A Response from the Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion Zayn Kassam (bio) and Kate M. Ott (bio) The Journal of Feminist Studies Religion (JFSR) was pioneering in its founding and yet, in order to sustain and be “recognized” in the academy, it often reified in its own practices the very categories and experiences that it sought to disrupt. In many ways, a peer review system is necessary to help authors achieve tenure, as is publishing in English. The journal has always published a diversity of authors, disciplines, and even materials, from poetry to teaching reflections, from Living It Out pieces to roundtables like this one. These “different” pieces are separate sections and do not fall under the same peer review guidelines. We, Zayn Kassam and Kate Ott as current coeditors of the journal, recognize the complexity of the both-and or yes-but approaches mentioned by many of the roundtable contributors related to the dual location of JFSR in the academy and for the broader feminist movement. If/since the journal no longer has to fight for legitimacy within the academy, what might we do to engage in more generative conflict, as West suggests, as we use the space of the journal and cultivate the JFSR board with a commitment to dismantle white supremacy, as Pritchard suggests? As Plaskow notes, change must begin with truth-telling and accountability. We agree with the many respondents who have called for even more of this as well as concrete changes. During our time as the journal coeditors, we have noticed ways in which white supremacy and Christian hegemony continue to influence the work of the journal and have actively sought or are seeking ways to reorganize the JFSR board and disrupt certain practices of the journal. We will name some of those here and look forward to opportunities to collaboratively address others with the JFSR board and in partnership with FSR units. First, narrow, Western assumptions about the definition of feminism show up in our review process now and in the past. They also affect whether authors understand the journal as a place to submit their work. The predominance of English, [End Page 83] and its embedded colonialism, is another barrier to becoming a transnational feminist publication. And the commitment to diversity is still largely signified by numbers and stuck in binary gender categories. As we consider the deep-seated role of Christian hegemony, we note that Zayn is the only Muslim participant in the roundtable. This reinforces how the journal board needs to shift its practices as it engages international board members, board members from various religious traditions, and Black, Latine, and Asian colleagues so we do not rely on too few individuals who are too busy and for whom JFSR is not a primary community. To resist the multiple forms and logics of racism, settler colonialism, and Christian hegemony, noted by many respondents, we recognize that multiple voices, experiences, and approaches are needed. This is why the JFSR board is collaboratively engaging these issues. Colleagues are working this year to robustly define feminism for reviewer guidelines and our public-facing description of the journal. The nominating committee will wrestle with a lack of trans and male-identified colleagues on our board in addition to considerations of disciplinary and racial diversity. Other groups will serve as mentors for emerging authors, and still others are developing structural ways to celebrate scholarship that exemplifies Black scholarly and antiracist commitments in the legacy of founding board member Katie Geneva Cannon. As coeditors, we have worked to revise editing practices for authors for whom English is not their first language, will pair up emerging authors with board members for mentoring on article writing, and expand the reviewer database to encompass broader worldviews. These practices fundamentally change the structure of traditional peer review that is defined by gatekeeping. Instead, JFSR commits to an antiracist, feminist review process, from invitations to submit to how feminism is defined to what resources an article receives. The key to this work is meaningful involvement by board members to ensure that diversity of scholarship, religion, and racialized experiences infuses the work of JFSR rather than remaining merely representational. We are thankful...
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jun 1, 2022
Jeffrey Todd Knight 
Open Access