to star items.

Accepted Paper

Methodological implications in the study of highly stigmatised topics: when families and academics strive to promote thinking beyond the binary  
Ariadna Ayala Rubio (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) Maria Isabel Jociles-Rubio (Universidad Complutense De Madrid)

Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract

Government backing of canceled academic events on surrogacy has stigmatized both the topic and the scholars studying it. Growing authoritarianism has also divided LGBTIQ+ movements, deepening fragmentation and reinforcing the stigma experienced by some of the families interviewed in our research

Paper long abstract

In contemporary Spain, state-affiliated institutions have increasingly adopted measures that adversely affect families who engage in surrogacy arrangements. This institutional stance is manifested through the lack of a regulatory framework governing surrogacy, as well as through its systematic characterization as an illicit and immoral practice in official public discourse. Government narratives frequently invoke notions such as “exploitation of women,” which are embedded in the preambles of legislative instruments that do not directly concern surrogacy. Within this social environment, feminist movements have also become more radical, this time promoting positions close to censorship and stigmatization of families who resort to surrogacy.

Furthermore, governmental endorsement of the cancellation of academic events addressing surrogacy has contributed to the stigmatization not only of the subject matter but also of the scholars engaged in its examination. This rise in authoritarianism has even divided LGBTIQ+ movements, which have become fragmented, further fueling the sense of stigmatization felt by some of the families we interviewed as part of our research.

These developments indicate a significant authoritarian turn in the institutional governance of surrogacy, giving rise to an increasing need for cooperation between the more tolerant associations and a sector of academia that wants to be able to study the issue without being cancelled.

This polarization at the political, media and social levels force anthropologists to occupy the public and media space more intensely, to disseminate their data more widely and to take a stand in favor of complex thinking, beyond the academic sphere.

Panel P164
Disruptive movements. On the ambivalence of polarisation in contexts of activism [Anthropology and Social Movements (ANTHROSOC)]
  Session 2