analysis. This perspective allows her to identify less overt and more silenced forms of resistance, such as how the use of popular culture allowed Saharawi women to show solidarity against arranged marriages during Spanish colonialism or to speak out in Malabo’s Semu market today. Allan manages to link all these situations thanks to extensive use of documentation and fieldwork, and an intelligent use of theory. The author also analyses the construction of hegemonic discourses, making extra effort to reflect on the concept of genderwashing, understood as a claim, made in this case by authoritarian regimes, of commitment to gender equality while their practices work against this. She also links these marketing efforts to the exploitation of natural resources, taking intersectionality into account. Doing so points to both the Orientalist roots of the discourses of authoritarian regimes and the overlap of categories of gender, race and class that necessarily constitute resistance to them. Allan manages to present a well-built argument pointing out the interrelations between the history of colonization and postcolonial regimes. As she observes, the argument that Arab and African women should be saved assisted colonization and the implantation of the Female Section, the Franco dictatorship’s women’s institution, in the territory. Also, this argument has been used by postcolonial authoritarian regimes in compliance with the international community in genderwashing operations. This observation, according to the author, does not apply to the discourse of the Polisario Front – the Saharawi nationalist movement. In this case, the participation of women in the early anti-colonial struggle helped mobilize the Saharawi nationalist discourse towards progressive goals and allowed for greater female empowerment. On finishing this brilliant book, a discerning reader could draw two general conclusions. First, academic research on authoritarian regimes has underestimated the extent to which dictatorships use gendered discourse to consolidate power. Second, there is a need not only to make a gender reading of subaltern studies, but also to understand gender categories as a constituent part of social categories. In this way, the work brings together reading from the geopolitical point of view with a reading of gendered processes of oppression and resistance.

中文翻译：

---

Cassandra Mark-Thiesen，调解人、合同工和殖民资本：黄金海岸殖民地的机械化金矿开采，1879-1909 年。纽约州罗彻斯特：罗彻斯特大学出版社（hb US$110 – 978 1 58046 918 0）。2018 年，230 页。

分析。这种观点使她能够识别出不那么公开和更加沉默的抵抗形式，例如流行文化的使用如何让撒哈拉妇女在西班牙殖民主义期间表现出对包办婚姻的声援，或者在今天的马拉博 Semu 市场上大声疾呼。艾伦设法将所有这些情况联系起来，这要归功于对文档和实地调查的广泛使用，以及对理论的巧妙运用。作者还分析了霸权话语的构建，特别努力反思性别清洗的概念，性别清洗被理解为在这种情况下由专制政权提出的对性别平等承诺的主张，而他们的做法却与之相反。她还将这些营销活动与自然资源的开发联系起来，同时考虑了交叉性。这样做既指出了威权政权话语的东方主义根源，也指出了性别、种族和阶级类别的重叠，这些类别必然构成对它们的抵抗。艾伦设法提出了一个完善的论点，指出了殖民历史与后殖民政权之间的相互关系。正如她所观察到的，关于阿拉伯和非洲妇女应该被拯救的论点有助于殖民化和在该领土内建立佛朗哥独裁统治的妇女机构女性部门。此外，这一论点已被后殖民专制政权在性别清洗行动中使用，以符合国际社会的要求。根据作者的说法，这一观察不适用于波利萨里奥阵线——撒哈拉民族主义运动的话语。在这种情况下，妇女参与早期的反殖民斗争有助于动员撒哈拉民族主义话语以实现进步目标，并允许更大程度地赋予女性权力。读完这本精彩的书，眼光敏锐的读者可以得出两个一般性结论。首先，对专制政权的学术研究低估了独裁政权使用性别话语来巩固权力的程度。其次，不仅要对底层研究进行性别解读，还要将性别范畴理解为社会范畴的组成部分。通过这种方式，该作品将地缘政治的阅读与对压迫和抵抗的性别化过程的阅读结合在一起。