studies. Despite the different degrees ofinstitutionalization of these programs,WGS/GS programs formpart of the areas of study in the university, frequently targetedby closure or restructuring measures transforming distinctiveareas of research and teaching to amorphous interdisciplinarity(Liinason, 2011; Pereira, 2015). Organized as interdisciplinarystudies, what lies behind the disciplinary dispersion ofWGS/GSis the allocation of permanent staff, space and resources.Mostlybased on a precarious infrastructure,WGS/GS teaching deliveryis often organized by faculty employed in other disciplines andan increasing group of temporaryworkers, composedmainly ofa female, racialized local and international body of adjuncts andtemporary lecturers and researchers held on the lowest paygrade.

The location of WGS/GS programs in the neoliberal univer-sity, thus, reveals an ambivalent positioning. If they contribute touniversity revenue streams theymight be considered an area forinvestment. What is interesting in this regard is the focus ongender in these programs. While there might be a theoreticalrationale for the change fromWGS to GS, the incorporation of GSinto the neoliberal university's governance agenda is indicativeof a shift froma feminist to a technocratic perspective in this areaof study. Nevertheless, the establishment of these programs stillrepresents a field of political struggle as the anti-feminist attackson WGS/GS programs in Scandinavia and Germany havedemonstrated in the recent years.2 Thus, the institutionalconsolidation of GS programs is subjected to political conjunc-tures and needs to be discussed in a broader social context.

While the literature on the restructuring of WGS/GS inneoliberal times has widely acknowledged and produced adetailed analysis of this briefly sketched scenario (c.f. Baird,2010; Campbell & McCready, 2014; Kahlert, 2007; Nash, 2013;Newson, 2012; Pereira, 2015), they have given little attention tothe question here at hand. As institutions marked by socialinequalities, universities have been and remain, primarilygoverned and led by national White male/female elites (cf.,Christian, 2012; Mählck, 2013; Mohammad et al., 2013; Smith,2013; Sow, 2014). WGS/ GS programs are not an exception tothis. In Germany and Britain professorial positions are mainlyheld by White female national citizens. Further, the neoliberaluniversity is shaped by migration control policies. The questionof the institutionalization ofWGS/GS in the neoliberal universityneeds to be assessed in this light.

White national (male) elites and the neoliberal university

In recent years debates regarding the neoliberal universityhave turned attention to institutional racism in academia(Ahmed, 2012; Christian, 2012; Lee & Cantwell, 2012). Whilethe perspective on institutional racism might have someshortcomings in understanding the cultural predication andeveryday dimension of racism (Essed, 1991; Tate, 2012, 2014),


it sharpens our view on institutional practices of discriminationand social exclusion (Cole, 2009; Law et al., 2004). AsMike Cole(2009) notes, the analysis of institutional racism is not onlyinterested in the mere structural dimension of racism, but itparticularly highlights the intersections between everyday andinstitutional practices. Thus, the analysis of institutional racismimplies an examination of

“collective acts and/or procedures in an institution orinstitutions (locally, nation-wide, continent-wider or glob-ally) that intentionally or unintentionally have the effect ofracializing, via ‘common sense’, certain populations orgroups of people. This racialization process cannot beunderstood without reference to economic and politicalfactors related to developments and changes in national,continental-wide and global capitalism.”

[Cole, 2009, 91–92]

The analysis of institutional racism in universities raisesquestions in regard to mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion.These mechanisms operate on the basis of a power matrix, thecoloniality of power3 (Quijano, 2000, 2008), deriving from acolonial pattern of thinking, producing social hierarchiesthrough racialization. Since colonial times, this pattern ofracialization has been altered through specific historical regionalcontingencies. The racial stratification of society is not explicitlyimposed by an administration or jurisdiction in contemporarysocieties. However, it is recreated through subtle institutionalpractices favoring the access of the White national affluentpopulation to leading economic positions aswell as political andcultural representation. Further, as we will see in regard to theimplementation of migration control policies in universities,while not explicitly operating within a racial matrix, the logic ofdifferentiation that they establish reproduces social hierarchiesreflecting and reinforcing processes of racialization.

As sites guaranteeing the institutionalization of knowledgeproduction, universities are strategic loci for the establishmentof cultural hegemony (Bourdieu, 1988; Pusser & Marginson,2013). As I have discussed elsewhere (Gutiérrez Rodríguez,2010b) in reference to Bourdieu's Homo Academicus, universi-ties reflect deeply entrenched social inequalities marked byclass, race, disability and migration. Thus, universities reflectthe inherent social inequalities within the nation state.When itcomes to German and British state universities, what becomesapparent is the class and racial stratification of these institu-tions. Mainly recruiting from White national affluent groups,these institutions are privileged sites for the reproduction ofWhite national elites (Pusser & Marginson, 2013).

Therefore, the analysis of the restructuring of the universitycannot just be confined to an economic question. Rather, thenegotiations around public spending cuts and austeritymeasures reveal an ideological dimension (Apple, 2010).Thus, behind the restructuring of the neoliberal universitymay lie political interests related to ideological projects (Apple,2012; Ball, 2012; Maskovsky, 2012). It is in this regard thatdiscussions on gender and diversity deserve some attention(Ahmed, 2011). “Diversity” has been at the centre of manage-rial strategies in British universities for some time and it isincreasingly being included in the strategic development plansof German universities. In the British context the principle ofdiversity prescribes an institutional goal. What this allows is a




token representation of White women and members of BlackMinority Ethnic (BME)4 groups. Nonetheless, the limitedinclusion of women and national minorities into leadingmanagement and research positions, precludes the fact thatstructurally very little has changed in the feminized and racialdivision of work in universities.

While in the last decade gender equality measures inGerman and British universities have resulted in a moderateincrease in female professors, they tend to beWhite and belongto the national elite or middle class. Members of BME groups,People of Colour (POC) and post/migrant groups are hardlyrepresented in professorial positions. As a recent report of theUniversity and College Union (UCU) in the UK has shown, only85 of the UK's 18,500 professors are Black and only 17 are Blackwomen (UCL, 2014; UCU, 2013). In Germany, research on theinternationalization of academia shows similar results (Bakshi-Hamm, 2009; Bakshi-Hamm& Lind, 2009; Lind & Löther, 2009;Neusel, 2010, 2012; Neusel & Wolter, 2014). For example,Neusel and Wolter's (2014) pilot study on the internationalmobility background of professors in German universitiesbased on 203 interviews with Assistant, Associate and FullProfessors5 highlights the increase in the numbers of interna-tional professors and professors with a migration backgroundsince 2005.6 In 2005 1800 out of 37,865 professors in Germanuniversities had a migration background, but in 2012 itincreased to 2700 from a total of 43,782 professors, whichcorresponds to 6% of the total professorial positions inGermany.7 Women represented thirty four percent of thissample. This study has been discussed in the media asdemonstrating the increasing degree of internationalization inGerman universities and recruitment of post/migrant scholars(Bauer, 2013; Dernbach, 2014). Yet, a closer look at its figurescomplicates these assumptions. Sixty four percent of theprofessors interviewed came from a middle class background,where one of the parents had a university degree, 80% werewhite Europeans, of which 20% and 23% came fromSwitzerlandand Austria respectively.8 Black professors and professors witha working classmigrant backgroundwere underrepresented inthis study.

Though this study is still in a pilot phase, this resultmight betaken as indicative of the composition of the faculty in Germanhigher education institutions. Despite a slight increase ininternational, Black, POC and post/migrant professors inGerman universities in the last decade, the interpretation ofthis development as indicative of increased social mobility andinclusion of Black and POC scholars needs further examination.By concentrating on international and post/migrant teachingand research staff, the methodological framework of this studyseems not to be situated within critical race studies. Yet, inorder to analyze how racialization as a matrix of socialinequality operates in this field, a focus on institutional racismmight be needed.

As Bakshi-Hamm and Lind (2009) demonstrate in theirchapter on female academics with a migration background inGerman universities, only 2% of these academics were“Bildungsinländerinnen”, foreign-born citizens that completedtheir schooling andhigher education in Germany. Further, if wecontrast this figure with the fact that 64% of the post/migrantprofessors come from a middle-class background and most ofthem are White Europeans, we can assume that access to aprofessorial position in German universities is mediated by


class and race. Thus, while the discussion on the recruitmentand promotion of Black, POC and post/migrant scholars toacademic and professorial positions is necessary in Britain andGermany, an analysis that foregrounds the question ofinstitutional racism in relation to social inequality remainspertinent in order to understand the dynamics of inclusion andexclusion in the neoliberal university. Thus, the discussion onthe institutional development ofWGS/GS needs to be related tothis observation.

Mainly headed by White national middle-class women,WGS/GS programs reflect the racial and class composition ofuniversity staff. The leading academic and professorial posi-tions in WGS/GS programs are mainly held by White nationalwomen, oftenwith amiddle andupper class background. Black,POC and post/migrant scholars, on the other hand, are mainlyemployed in temporary and precarious positions. Thus, whilein some universities WGS/GS programs receive institutionalsupport and gender equality seems to advance, the questionremains regarding the racial and national composition of theseprograms. Further, some examination is needed, when it comesto the recruitment of international students and scholars.While the neoliberal university embraces diversity and genderequality, creating the impression that race, nationality andgender do not represent any obstacles in recruitment andpromotion decisions, the structurally ingrained feminized andracialized division of work remains unchallenged. Such adivision of work, as wewill see, is reinforced throughmigrationcontrol policies. This is particularly evidenced when nationalmigration control policies enter university campuses.

Border policing on university grounds

Racism and migration control policies do not stop at thegates of universities. As nation-state institutions universities areregulated by migration policies. As such they are not exemptfrom the logic of exclusion embedded in migration control andmanagement devices, permanently (re)producing the nation'sother as racialized, ethnicized and culturally different. Whenmigration policies enter the gates of the neoliberal university,the national racial matrix underlying the nation-state's gover-nance logic and practice becomes tangible. While not explicitlyoperating within a racial matrix, migration policies are reminis-cent of a colonial pattern of thinking producing social hierar-chies through racialization (Quijano, 2000, 2008).

International students and academic as well as non-academic staff are subjected to visa and migration controlregulations. Considering that international students are not ahomogenous unit, but rather composed by heterogeneouscultural, economic, geographical, political and social differences9

(Raghuram, 2013), the impact of migration policies varies inregard to nationality and economic position. In the studyconducted by Lee and Rice (2007) on racial discrimination ofinternational students in the United States, the authors revealthat students from the Middle East, Africa, East and South Asiaand Latin America experience forms of discrimination that Lee(2007) terms neo-racism. In reference to this study, Lee seeks tocapture with this term the institutional discriminatory mecha-nism resulting from political regulations. Resonating with thealready discussed term of institutional racism, Lee's analysis ofneo-racism differentiates between direct and indirect forms ofracial discrimination. Direct forms of discrimination are




“detentionwithout limit, denial of due process, and violations ofpersonal freedoms of some individuals; cumbersome foreignstudent tracking procedures; new hurdles for obtaining visas toenter the United States; and fingerprinting and profilingprocedures in the name of maintaining national security” (Lee,2007, 28). On an indirect level, discrimination occurs throughunequal treatment, for example “in the form of less-than-objective academic evaluations; loss of employment or aninability to obtain a job; difficulty in forming interpersonalrelationships with instructors, advisors, and peers; negativestereotypes and inaccurate portrayals of one's culture; negativecomments about foreign accents; (…)” (Lee, 2007, 28). Bothlevels as we will see in the discussion evolve within affectivedynamics.

In the European context, migration surveillance and controltechnologies in the university are not only articulated bypolitical regulations, policies andmeasures, but in particular byeveryday practices and imaginaries. It is on these two levelsthat institutional racism is experienced. Operating on thedistinction between “citizen” and “migrant”, migration policiesproduce different legal categories of inclusion/exclusion tocitizenship rights. Questions of settlement, political participa-tion, family reunification, freedom of movement, access to thelabor market, to education, to health insurance and socialbenefits are regulated on this basis.10 Legal migratory status, isindicative of the opportunities or hindrances individuals orcollectives legally marked as migrants, refugees or asylumseekers encounter. For example, undocumented migrants,refugees without leave to remain and asylum seekers do nothave access to higher education. Though theymight individuallyfulfill the official prerequisites for acceptance as students, theirlegal status keeps them in a space of social inertia, preventingthem from participating in work and/or study. In the case ofinternational students and scholars, we are already dealing witha group of migrants who due to their financial means orprofessional skills, have been able to receive temporaryresidency status in Europe. Yet, as I will discuss despite theirprivileged position in regard to their legal status, this group isnot exempt from the discriminatory assaults produced throughanti-migration rhetoric and migration control policies.

The extent of control RMI scholars and students are exposedto varies according to bilateral and transnational agreementsbetween the immigration and emigration countries. Forexample, in Germany students from the United States, Canadaor Japan require no visa to enter the country. Meanwhile,students from Eastern Europe and most countries of LatinAmerica, Africa and Asia need to apply for a visa and mightencounter a series of restrictions to enter the country and enrollin their study program (Amjahid, 2011). However, theseregulations are subject to national economic and politicalinterests. As theGerman example shows, economic growth andhigh demand for skilled labor can lead to a liberalization ofmigration control regulations favoring highly skilled migrantsand promoting the recruitment of high achieving internationalgraduates. In contrast, in times of heated racist, nationalistsentiments an augmentation of migration control devicesrestricting access to higher education for international studentsand hindering the settlement of international scholars can benoticed.

In Britain, for example, the Tier 4 visa regime restricts theaccess of non-EU students to higher education. In April 2009


New Labour introduced the Tier 4 visa, regulating legalresidency for international students. International studentswould obtain this visa if they had a confirmed place for study atan educational institution with “Highly Trusted Status” (HTS),met the English language requirements and had the financialmeans to cover the university and maintenance costs for thefirst year, for which latter a bank statement showing evidenceof this had to be provided 28 days before applying for the visa. Asimilar system is in place in Germany.

Germany has also introduced a specific residency title forinternational students. In order to enter the country, interna-tional students need to apply for an initial student visa in orderto be able to apply for the study residency title, officiallyauthorizing the student to pursue the programof study. For theapproval of study residency the student needs to fulfill certainprerequisites, such as confirmation of a place for study in aGerman university and a bank statement demonstrating ayear's income of approximately 8000 Euros. This residency isgiven for a fixed period of time coupled to the standard time setby the university for the completion of study and operates onthe cultural prescription of integration. This is so, as suchstudents are required to enroll in German classes and showevidence of attendance and passingmarks, when applying for acontinuation of the residency title. For international studentsthis means that even if the language of study required isEnglish, they still need to acquire German language proficiencyduring their academic registration.

In light of increasing demand for professionals in theGermanlabormarket, some changes have occurred in regard to enablinginternational graduates to remain inGermany if their skills are indemand. The study residency title is limited to the time of study.Yet, in order to facilitate the recruitment of in demandprofessionals, international students can remain in the countryfor 18 months as long as they can provide evidence of amonthlyincome. As a recently graduated international doctoral studenttoldme, demonstrating financial support represents a hindrancein opting for this avenue. Where graduates are not immediatelyemployed, they need to leave the country and return if in theprescribed time they find employment commensurate withtheir qualifications. Just any job is insufficient. It needs to beemployment related to the qualification obtained. Another stepto fulfill the German state's demand for skilled labor is the “EUblue card”. This EU title guarantees the immediate settlement ofthe required professional without making the German languageand integration test prerequisites for approval.

In sum, Germanmigration control policies have detrimentaleffects on international students. Only international studentsthat do not face any financial hardship are able to study as theyneed to show that they have sufficientmonthly income and areonly allowed to work minimally. Also, if they decide to changestudy program, they are only allowed to do so once in the first18 months and this changeneeds to be officially approved. Otherpersonal reasons for study interruption will also be scrutinizedand this puts them at risk of loosing their residency status.Interestingly, while Germany has expanded the time studentsget to apply for a job in their profession, Britain has cut its workvisa for graduates from 24 months to 12 months.

The restriction of work visas for international students isindicative of the severe measures international students haveundergone since the introduction of Tier 4 in Britain in 2009.Since then, British education institutions recruiting international




students need to show that they have the instruments tomonitor the whereabouts and attendance patterns of interna-tional students according to the UKBA immigration regulations.Thus, to obtain and maintain Tier 4 sponsorship status, HEIs arerequired to regularly report to the UKBA regarding internationalstudents' absence from class, supervision meetings or failure toenroll, leaving their course earlier than expected or having beenexpelled. If an international student fails to attend class orsupervision meetings with their PhD supervisors withoutnotification, or a suspension of study is needed due to health orpersonal reasons this becomes a UKBA issue. Shortly after theintroduction of the “Tier 4” visa, a media campaign waslaunched, portraying international students as “illegal migrants”studying in private education institutions, defined by the mediaas “bogus colleges” (Education Commission Report 2, Educationat the Border, 2013). This political climate led to increasingpressure on the UKBA in August 2012, when it revoked LondonMetropolitan University's “highly trusted” status to sponsorinternational (non-EU) students based on the accusation that ithad breached the monitoring requirements for its internationalstudents. Suddenly, 2600 international students found them-selves without a university place and in a period of 60 dayswere forced to find alternative institutions or they wouldneed to leave the country. The situation at London MetropolitanUniversity alerted other universities, which immediately afterthis event started to implement a rigorous monitoring system,asking lecturers and administrators to control and report back ontheir international students. Delegating to universities UK BorderAgency (UKBA) migration control devices, employees, adminis-trators and lecturers are indirectly asked to “police” theirinternational students.

Coinciding with the imposition of austerity measures inhigher education threatening university departments withrestructuring or closure, collective protest against these mea-sures from university staff has been subtle, individualized anddispersed. At the individual level, in contesting these measuresfaculty opt to ignore or undermine these control devices byrefusing to take registers or fudging data. Yet, without strongcollective action there is no chance that this policing can bestopped. In the meantime, international students continue to betreated as potential “illegal migrants”. Until May 2014, interna-tional students could apply for suspensions of study for onemonth due to personal or medical reasons. Now, this right hasbeen revoked and students are asked to leave the country andapply anew for a visa in order to re-enter the country. Sufferingstress, panic attacks or depression while trying to complete aPhD is not advisable for an international student, nor is having ababy or caring for a relative, as all this could lead to a breach ofvisa regulations. As Kandiko and Weyers (2013) in their reporton the university experience of international students havehighlighted, these students not only suffer from economicconstraints due to restrictions in terms of the limitation ofworkhours, but also experience racial attacks andharassment ona regular basis which negatively impact their emotional andpsychological health. Being treated as a suspicious target by stateauthorities translates into everyday situations of being searchedand stopped, questioned and singled out. However, migrationpolicies do not only have an immediate impact on internationalstudents' well-being, but also on their career prospects.

As previously mentioned, this general overview on theimpact of migration control policies on international students


and staff is relevant for WGS/GS programs. WGS/GS hasfostered the debate and policies on gender equality anddiversity in the university, contributing to the rhetoric of theneoliberal university on gender. However, a debate thatconsiders the inequalities and discrimination producedthrough migration policies is still at stake in this area of study.This is not a matter specific to WGS and GS but relevant for theuniversity as awhole. Yet,WGS/GS has championed debates onintersectionality and racism and represents a ventage pointfrom whence to launch this critique. In this regard, a criticalreflection about its own praxis in regard to the policies thatstructure this field is needed. As previously mentioned, thelogic embedded in the system of differentiation underlyingmigration control policies resonates with a colonial pattern ofthinking, relying on a differential nomenclature of devaluation.Though not based on an explicitly racial script, migrationpolicies recreate a colonial pattern of racial differentiation in anew legal vocabulary. This matrix of differentiation articulatedbymigration control policies is sensed as dispossession by thosesubjected to these technologies of surveillance and control.

Sensing dispossession

As is the case for other junior faculty, international graduatesenter the university job market as research assistants, teachingassistants or adjuncts. These are precarious, temporary jobs.Precarious working conditions imply intervals of unemploy-ment between jobs. These intervals are risky for RMI academicsas the extension of their visa is reliant on a work contract.

For example Caroline,11 who was working in a WGSprogram in an English university, after the completion of herthree-year PhD, told us howdue to her being a national from anEnglish-speaking Caribbean country, she needed to apply for astudy and work visa. Though she was able to apply for a oneyear postdoctoral fellowship and to renew it afterwards by twoyears through a fix-termed lectureship, she found herself in alegally uncertain position after the termination of her last workcontract because her work visa expired. Her residency permitwas tied to her work contract, loosing her job meant loosingher legal residency. While she was applying for a new post, shewas detained by migration officers. She was processedimmediately as an “undocumented migrant” and asked toleave the country or she would be deported. Despite herlawyer's appeal and the protest of advocacy groups against thisdecision, Caroline was forced to leave. This brief accountillustrates how migration policies do not stop, when it comesto academics or students. As we have seen in the LondonMetropolitan University examples, students that lost theirstudy places risked being deported. Similarly, insecure em-ployment can end in the loss of legal residency status foracademics subjected to severe migration regulations.

For example, the outcome of the probationary period as alecturer might have life changing consequences, if the residen-cy status is tied to the work visa. Rita, a respondent from LatinAmerica, teaching Gender Studies in an English university,opted to immigrate to another country in order to prevent herfrom loosing her residency status if she failed her probation.Though she passed her her probation, the sensation of beingexposed to a decision process that might have turned into atermination of her contract and immediate expulsion from thecountry weighed heavily. Other respondents told me similar




stories. Remarkable in these stories is the fact that they aremainly silenced as addressing this issue of discrimination withline managers or the university's administration might notbring any change. Mostly, line managers and universityadministration enable the implementation of these policies.Only in some cases has the collective organization of protestpressured the administration to find alternative solutions.

While the position of these RMI scholars is not identical tothe situation of undocumented migrants (Gutiérrez Rodríguez,2010a), the sensation of dispossession created by migrationcontrol policies are shared by both equally. The space of theundocumented migrant, represents a zone of surveillance,where the subjects inhabiting it are officially dispossessed oftheir life achievements, their educational experiences andprofessional trajectories. When we relate the experience ofracism of the international scholar to this sensation, herprivileged position in academia becomes shaky. Anotherrespondent from South Asia, Mira, found herself in the officeof the UKBA after the university could not confirm thecontinuation of her contract. While she was waiting togetherwith other postcolonial migrants for the processing of herapplication, she realized how her position as an successfulinternational scholar employed in an English world-classuniversity can be destabilized, when migration regulationskick in. Being treated by the UKBA officer as just one moreapplicant, revealed the objectification force with which thebureaucraticmachinery ofmigration policies operate. Reducingindividual lives just to objects of regulation by negating anyglimpse of humanity and instead pressing people into residen-cy regulation devices such as visas, leave to remain andresidency permissions. Mira similar to Caroline, reacted byorganizing collective protest. Together with colleagues a strongprotest was organized, pressuring the university administra-tion to renew her contract.

In all three cases the bureaucratic invasion of migrationpolicies into their lives was affectively met with the sensationof dispossession. Mixed feelings of disbelief, anger, fear andperseverance emerged in reaction to the attempt to putprofessional achievements and life plans in jeopardy. Whileresearch on racism in academia has addressed the affectiveeconomies of race to which Black scholars are exposed (Tate,2012, 2014), further attention is needed in terms of the affectiveinjuries produced through the reshuffling of institutional racismthrough migration control policies. Thus, the impact of migra-tion policies on the everyday lives of RMI students and staff isnot only felt in regard to administrative measures, but alsothrough ordinary gestures, attitudes and comments. As ShirleyAnne Tate (2014) discusses in her article on the experiences ofracismof Black scholars in England, the ordinariness of racism inacademia makes this space “unliveable” for those targeted by it.It is this culture that undermines or supplements a rhetoric oftolerance embracing diversity, while enabling racial discrimi-nation in direct or subtle ways. As Tate (2012, 2014) notes, theculture of tolerance underpinning the rhetoric of diversity,while it acknowledges race as one difference among other,simultaneously suggests that the relevance of the question ofrace is obsolete. This contributes to the administrative outreachthat the neoliberal university is a ‘post-race’ university (Ahmed,2012), where teaching critical race studies or on racism is nolonger necessary. However, interestingly Black Studies haven'tyet been established in Britain or Germany (CERS, 2013;


Community Statement, 2015). The culture of tolerance as Tateargues is contributing to the silencing of ordinary experiences ofracism in the university. Some of these experiences, as we haveseen, occur through the direct and indirect discriminationresulting from the implementation of migration control policieson university grounds. This silence becomes intolerable and, asTate highlights, instantiates a “culture of disattendability” (Tate,2014, p. 2481).

In the case of RMI scholars, subjected to migration controlmechanisms, the culture of disattendability is complicated. Onthe one hand, as migrants they are objects of attention for theadministration. However, their specific position as migrants isnot fully acknowledged, when it comes to their employers'duty of care for them as employees. Also, experiencingchallenges from the migration administration is not a topicthat is easily shared publicly. Being discriminated against bymigration control policies seems to be in disjuncture with theprofile of the prestigious international scholar and the brandimage of the world leading university. Further, in the case ofRMI scholars in precarious employment, addressing thediscriminatory effects of migration regulations publicly mightnegatively affect their career development. As Tate notices inthe case of Black scholars, speaking about racism exposesoneself to more discrimination and potentially to a lack ofsupport in career progression.

Felt in the ordinariness of everyday encounters, comments,gazes and gestures, members of minoritized and racializedgroups aremade aware of the assumptions of hegemonic groupsregarding their inappropriateness in academia (Gutiérrez yMuhs, Flores Niemann, González, & Harris, 2013; Kilomba,2010). This is conveyed for example, in minor unnoticeabledetails. It is in this regard that the question of the affectivedimension of migration policies becomes relevant. Affect notonly unfolds context, but surfaces within specific social, politicaland economic contexts (Gutiérrez Rodríguez, 2010a; 2014). Assuch, affection and disaffection (Brennan, 2004), the transmis-sion of positive and negative affect, not only expresses, but alsoimpresses, the cultural baggage of social meaning instilled infeelings. Thus, ordinary gestures, comments, gazes or remarks,while they seem to be fleeting, hit bodies profoundly, leaving inthem the traces of the negative social meanings they transfer.

While the British university has policies in place targetinginstitutional racism and BME scholars are vocal in regard tobuilding the anti-racist university (CERS, 2013; UCL, 2014),German university administrations have no measures in placeto counter institutional racism. Despite the increased recruit-ment of international scholars or scholars with a diasporic ormigration background and growing numbers of internationalstudents, German universities tend to reproduce themselves asmono-lingual, -cultural, -ethnic and -racial entities (Xian & Yi,2011). This is transmitted in everyday encounters, for example,through comments on the German language proficiency ofBlack, POC and post/migrant scholars.

For example, Tania, who migrated from Colombia 25 yearsago, reported an irritating situation she encountered whilecovering a professorship in Gender and Intercultural Studies.She noticed that in the minutes of the departmental meeting,she seemed to be the only one listed without her doctoral title.On another occasion, in an evaluation meeting with a seniorWhite German female colleague, an advocate for genderequality, this colleague made an aside about Tania's language




skills by assuming that speaking in German might represent achallenge for her. Tania who has studied in Germany andspeaks fluent German could not understand what thiscomment implied. Maybe her slight accent was perceived asher not having full German proficiency. Fromanother angle, wecan identify this comment as symptomatic of the monolingualimperative with which racialized and minoritized post/migrants are confronted in German society, reflected in thesuggestion of the speaker of the Bavarian Christian Party(CSU) made in December 2014 that migrants should speakGerman at home.12 Thus, these incidents demonstrate theincapacity of German education, and in particular HEIs, toacknowledge multilingual skills other than languages con-sidered as career assets such as English, French or Spanish.Further, through the enunciation of language command aposition of superiority is enacted, establishing a norm anddisciplining the speaker perceived as outside of it. For theperson addressed, this command not only represents anattempt at domestication within the principle of assimilation,but it also implies an affective dimension. The comment on herlanguage skills left Taniawith feelings of insecurity. This incidentaffectively transmitted to her the message of being a “spaceinvader” (Puwar, 2004). Thus, her entitlement to hold a post as avisiting professor in a German university was undermined byquerying her language proficiency and academic skills. As Lee(2007) noted in the case of the United States, comments onaccent and biased evaluations aswell as professional assessmentrepresent features of the indirect discriminatory treatment RMIstudents might encounter. Also RMI scholars are subjected tothese rather subtle and intangible forms of discrimination. In thissense, institutional racism does not just occur through explicitand direct measures preventing certain social groups fromaccessing specific sectors of society, but also by subtle interac-tions, normalized through everyday routines.

Comments on German language skills are inserted in theseeveryday routines silently, and are often (un-)consciouslyexercised by members of dominant social groups. Whatremains unexamined in this encounter is the reiteration ofnormative assumptions and governance such as thoseestablished by migration control policies. These policiesbecome effective not just through their legal implementation,but through their everyday enactment. In ordinary encountersmechanisms of exclusion and technologies of subordination arecorporeally felt and sensed. Through these encounters theaffective dimension of migration control policies and institu-tional racism are felt on an individual level, animating(mobilizing) or dis-animating (demobilizing) the subjecttargeted by institutional racism. Ordinary speech acts orinteractions directly or indirectly producing the other asinferior, leave the sensation of dispossession in the personsubjected to these interpellations. This sensation is diametri-cally opposed to individual abilities and capacities. It articulatesan imagined inability, imposed on the addressee, who throughthis act experiences being dispossessed of her experiences,wisdom and knowledge.

Most of these subtle ordinary experiences of discriminationand racism are hardly made public. Fearing that making thempublicwould expose them tomore discrimination,most peoplesubjected to them remain silent. Tate's (2014) analysis of the“culture of disattendability” seems to capture the dynamicssurrounding the silence around racism and anti-migrant


discrimination. As Tate notes Black scholars, and we couldadd, also POC as well as post/migrant scholars exposed to racialand anti-migrant discrimination experience HE as a paradox-ical site. On the one hand within the managerial rhetoric ofdiversity, proclaiming a culture of tolerance, they are tokens,while at the same time, their skills and abilities are constantlyscrutinized revealing a dominant culture of ignorance,expressed in the ordinariness of disattendability.

Also WGS/GS programs reproduce a culture ofdisattendability in regard to racism and migration controlpolicies, when they ignore how their programs evolve withinthe dynamics of racism and anti-migration practices. In order toaddress this, a theoretical and practical engagement with theeffects of racism and migration control policies in theuniversity, and particularly in WGS/GS is needed. Further, theemployment and promotion practices in this area reveal acontinuation of the representation of White national elitewomen in leading academic and professorial positions. Whilethe discrepancy between theory and institutional practice isnot specific to WGS/GS, this critique needs to be addressed inlight of the need to develop the anti-racist university.

Conclusion: some thoughts on building theanti-racist university

Focusing the discussion on the effects of racism andmigration control policies on RMI scholars and students at thecentre of WGS/GS, draws attention to the racialized genderedinequalities that structure the neoliberal university. It alsocenters our view on the reshuffling of institutional racism inHEIs through the implementation of migration policies.Further, this vantage point opens up the space to consider theaffective economies of race and migration, and to analyze theprevalence of the coloniality of knowledge (Mohammad et al.,2012; Quijano, 2000) organizing HEIs in the UK and Germany.The entry to this debate through the angle of WGS/GS ispertinent, if we consider the pioneering role of WGS inestablishing “diversity” within the managerial agenda of HEIs.The neoliberal university has integrated this perspective andpresents itself as a diverse and gender sensitive institution. Yet,while a gender equality rhetoric seems to stand at the center ofthe neo-liberal university, this has not yet been translated toequal representation of women in leading academic andprofessorial positions. On the other hand, the promotion ofBlack, POC and post/migrant scholars into leading academicand professorial positions is a rather marginal issue in theneoliberal university. Nonetheless, when it comes to theinternationalization strategies of the university, this topic hasreceived some attention.

However, the internationalization strategies of British andGerman universities are challenged by migration controlpolicies, moderating, and in parts limiting, the access ofinternational students and scholars to HEIs. As we have seen,this has consequences for academic progression, professionalcareer and the organization of life, as well as on the personaland emotional levels. Despite the attempts of the neoliberaluniversity to include gender equality and diversity in itsmanagerial principles and goals, the analysis of the implemen-tation of migration control policies in HEIs reveals thepersistence of institutional racism. Institutional racism in theneoliberal university is not only articulated through the




coloniality of knowledge (Quijano, 2000), historically rootedperceptions, institutional logics and everyday practices ofracism, but also fostered by the affective dynamics emanatingfrommigration control policies. Through this process positionsof inferiority are attributed, leaving in the individuals subjectedto institutional racism a sensation of dispossession.

Set within these dynamics the question of how theneoliberal university is shaped by the dynamics of institutionalracism remains germane to the transformation of HE in times ofausterity in Western Europe. As we have seen, while rhetori-cally gender equality has been included into the premises of theneoliberal university, the institutional consolidation ofWGS/GSremains a topic of negotiation, linked to expansion plans andrevenue expectations. Within these dynamics, WGS/GS pro-grams might be institutionally consolidated, if they areconsidered financially viable and profitable. Yet, this processis not necessarily accompanied by the creation of a solidinfrastructure, promoting fair working conditions for the staffdelivering the programs. Rather, in times of austerity, theadministrative discourse on diversity and gender sensitivityruns parallel with the reshuffling of the gendered and racializeddivision of work within universities. Thus, the neoliberaluniversity is characterized by an increase of temporary workcontracts and cheapening of labor in jobs held by a largelyfeminized and racialized precariat, working at the bottom ofpay grades teaching the mass of students.

Considering the dynamics related to institutional racism,migration control policies and the enduring feminized andracialized division of work in HEIs, the implementation ofausterity measures in the university signals an ideological shift(Kumar, 2012). Re-establishing White boys-networks withinleading managerial and professorial positions, while attendingto a diversity and gender equality rhetoric, the neoliberaluniversity reveals the prevailing composition of universities assites of White national citizen elites. Despite the internation-alization ambitions driving the neoliberal university, thegendered racial social inequalities dominating the universityremain unchallenged.

WGS/GS programs are thus evolving in a universitylandscape increasingly embodying the goals and strategies ofcorporations. The commodification of education and theconversion of universities into corporations have deepenedthe gendered racialized social inequalities in the highereducation system. Cutting down on public spending foreducation has limited the option for students from economi-cally disadvantaged groups to pursue higher education.Further, through the focus of universities on augmenting theirresearch funding revenue, and in the British case in particular,also student fees, state measures have been set in placefavoring the corporate logic in education.

In order to counter this development, the critic of theneoliberal university needs to be attentive to the reconfigura-tion of institutional racism. In this vein the Centre for Ethnicityand Racism Studies (CERS) at Leeds University, UK, hasproposed that HEIs readdress the Race Relations (Amendment)Act 2000, which “placed a statutory duty on HEIs in the UK toeliminate racial discrimination and promote racial equality”(CERS, 2013). Based on this Act over “300HEIs established racialequality schemes by 2008 and improved experiences andopportunities in this sector, particularly for black and minorityethnic students” (CERS, 2013) in the UK. Yet, as CERS notes “the


progress in this field has slowed and a focus on the goals ofeliminating racial discrimination, promoting racial equality andengendering change in organizational culture as well asapproaches to curriculum and pedagogy has dissipated so thatbuilding the antiracist university remains urgent (…)” (CERS,2013). This situation has been further aggravated through theimpact of migration control policies in HEIs. Integrating thisanalysis in to the critique of the neoliberal university calls for ananti-racist feminist project of decolonizing the neoliberaluniversity that could stand at the center of the pedagogicaland epistemological project of Women and Gender Studies andGender Studies.

Endnotes

1 Due to space constraints and in order to keep the focus of this article, thecomplicated entanglement resulting from the coming together of differentsocial, economic, geographical, political and social positions cannot beextensively treated here. For further discussion of this topic, please seeGutiérrez Rodríguez (2006, 2010a).

2 Attacks against scholars working on sexualized violence, genderinequality, gendered, sexualized and racialized power relations have beenrecently published in liberal and supposedly impartial journals such as Die Zeitand Lehre& Forschung in Germany. Articles in these newspapers express openlyanti-feminist and homophobic views (for further information and critique seehttp://dasendedessex.de/ueberblick-angriffe-gegen-geschlechterforscher_innen-und-sexualpaedagog_innen-und-die-positionierungen-von-fachgesellschaften/). Also in Scandinavian countries this development has beenobserved in the last years and some feminist scholars have critiqued it as right-wing populist and anti-migration rhetoric (cf., Eriksson, 2013; Holst, 2012;Johansson & Lilja, 2013; Keskinen, 2013).

3 During Spanish and Portuguese colonialism in the XVIth century, a racialsocial classification systemwas established. This would be further developed inthe XVIIth to the XXth centuries by other European colonial powers such asHolland, England, France, Belgium, Germany and Italy. Despite the process ofdecolonization in theAméricas in the XIXth century and inAsia and Africa in thesecond half of the XXth century, the colonial pattern of racialization, whilealtered through specific historical regional contingencies, remains one of themain modes of stratification of contemporary societies.

4 The use of the terminologies Black, People of Colour (POC) and post/migrant and Black, Ethnic Minority (BME) derives from political uses of theseterms in Germany and the UK. While in the UK BME and Black have been usedas political identities, in Germany in the 1980s the term Black emerged as apolitical identity for Afro-German and other African descent people (Oguntoyeet al., 1992, orig. 1986). In the 1990s the term migrant appeared as a politicalcategory (FeMigra, 1994). Currently, the term Black (Community Statement,2015), POC and postmigrant are used as political categories in anti-racist anddecolonial interventions in German universities. I use in this article Black, POCand post/migrant in order to avoid redundancies. Yet, I am aware of the geo-political contextualized uses of these political identities.

5 The sample of 203 participants interviewed was composed of 71%working in Research Universities, 21% in Applied Universities and 8% in MusicandArt Universities. Further, 29% of the intervieweeswere employed in Sciencedepartments and 5% in Humanities. This is a young generation of scholars, theaverage age is between 41 and 55, with a higher share of female professors(34%) than in the German peer group (20%) (Bauer, 2013).

6 This increase is in relation to the figures in 2009. As Aylâ Neusel notes in2009 5.7% of professors in Germany were international (Neusel, 2012).

7 See https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2013/07/PD13_235_213.html.

8 Social inequality in the German primary and secondary education systemis rooted in its tri-partite system (Fereidooni, 2010; Gomolla & Radtke, 2007;Wolter, 2011), on which basis students are selected and channeled into one ofthese routes at the early age of 9 to 10 years, providing themwith a mobility orstagnation path into prospective employment or study through the Gymnasi-um, Realschule and Hauptschule. Different school systems pre-structure accessto the labour market and the possibility of completing A levels. Children ofmigrant households are 2/3 of the Haupt- or Realschule student body, whileonly 1/3 of them gain access to the Gymnasium.While the figures have slightlyincreased in the last few years in regard to the representation of children ofmigrant parents in the Gymnasium, the balance remains static (Autorengruppe




Bildungsberichterstattung, 2014). This selection predetermines the possibilityof social mobility and students' achievement. Admission to university is gainedthrough A levels via the Gymnasium route. Various studies have discussed howthis process is predicated by the students' social background and the parents'educational level (Fereidooni, 2010; Roketti, 2012). Children with a migrationbackground tend to be working class and are often targets of institutionaldiscrimination. Very often assessed by the education institution as lacking inGerman language proficiency, this leads to a degrading of the intellectualcapacities and skills of post/migrant students.

9 I consider that these two groups do not represent homogenous entities,but are composed of heterogeneous cultural, economic, geographical, politicaland social differences. As King and Raghuram (2013) note the term“international” covers a range of geographical and political locations as wellas the term “students” representing variety of exchange, year-abroad to full-study programs and levels of study such as undergraduate, postgraduate andresearch studies. Also, as I will discuss, the term “academic” holds differentpositions from professor to precarious adjunct or lector positions.

10 The position of the non-citizen/migrant relates to undocumentedmigrants and refugees. As the refugee protests in Germany and Austria in thelast five years have shown, during the asylum seeking procedure refugees areexposed to technologies of dehumanization (Atac, 2013; Khan, 2013;McGuaran & Hudig, 2014; Muhammad, 2013). They are not allowed to leavethe territory theyhave been assigned to, also their access to the labourmarket isseverely curtailed or closed. Further, undocumented migrants are completelykept outside of any legal protection framework (Gutiérrez Rodríguez, 2010a).

11 The names of the research participants have been anonymised.12 For further information see, http://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/

zuwanderer-in-deutschland-csu-fordert-deutsch-pflicht-fuer-zu-hause-1.2254388.

References

Ahmed, Sara (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press.

Ahmed, Sara (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life.Durham: Duke University Press.

Alesi, Bettina, & Kehm, BarbaraM. (2010). Internationalisierung von Hochschuleund Forschung. Arbeitspapier 209 der Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf 2010(Available at Boeckler: www.boeckler.de/pdf/p_arbp_209.pdf).

Amjahid, Mohamed (2011). Kritische Übergänge : Hürdenläufe internationalerStudienbewerberInnen und AbsolventInnen. Dossier der Böll-Stiftung.Available at Boell: http://www.migration-boell.de/web/integration/47_2786.asp

Apple, Michael W. (2010). Global crisis, social justice and education. New York:Routledge.

Apple, Michael W. (2012). Educating the "right" way. New York: Routledge.Apple, Michael W. (2006). Can education change society? New York: Routledge.Apple, Michael W. (2014). Creating democratic education in neoliberal and

neoconservative times. Praxis Educativa, XVII(2), 48–55.Atac, Ilker (2013). Die Selbstkonstituierung der Flüchtlingsbewegung als

politisches Subjekt. on-line journal translate: flee erase territorialize, 3,(Available at eipcp: http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/atac/de).

Baird, Barbara (2010). Ambivalent optimism: Women's and gender studies inAustralian universities. Feminist Review, 95, 111–126.

Bakshi-Hamm, Parminder (2009). Wissenschaftlerinnen mitMigrationshintergrund und ihre Erfahrungen. In I. Lind, & A. Löther (Eds.),Wissenschaftlerinnen mit Migrationshintergrund. cews.publik, 12. (pp.61–74). Bonn: GESIS — Leibnitz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften.

Bakshi-Hamm, Parminder, & Lind, Inken (2009). Migrationshintergrund undChancen anHochschulen: GesetzlicheGrundlagen und aktuelle Statistiken.In I. Lind, & A. Löther (Eds.),WissenschaftlerinnenmitMigrationshintergrund.cews.publik, 12. (pp. 11–24). Bonn: GESIS — Leibnitz-Institut fürSozialwissenschaften.

Ball, Stephen J. (2007). Education plc. London: Routledge.Ball, Stephen J. (2012). Global Education Inc. New York: Routledge.Bauer, Tina (25.10.2013). Ihre Herkunft macht sie begehrt. duz Magazin, 11/13.Bhandari, Rajika, & Laughlin, Shepherd (2009). Higher education on the move:

New developments in global mobility. New York: Institute of InternationalEducation.

Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2014). Bildung in Deutschland 2014.Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Bielefeld: BertelsmannVerlag.

Bourdieu, Pierre (1988).Homo Academicus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Brennan, Teresa (2004). The transmission of affect. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press.


Brooks, Rachel, &Waters, Johanna L. (2011). Student mobilities: Migration and theinternationalization of higher education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Burch, Patricia (2009). Hidden markets. The new education privatization. NewYork: Routledge.

Byram, Mike, & Dervin, Fred (2008). Students, staff and academic mobility inhigher education. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Campbell, Mary Ellen, & McCready, A. L. (2014). Introduction to special issue:Materialist feminism against neoliberalism. On-Line Journal Politics andCulture (Retrieved from: http://politicsandculture.org/issue/materialist-feminisms-against-neoliberalism/ (accessed 25.09.2014)).

Centre for Ethnicity and Racism Studies (CERS) (18.11.2013). Annual blackhistory month conference: Building the Antiracist University (BAU): Nextsteps. Organized by Shirley Anne Tate and Paul Bagguley. University ofLeeds. Available at CERS: http://cers.leeds.ac.uk.

Chatterton, Paul, Hodkinson, Stuart, & Pickerill, Jenny (2010). Strategicinterventions inside and outside the neoliberal university. ACME: AnInternational E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 9(2), 245–275.

Christian, Mark (2012). Integrated but unequal. Black faculty in predominantlywhite spaces. Africa World Press.

Cole, Mike (2009). Race theory and education. A Marxist response. London:Palgrave Macmillan.

Community Statement (2015). “Black” studies at the University of Bremen.Available at Present_Tense Scholars Network: Black Perspectives and StudiesGermany: https://blackstudiesgermany.wordpress.com/statementbremen/

Dernbach, Andrea (19.02.2014). Die entgrenzte Uni: Internationale Professorenan deutschen Hochschulen. Der Tagesspiegel. Available at Tagesspiegel:http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/internationale-professoren-an-deutschen-hochschulen-die-entgrenzte-uni/9501862.html

Education Commission Report 1, Foot in the Door. Profit and Public Education(2012). Available at scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/114024345/UK-Education-Commission-Report-1

Education Commission Report 2, Education at the Border (2013). Available atweareplanc: http://www.weareplanc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Education_at_the_Border_Report21.pdf

Eriksson, Mia (2013). “Wronged white man”: The performativity of hate infeminist narratives about anti-feminism in Sweden. Nora — Nordic Journalof Feminist and Gender Research, 21(4), 249–263.

Essed, Philomena (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinarytheory. London: Sage.

Fals Borda, Orlando (2013). Action research in the convergence of disciplines.International Journal of Action Research, 9(2), 155–167.

FeMigra (1994). Wir, die Seiltänzerinnen. In C. Eichhorn, & S. Grimm (Eds.),Gender Killer: Texte zu Feminismus und Politik (pp. 39–63). Berlin: ID-Verlag(Available at nadir: http://www.nadir.org/nadir/archiv/Feminismus/GenderKiller/gender_5.html).

Fereidooni, Karim (2010). Schule, Migration, Diskriminierung: Ursachen derBenachteiligung von Kindern mit Migrationshintergrund im deutschenSchulwesen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

Gomolla, Mechtild, & Radtke, Frank Olaf (2007). Institutionelle Diskriminierung.Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Encarnación (2006). Translating positionality. On post-colonial conjunctures and transversal understanding. On-line journal trans-late, special issue: under translation, 6, (Available at eipcp: http://eipcp.net/transversal/0606/gutierrez-rodriguez/en).

Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Encarnación (2010a). Migration, domestic work and affect.New York: Routledge.

Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Encarnación (2010b). Decolonizingpostcolonial rhetoric. InE. Gutiérrez Rodríguez, M. Boatcã, & S. Costa (Eds.), Decolonizing Europeansociology. Transnational approaches (pp. 49–67). Farnham: Ashgate.

Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Encarnación (2014). Domestic work— Affective labor: Onfeminization and the coloniality of labor. Women's Studies InternationalForum, 46, 45–53.

Gutiérrez y Muhs, Gabriella, Flores Niemann, Yolanda, González, Carmen, &Harris, Angela P. (2013). Presumed incompetent: The intersections of race andclass for women in academia. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.

Hartmann, Eva (2003). The transnationalization of tertiary education in a global38 civil society. In G. Kreutzner, & H. Schelhowe (Eds.), Agents of change:Virtuality, gender, and the challenge (pp. 25–42). Opladen: Leske & Budrich.

Holst, Cathrine (2012). Antidote to anti-feminism. Kilden. Information Centrefor Gender Research in Norway. Available at Kilden: http://eng.kilden.forskningsradet.no/c52778/nyhet/vis.html?tid=81086

Johansson, Eveline, & Lilja,Mona (2013). Understanding power and performingresistance: Swedish feminists, civil society voices, biopolitics and “angry”men. Nora — Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 21(4),264–279.

Kahlert, Heike (2007). Emanzipatorisches Wissen im Schatten desNeoliberalismus: Ökonomisierung der Kritik oder Kritik derÖkonomisierung? In E. Borst, & R. Casale (Eds.), Jahrbuch der Frauen- undGeschlechterforschung in der Erziehungswissenschaft (pp. 45–60). Opladen &Farmington Hills: Verlag Barbara Budrich.


http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0277-5395(15)00101-6/rf9000




http://www.boeckler.de/pdf/p_arbp_209.pdf

http://www.migration-boell.de/web/integration/47_2786.asp








http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/atac/de






























http://politicsandculture.org/issue/materialist-feminisms-against-neoliberalism/

http://politicsandculture.org/issue/materialist-feminisms-against-neoliberalism/

http://cers.leeds.ac.uk








https://blackstudiesgermany.wordpress.com/statementbremen/

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/internationale-professoren-an-deutschen-hochschulen-die-entgrenzte-uni/9501862.html

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/internationale-professoren-an-deutschen-hochschulen-die-entgrenzte-uni/9501862.html

http://www.scribd.com/doc/114024345/UK-Education-Commission-Report-1

http://www.scribd.com/doc/114024345/UK-Education-Commission-Report-1

http://www.weareplanc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Education_at_the_Border_Report21.pdf

http://www.weareplanc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Education_at_the_Border_Report21.pdf








http://www.nadir.org/nadir/archiv/Feminismus/GenderKiller/gender_5.html

http://www.nadir.org/nadir/archiv/Feminismus/GenderKiller/gender_5.html






http://eipcp.net/transversal/0606/gutierrez-rodriguez/en

http://eipcp.net/transversal/0606/gutierrez-rodriguez/en














http://eng.kilden.forskningsradet.no/c52778/nyhet/vis.html?tid=81086

http://eng.kilden.forskningsradet.no/c52778/nyhet/vis.html?tid=81086












Kandiko, Camile B., & Weyers, Mark (2013). The global student experience. Aninternational and comparative analysisInternational Higher Education series.London: Routledge.

Kauppinen, Ilkka (2012). Towards transnational academic capitalism. HigherEducation, 64(4), 543–556.

Kauppinen, Ilkka (2014). Different meanings of ‘knowledge as commodity’ inthe context of higher education. Critical Sociology, 40(3), 393–409.

Keskinen, Suvi (2013). Antifeminism and white identity politics: Politicalantagonisms in radical right-wing populist and anti-immigration rhetoricin Finland. NJMR— Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 3(4), 225–232.

Khan, Adelat (2013). Die Forderung nach einem normalen Leben. On-line journaltranslate, special issue: flee erase territorialize, 3, (Available at eipcp: http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/Khan/de).

Kilomba, Grada (2010). Plantation memories.Münster: Unrast.King, Russell, &Raghuram,Parvati (2013). International studentmigration:Mapping

the field and new research agendas. Population, Space and Place, 19, 127–137.Kumar, Ravi (2012). Education and the reproduction of capital: Neoliberal

knowledge and counterstrategies. Palgrave Macmillan.Law, Ian, Turney, Laura, & Phillips, Deborah (2004). Institutional racism in higher

education. Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Press.Lee, Jenny J. (2007). Neo-racism towards international students. About Campus,

28–30.Lee, Jenny J., & Cantwell, Brendan (2012). The global sorting machine. An

examination of racism among international students and postdoctoralresearchers. In B. Pusser (Eds.),Universities and the public sphere. Knowledgecreation and state building in the era of globalization (pp. 47–64). New York:Routledge.

Lee, Jenny J., & Rice, Charles (2007). Welcome to America? Internationalstudent perceptions of discrimination. Higher Education, 53, 381–409.

Liinason, Mia (2011). Feminism and the academy: Exploring the politics ofinstitutionalization in gender studies in Sweden. Centre for Gender Studies:Lund University.

Lind, Inken,& Löther, Andrea (2009).WissenschaftlerinnenmitMigrationshintergrund.cews.publik, 12, Bonn: GESIS— Leibnitz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften.

Lynch, Kathleen (2010). Carelessness: A hidden doxa of higher education. Artsand Humanities in Higher Education, 9(54), 54–67.

MacGregor, Emily (2012). Whoever pays the piper calls the tune: Pressure onacademic freedom and the discipline of music in the UK. Critical Quartely,54(4), 54–73.

Mählck, Paula (2013). Academicwomenwithmigrant background in the globalknowledge economy: Bodies, hierarchies and resistance. Women's StudiesInternational Forum, 36, 65–74.

Maskovsky, Jeff (2012). Beyond neoliberalism: Academia and activism in anonhegemonic moment. American Quartely, 64(4), 819–822.

Massey, Doreen (2004). Geographies of responsibility. Geografiska Annaler:Series B, Human Geography, 86(1), 5–18.

McGuaran, Katrin, &Hudig, Kees (2014). Refugee protest in Europe: Fighting forthe right to stay. Statewatch Journal, 23(3/4), 28–33.

Mohammad, TamdgidiH., Boidin, Capucine, Cohen, James, &Grosfoguel, Ramon(Eds.). (2012). Decolonizing the university. Practicing pluriversality. HumanArchitecture. Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, X, 1.

Muhammad, Nurman (2013). Das Land ist für uns alle gleich. On-line journaltranslate, special issue: flee erase territorialize, 3, (Retrieved from: http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/numan/de).

Nash, Meredith (2013). Reflections on teaching gender to Australian sociologyundergraduates in the neoliberal postfeminist classroom. Journal ofSociology, 49(4), 411–425.

Neusel, Aylâ (2010). Was müssen wir alles wissen? Beitrag zum Workshop“Chancengerechtigkeit in der Wissenschaft?”. Halle-Wittenberg: Institutfür Hochschulforschung (HoF) (Available at HoF: http://www.hof.uni-halle.de/dateien/workshop%20 18_19_11_2010/Neusel_Nachwuchs_Migrationshintergrund.pdf).

Neusel, Aylâ (2012). Untersuchungen der inter- und transnationalen Karrieren vonWissenschaftlerInnen an deutschen Hochschulen. Die Hochschule, 1, 20–35.

Neusel,Aylâ,&Wolter,Andrä(2014). InternationaleMobilität undProfessur (MOBIL)—Karriereverläufe und Karrierebedingungen internationaler Professorinnen undProfessoren an deutschen Hochschulen. Berlin: Humboldt Universität.

Newson, Janice (2012). Academic feminism's entanglements with univer-sity corporation. Topia. Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies (on-linejournal), 28.

O'Neill, Maggie, & Hubbard, Phil (2010). Walking, sensing, belonging: Ethno-mimesis as performative praxis. Visual Studies, 25(1), 46–58.

Oguntoye, Katharina, Ayim,May, & Schultz, Dagmar (1992). Showing our colors:Afro-Germanwomen speak out.Amherst: University ofMassachussets Press.

Pereira, Maria do Mar (2015). Higher education cutbacks and the reshaping ofepistemic hierarchies: An ethnographic study of the case of feministscholarship. Sociology, 49(2), 287–304.


Precarias a la Deriva, (2004). A la deriva — por los circuitos de la precariedadfemenina.Madrid: Traficante de Sueños.

Probyn, Elspeth (2004). Teaching bodies: Affects in the classroom. Body &Society, 10(4), 21–43.

Pusser, Brian, Kempner, Ken, Marginson, Simon, & Ordorika, Imanol (2012).Universities and the public sphere. Knowledge creation and state building inthe era of globalization. New York: Routledge.

Pusser, Brian, & Marginson, Simon (2013). University rankings in criticalperspective. The Journal of Higher Education, 84(4), 544–568.

Puwar, Nirmal (2004). Space invaders: Race, gender, bodies out of place. Oxford:Berg.

Quijano, Anibal (2000). Colonialidad del Poder y Clasificación Social. Journal ofWorld-Systems Research, VI(2), 342–386.

Quijano, Anibal (2008). Coloniality of power, eurocentrism, and socialclassification. In M. Moraña, E. Dussel, & C. A. Jáuregui (Eds.), Colonialityat large. Latin America and the postcolonial debate (pp. 181–224). N.C.: DukeUniversity Press.

Raghuram, Parvati (2013). Theorising the spaces of student migration.Population, Space and Place, 19, 138–154.

Rhoades, Gary, & Slaughter, Sheila (2004). Academic capitalism in the neweconomy: Challenges and choices. Baltimore, MD: The John HopkinsUniversity Press.

Rice, Gareth (2011). The ‘browning’ of public higher education in England.Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36, 333–337.

Roketti, Rico (2012). Studierende mit Migrationshintergrund undInterkulturalität im Studium. Working paper, 248. Hans-Böckler-Stiftung:Serie Bildung und Qualifizierung. Düsseldorf: Hans-Böckler-Stiftung.

Santos, Boaventura de Sousa (2010). The university in the twenty-firstcentury. Towards a democratic and emancipatory university reform. InM. W. Apple, S. J. Ball, & L. A. Gandin (Eds.), The Routledge internationalhandbook of the sociology of education (pp. 274–282). London/NewYork: Routledge.

Sappey, Jennifer (2005). The commodification of higher education: Flexibledelivery and its implications for the academic labour process. 19th AIRAANZ(Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand)Conference Proceedings, Sydney.

Sayer, Derek (11.12.2014). One scholar's crusade against the REF. THE (TimesHigher Education) (Available at THE: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/feature-one-scholars-crusade-against-the-ref/2017405.fullarticle).

Shore, Cris, & Wright, Susan (1999). ‘Audit’ culture and anthropology: Neo-liberalism in British education. The Journal of the Royal AnthropologicalInstitute, 5(4), 557–575.

Slaughter, Sheila, & Leslie, Larry L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies,and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: The John HopkinsUniversity Press.

Slaughter, Sheila, & Leslie, Larry L. (2001). Expanding and elaborating theconcept of academic capitalism. Organization, 8(2), 154–161.

Slaughter, Sheila, & Rhoades, Gary (2000). The neoliberal university.New LaborForum, 6, 73–79.

Smith, Annie (2013). It's not because you're black. Addressing issues of racismand underrepresentation of African Americans in Academia. Lanham:University Press of America.

Sow, Noah (08.12.2014). The beast in the belly. SchwarzeWissensproduktion alsangeeignete Profilierungsressource und der systematische Ausschluss vonErfahrungswissen aus Schwarzen Kulturstudien. Portal: Heimatkunde,Heinrich-Böll Foundation (Available at Boell: http://heimatkunde.boell.de/2014/12/08/beast-belly).

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty (2012). An aesthetic education in the era ofglobalization. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Tate, Shirley Anne (2012). “Supping it”. Racial affective economies andepistemology of ignorance in UK universities. In M. Christian (Ed.),Integrated but unequal. Black faculty in predominantly white spaces(pp. 210–225). Trenton: Africa World Press.

Tate, Shirley (2014). Racial affective economies, disalienation and “race”madeordinary. Race and Ethnic Studies, 37(13), 2475–2490.

UCL (University College London) (2014, March 14). Why isn't my professorblack? UCL event. Retrieved from: http://events.ucl.ac.uk/event/event:xe-hobmesz1-pt3gqx/why-isnt-my-professor-black

UCU (University and College Union) (2013). The position of women and BMEstaff in professorial roles in UK HEIs. Retrieved from: http://www.ucu.org.uk/bmewomenreport

Wolter, Andrä (2011). Hochschulzugangund soziale Ungleichheit in Deutschland.Dossier der Böll-Stiftung 2011. Available at Boell: http://www.migration-boell.de/web/integration/47_2765.asp

Xian, Peixin, & Yi, Haizhou (2011). Ausländische Studierende im deutschenHochschul-Dschungel. Dossier der Böll-Stiftung 2011. Available at Boell:http://www.migration-boell.de/web/integration/47_2798.asp












http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/Khan/de

http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/Khan/de






































http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/numan/de

http://eipcp.net/transversal/0313/numan/de




http://www.hof.uni-halle.de/dateien/workshop%20

http://www.hof.uni-halle.de/dateien/workshop%20



















































http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/feature-one-scholars-crusade-against-the-ref/2017405.fullarticle

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/feature-one-scholars-crusade-against-the-ref/2017405.fullarticle














http://heimatkunde.boell.de/2014/12/08/beast-belly

http://heimatkunde.boell.de/2014/12/08/beast-belly









http://events.ucl.ac.uk/event/event:xe-hobmesz1-pt3gqx/why-isnt-my-professor-black

http://events.ucl.ac.uk/event/event:xe-hobmesz1-pt3gqx/why-isnt-my-professor-black

http://www.ucu.org.uk/bmewomenreport

http://www.ucu.org.uk/bmewomenreport





Sensing Dispossession: Women and Gender Studies Between Institutional Racism and Migration Control...

Documents

Transcript of Sensing Dispossession: Women and Gender Studies Between Institutional Racism and Migration Control...