Lecture 9: Gender Dimensions of Peace and Security Flashcards
3 focuses of liberal feminism
- Making women visible in security
- How security measures affect women differently than men
- Equal representation of women in global security studying
Core argument of liberal feminism
The functioning of the international relies on the private division of labor (e.g. unpaid domestic work of wives of military men contributes to global security and diplomatic interests and careers)
Main goal of liberal feminism
Making women visible
3 limitations of the liberal feminist approach
- No critique of the positivist foundation of realist theories
- “Add women and stir” (doesn’t go beyond realism)
- Essentializes women’s identities
3 focuses of standpoint feminism
- How does security look from a female perspective? How are their experiences of security different from men’s?
- Redefining through a feminist lense the ways in which we understand security
- The perspective of women add something new and different to security
The core argument of standpoint feminism
The distinction between the “international” and the “domestic” relies on gendered assumptions, tropes, and metaphors
The international is defined in words like strength, power, autonomy, independence, rationality, whereas the domestic is defined like weakness, naiveté, irrationality
2 Main goals of standpoint feminism
- Include women’s experiences to transform global politics
- Understand the history of exclusion and de-valorization of women in global politics (why did it happen?)
3 implications of standpoint feminism for studying security?
- Behavior in the domestic and the international sphere are inseparable (the brave soldier depends on the idea of a vulnerable woman in need of protection=
- Identity is important, and inclusion of women’s views might lead to a less militarized state identity and more peaceful relations between states
- Gender equality is important for global security (human insecurity often has gendered origins)
2 limitations of standpoint feminism
- Are there “authentic” female views and experiences across time, space, and culture? Can we generalize about women or would this reinforce gendered view of security?
- Can there truly be a “non-gendered” discipline?
2 focuses of post-structural gender approaches
- Understanding gender as a category
- How is the concept of men and women socially constructed and can be fluid? How does shifting perceptions change security?
Core argument of post-structural gender approaches
Our viewpoints are never “neutral” and always “gendered”. We always speak from dominant assumptions about masculinity and femininity
Definition: gendering
Assigning characteristics of masculinity and femininity to certain phenomena
2 main goals of post-structural gender approaches
- Deconstruct gender and sex categories
- Critically engage with the consequences of gendered global politics (e.g. how national security reproduces hierarchies and structural violence against people it claims to protect)
Limitation of the post-structural gender approach
How can we pursue change if we can’t speak for “women”? Can lead to exclusion of women and reproduction of inequalities
When women are included in peace processes…
There is a 35% increase in the probability of an agreement lasting at least 15 years
How can women be “honest brokers”?
Having interests that differ from the people in power, outside the existing power structure
6 ways women work as 6 peace makers
- Work across cultural and sectarian lines
- Act as honest brokers
- Stage mass action
- Access critical information through community networks
- Broaden the agenda (political, social, economic, and legal reforms)
- Aid post-conflict recovery (monitoring peace process, reconciliation)
The four pillars of the UN women, peace, and security agenda
- Prevention (of violence against women)
- Participation (incorporating women in decision-making in conflicts)
- Protection (in peace-building and peace-keeping)
- Relief and recovery (aid women post-conflict)
What are the theoretical origins of the UN women, peace, and security agenda
Liberal and standpoint feminism: where are the women? Improve representation of women + women’s experiences can contribute to more peace
Post-structuralist critique of the UN women, peace, and security agenda
By making the resolution about women and not gender in general, they reproduce the sources of inequality, hierarchy, and male dominance
3 challenges for the UN women, peace, and security agenda
- Securitizing women’s rights/issues implies a traditional military intervention
- Gaps in implementation - there is no language on compliance/noncompliance
- Is the agenda adequate? Can it prevent wartime sexual violence?
Policies initiatives against sexual violence during war
International criminal tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda made sexual violence a war crime and crime against humanity
UNSC said gender-based violence is a threat to peace and a tactic of war, calling for monitoring, analysis, and reporting
3 Feminist critiques of the policy agenda regarding sexual violence in war
- Too narrow a focus on women as victims, leaving out male victims and female perpetrators
- “Rape as a weapon of war” implies the problem can be solved with the legal prosecution of commanders and the logic of deterrence
- Causes and dynamics of violence against women are not limited to wartime processes (continues in peace-time)
Mention 4 causes of sexual violence during war
- War increases men’s opportunity for rape
- Rape is used to shame male relatives and the wider social/ethnic group who failed to protect the women
- Women and men can be victims of sexual violence, which masculinizes the identity of the perpetrator and feminizes the identity of the victim
- Much variation between and within civil war across space and time
Causes of sexual violence during war: war increases men’s opportunity for rape
Essentialist position: Inequality, discrimination and male domination happens in war and peace, but war can give vent to men’s contempt for women
Limits:
Overestimates the occurrence of rape
Criminalizes all men
Causes of sexual violence during war: rape is used to shame male relatives
Structuralist position: men have to prove their masculinity during war to their wider ethnic group, e.g. Bosnia 1992-1995 had 20,000 ordered rapes in 1992 alone
Limits:
Overlooks sexual violence against men
Limits occurrence of sexual violence to ethnic wars
Causes of sexual violence during war: Sexual violence masculinizes the perpetrator and feminizes the victim
Social-constructivist position: Sexual violence occurs due to the social construction of the feminine as inferior and the masculine as superior, and is an expression of power relations in society
Causes of sexual violence during war: Much variation between and within civil war across space and time (3 points)
- Opportunistic individual interests (desire, prestige)
- Strategic group interests (deter civilians from supporting rebels, ethnic cleansing)
- Rape as a practice (Combatant socialization, a form of teambuilding)
Limits: does not account for continuities between war and peace (e.g. increase in rape after war ends)
Reading: Why the Nobel Peace Prize Went to 2 People Fighting Sexual Violence in War - Ragnhild Nordas and Elisabeth J. Wood
Wartime sexual violence (sexual torture, forced marriage, rape and sexual slavery) is not inevitable
There is huge variability in sexual violence: some victimize ethnic groups, weapon of war, social pressures to conform to violent forms of masculinity, e.g. rape as a practice to create social bonds, managing sexual lives of army members
Organizations that effectively prohibit violence build strong institutions of norms of restraint and discipline, undermining the pressures that drive sexual violence
