¡No Fue Suicidio, Fue Feminicidio!: Ambivalent Facts in the (Un)making of Feminicide in Mexico
This article examines how feminicide in Mexico emerges as an ambivalent phenomenon, arguing that it materializes not despite but precisely through tensions in forensic, legal, activist, and media practices. Challenging assumptions that feminicide precedes these socio-technical processes, this study highlights how state institutions, forensic evidence, and feminist activism co-constitute feminicide through complex practices of refusal, misclassification, and resistance. Institutional complicity and activist counter-narratives simultaneously obscure and validate feminicide as a sociolegal reality. Drawing on Karen Barad’s agential realism and the forensic theories of Corinna Kruse, Thomas Keenan, and Eyal Weizman, this analysis demonstrates how the ambivalence of factuality shapes the visibility, recognition, and epistemic authority surrounding feminicide cases. Ultimately, the article foregrounds how the struggle over what counts as feminicide—expressed through numerical data, forensic classifications, and activist interventions—produces paradoxical conditions of both erasure and hypervisibility, complicating feminist demands for justice and accountability within a state that is simultaneously complicit in and legitimized by gendered violence.
Soria-Cruz, F. (2025). Media and Ambivalence| ¡No Fue Suicidio, Fue Feminicidio!: Ambivalent Facts in the (Un)making of Feminicide in Mexico. International Journal of Communication, 19, 20. Retrieved from https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/24056