However, they support the position that knowledge claims should be formulated from a broader base of experience and should recognize that women's experiences will differ across race, class, culture, and sexual orientation. Thus, there are diverse feminist theoretical approaches. Although they converge on the core issue of women's subordination, they differ in their assumptions about the causes or sources of that subordination. These differences reflect the richness of women's lives and the need to integrate the experiences and knowledges of women in the South, as well as all women in the North, if we are to move toward a more inclusive, sensitive theorizing about both women's subordination and their power.
Hilary Rose's remarks in Box 6 illustrate some of the new thinking of feminists in the South and North. Staying Alive by Vandana Shiva is a marvellous example of the ways that feminists relate to theory, using it as a resource in the defence of both women and nature. First the book is written from within a struggle of the Chipko women to defend the trees on which their lives depend. While without the mass movement there would be no story, it is also a story in which her skills as a scientist are integral.
Her account of the struggle is a story of transformation She makes solid technical arguments about what is happening to the land and the water. Her training as a physicist — part of that universalistic highly abstract discourse so criticised by feminism — is both a crucial element within, and transformed by the struggle. She reports different ways of collecting data, organising in fresh ways, producing a holistic ecological knowledge specific to the locality and people.
This careful rethinking of the environmental endemic generates a highly "situated and embodied knowledge" with strong claims to objectivity, out of the "universalistic and disembodied knowledge" of the physicist. Nor are the activities she reports limited to new knowledge building, for she also describes and endorses essential myth making which historically has often given energy to social movements of the excluded but which unquestionably often makes their intellectual allies uneasy.
Whereas Western feminists have mostly fought the notion that women are naturally nearer to nature, seeing that as a patriarchal cage, Shiva casts Indian peasant women and the myths they construct cast themselves in the role of the natural protectors of the forest. Essentialism is used as a source of strength. It is a dangerous move yet the situation is already a matter of staying alive. But the point I want to make is the extra-ordinarily divergent strands which Shiva weaves together.
Nothing that can be made useful within a struggle is disregarded, she takes very different discourses and radically recycles them, adapting them with strength and imagination to political purposes. In Shiva I think we get something of a reply from a feminist scientist to Audre Lorde's question, can the master's tools be used to dismantle the master's house? I think the reply goes something like this, providing we are prepared to select, to adapt, to use for hitherto unimagined purposes and weave them in with the entirely new, then yes, we can use the master's tools.
But in the process it is crucial to understand that the tools are themselves transformed. As well as tearing down the master's house, that crucial preliminary act, a feminist science also begins to build anew, to construct a feminist science. This more comprehensive knowledge base enables a wide cross section of experiences and measures to inform policy and action.
Chapter 4 will examine existing policies and those being developed, to illustrate how they reflect and satisfy the needs of women. This chapter discusses theorizing as a process used to test assumptions about a number of phenomena in order to generate principles and theories to explain these phenomena.
2. Themes in feminist ethics
This chapter also points out that traditionally this process has been male centred and related to the cultures, nationalities, and dominant economic classes of the theorists, who did not take into account the perspectives and experiences of women or the problems and issues that affect women.
Until feminist theorists began critiquing existing knowledges, these theories were used to produce programs and policies that adversely affected the lives of women. The readings highlight the feminist challenges to the traditional, androcentric approach to theorizing and discuss some of the characteristics of feminist approaches. These approaches not only take into account differences in experiences of women and men but also recognize that women themselves do not constitute a homogenous group.
Using these approaches, feminists have deconstructed androcentric theories and knowledge and produced a comprehensive view of women's multiple realities. The knowledges they have generated provide a basis for critiquing existing policies and determining alternative policies and activities to address the problems affecting women. Recognizing that factors such as class, race, ethnicity, age, social status, and sexual orientation shape perceptions and experience points to the social character of gender and gender relations. In the next chapter, you will examine a number of theories on gender and development that have evolved from a process of both women's and men's theorizing in different contexts and situations.
Baksh-Soodeen, R. Is there an international feminism? Alternative Approach 24 Summer , Charlton, S. Women in Third World development. Chhachhi, A. Concepts in feminist theory: consensus and controversy. In Mohammed, P. Harding, S. Conclusion: epistemological questions. In Harding, S. Introduction: Is there a feminist method? Ornstein, A. Curriculum — foundations, principles and issues. Rose, H. Alternative knowledge systems in science: can feminism rebuild the sciences? In Bailey, B. Stanley, L. Breaking out: feminist consciousness and feminist research.
Whose science? Whose knowledge? Talking back — thinking feminism, thinking black. Seibold, C. Feminist method and qualitative research about mid-life. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, This chapter introduces the concepts of gender and development and the factors that gave rise to their emergence. It also provides an explanation of the precolonial experience of so-called Third World people, especially with respect to gender relations and the experiences of women and men in social, political, and economic life.
The discussion challenges simplistic characterizations and generalizations of precolonial societies and points to their rich diversity and difference. This chapter provides a framework for considering alternative ways of perceiving human social and cultural development and organizing social, economic, and political life.
It also provides information that challenges traditional monolithic assumptions about women and the sexual division of labour. To explore the evolution of the concepts of gender and development and to critically examine their underlying assumptions;. To recognize the diversity of human experience and the alternative measures of value and standards for the assessment of progress and human achievement; and. To provide a general historical understanding of the lives of Third World people before the institutionalization of development.
In ordinary usage, development a noun derived from the verb develop implies movement from one level to another, usually with some increase in size, number, or quality of some sort. In the Penguin English Dictionary, the verb develop means "to unfold, bring out latent powers of; expand; strengthen; spread; grow; evolve; become more mature; show by degrees; explain more fully; elaborate; exploit the potentialities of a site by building, mining, etc. For our purposes, these meanings of development apply to human societies. The usage of the word in this context was popularized in the post-World War n period to describe the process through which countries and societies outside North America and Europe many of them former colonial territories were to be transformed into modern, developed nations from what their colonizers saw as backward, primitive, underdeveloped societies see Box 1.
Colonialism refers in general to the extension of the power of a state through the acquisition, usually by conquest, of other territories; the subjugation of the inhabitants to a rule imposed by force; and the financial and economic exploitation of the inhabitants to the advantage of the colonial power. Characteristic of this form was the maintenance of a sharp and fundamental distinction often expressed in law as well as in fact between the ruling nation and the subordinate colonial populations. This led to entrenched forms of racism.
In the modern period, that is, since , colonial powers initially included the Dutch, English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish. Later, other European states also became involved, such as the Belgians and Germans. In the 20th century, the United States, too, became a colonial power.
Gendering Global Conflict | Columbia University Press
It is necessary to differentiate between settler colonialism and nonsettler colonialism. In the case of the United Kingdom, for example, special status of dominion or protectorate was given to settler colonies, such as Australia, Canada, the Irish Free States, Newfoundland, New Zealand, Southern Rhodesia, and the Union of South Africa, which had large communities of European migrants. They were usually self-governing territories of the British empire. Protectorate was used to refer to territories governed by a colonial power although not formally annexed by it.
In these areas also, including the United States, internal colonialism is often used to describe the relationship between the settlers and the native or indigenous people and minorities. Although other forms of domination and hegemony have existed in human history, this chapter concentrates on the specific form of European colonization and colonial domination that has taken place since the 16th century.
Today, this grouping includes former colonial, largely but not totally tropical, countries, peopled mainly by non-Europeans. It is usually referred to as the Third World, underdeveloped countries, developing countries, and, more recently, the South or the economic South. Although it would be helpful to have one term to designate all of these countries, none of the above terms is really adequate. All are based on assumptions that we should be aware of when we use them.
They are an improvement, however, on the terms first used in development writing, such as backward or economically backward countries. It is important to note that before European colonial domination, many societies had already felt the impact of other dominating forces. For example, in North Africa the spread of the Islamic influence wrought great changes in the lifestyle of the native people — so much so that, now, some people hardly have any memory of a pre-Islamic past. In India, the spread of Hinduism over the continent had a similar, although more varied, impact. In some instances, the colonizers entered countries already controlled by well-established, stratified, patriarchal structures and introduced yet another controlling force into women's lives.
In this chapter, I briefly explore each of these concepts and the contexts within which they arose. The concept of underdeveloped-developing countries emerged as part of the work of early development economists in the s, who theorized very simplistically about the stages of development mat societies had to pass through to become "developed," or "modern. In addition, the history of Western industrialized countries was used as a broad model for the process through which all societies were to pass. Around the s, with nationalist sentiments becoming vocal, the term less developed was added, as it was considered less pejorative than underdeveloped.
This approach is sometimes critically referred to as developmentalism. Not much later, a school of mainly sociologists and political scientists emerged. They were eventually referred to as modernization theorists because they described this process as one of becoming modem. They, too, developed a triad:.
Modernity may be understood as the common behaviourial system historically associated with the urban, industrial, literate, and participant societies of Western Europe and North America. The system is characterised by a rational and scientific world view, growth and ever-increasing application of science and technology, together with continuous adaptation of the institutions of society to the imperatives of the new world view and the emerging technological ethos. One of the main features common to these two approaches is that they equated development or modernity with industrialization.
Industrialization and its companion, urbanization the emergence of towns and cities , were considered the only ways for backward societies to become modern, or developed. Progress and advancement were also seen in this light. There was little appreciation of the social, cultural, economic, or political attributes of non-Western societies. Indeed, these approaches accepted to a large degree the colonial feeling of superiority over indigenous peoples, many of whom were decimated, robbed of their land, or confined to reservations or territories for example, in Australia, Canada, and the United States , or marginalized and forced to flee into the mountains for example, in parts of Asia and most of South and Central America see Box 2.
Thus are economies based on indigenous technologies viewed as "backward" and "un-productive. On the contrary, the destruction of ecologically sound traditional technologies, often created and used by women, along with the destruction of their material base is generally believed to be responsible for the "feminisation" of poverty in societies which have had to bear the costs of resource destruction.
These approaches also had little to say about women. Women were largely linked to the traditional and backward aspects of these societies and most resistant to change. Because the theorists used traditional in such a general sense, with little recourse to history or social anthropology, they little realized the diversity in women and men's relations, in modes of domestic and family organization, or in social, economic, and political life.
It emerged with the heightened anticolonial consciousness that arose with the coming of the new nation-states in Africa and Asia. This was also a time when the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union-Eastern Europe was dividing the world along ideological and geopolitical lines. They adopted the position of nonalignment with either camp, arguing the need for a third, alternative world grouping.
The term Third World was adopted by many of these countries to differentiate themselves from the First World the North Atlantic capitalist world, or the world of advanced market economies and the Second World the centrally planned economies of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. The Third World consisted of all other nations — usually in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, the Pacific, and South and Central America, including the centrally planned economies in these areas.
One of the main criticisms of the concept of the Third World has been that it suggests a hierarchy of nations. Some people argue that to accept third place is to accept a lower status in the world order. The people who coined the phrase probably never considered this but simply saw Third World as an alternative to the two main options their countries were being pushed to accept, options that, as history would show, they would eventually agree to.
North-South became a popular term around , after the publication of the report of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues, popularly known as the Brandt Commission because it was led by the late Willy Brandt, former Chancellor of West Germany see Brandt According to one source,. The expression was selected by the Commission to emphasize the economic divide between the North rich nations and the South poor nations and to highlight the presumed desirability of a North-South dialogue grounded in a common concern for global problems and freed from the complications of East-West political interests.
This division, like many associated with relations of power, is geographically incorrect. Some countries in the South are neither low income nor not former colonial countries; likewise, some economies and conditions of life in the North, such as can be found in Eastern and Southern Europe, have little in common with the leading industrialized capitalist economies of the North.
For some, this terminology reflects global restructuring and the changes taking place in the global economy. Economic South was a term coined to further delineate this grouping in economic and political terms, rather than in purely geographic ones. The heyday of developmentalism — in the s, s, and s — fostered some strong beliefs, such as. That state or government should play the central determining role in introducing development policies and strategies that could lead to improved standards of living and conditions of life; and.
That international investment, loans, and aid can redirect economies away from their traditional bases — usually in agriculture — toward industry and manufacture. Today, although much of this sentiment has changed, much has remained the same. The dominant thinking in the late s and early s has been that the state has a leading, but only facilitating, role in the economy.
Development is now seen as the responsibility of private companies and, increasingly, private nongovernmental organizations NGOs. In addition, the market is seen as the main arbiter of decision-making. This approach is based on the renewed influence of liberal economic thinking now called neoliberal economics , which has affected international economic. All this has taken place within the context of a Third World debt crisis, within which economic restructuring and structural-adjustment policies are advocated as mechanisms for generating income to repay debt.
Such thinking has become reality through the conditions on the stabilization and structural-adjustment loans offered by the International Monetary Fund IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development the World Bank to countries facing balance-of-payments difficulties.
The main purpose of the new organizations was to provide a basis for monetary and currency stability for increased trade and expansion of these economies. This was to be accomplished by providing financial support during periods of balance-of-payments difficulties, that is, when imports exceeded exports. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was later added, and, according to Dennis Pantin, each of these institutions would play a complementary role in the management of a world economy that did not restrict the movement of goods, services, and money Pantin Since the emergence of the new nation-states in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and the Pacific in the s and s, the Bretton Woods Agreement has widened in scope.
As a result of the current trend in monetarist, or neoliberal, economics, the role of this agreement has expanded. The IMF provides short-term stabilization assistance to countries with balance-of-payments difficulties, on condition that they implement certain fiscal and monetary policies. The World Bank, on the other hand, is more concerned with long-term adjustment through restructuring of host economies along fixed lines.
Its policies can be summarized as follows Blackden :. Stabilization or reduction of budget or balance-of-payments deficits, reduction of budget deficits or freezes in public-sector employment, cut-backs in public-sector investment, removal of public-sector subsidies usually away from the agriculture and social sector to the private commercial sector , and tax reform;. Promotion of the private sector through contracting of public services, sale of state enterprises, and deregulation;.
Market liberalization and price reforms, in which the local market is opened to greater foreign and domestic competition; exchange-rate liberalization, usually devaluations or floatation of local currency to encourage exports; and removal of price controls and supports to local industry; and. Rationalization of public-sector institutions, including civil-service public-sector reform, privatization of state enterprises, and reform of the social sector to make it cost-effective.
Aspects of these neoliberal policies have also been implemented since the s in Northern countries, such as Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and, more recently, in continental Europe. Additionally, many governments have implemented economic-adjustment programs without being involved in an IMF or World Bank program. They are not tailored to the particular needs of individual economies;. They contribute to major declines in standards of living, including nutritional levels, educational standards, employment rates, and access to social-support systems;.
They shift more of the responsibility for health care, education, and care of the sick and elderly to women already burdened by unpaid work;. They increase social ills, such as violent crime, drug abuse, and violence against women; and. They result in increased levels of migration legal and illegal from the South to the North. In many parts of the North and South, women's organizations and NGOs are involved in developing sustainable and economically feasible alternatives to these neoliberal policies of structural adjustment. The term sustainable development came into popular use after the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, popularly known as the Brundtland Report and the Brundtiand Commission, respectively.
The report was largely a response to the growing international environmental and ecological lobby. It defined sustainable development as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" WCED , p. According to Donald Brooks , the paradigm, or worldview, emerging around this concept recognized the need to ensure and facilitate the following:.
Integration of conservation and development;. Maintenance of ecological integrity;. Satisfaction of basic human needs see Chapter 3 ;. Achievement of equity and social justice; and. Provision of social self-determination and cultural diversity. This comprehensive approach does not reflect all approaches to sustainable development. Some economists, for example, speak of "sustainable growth. Nevertheless, a more equitable distribution of existing resources could lead to improvements in the quality of life. Feminist activists have been central to the movement against environmental degradation and for sustainability right from the movement's inception.
They have also often gone beyond the narrower definitions of the issues to include the struggle for peace and the struggle against the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Whereas most of the discussions on sustainable development have taken place within the context of mainstream development economics, feminist activists have for the most part seen sustainable development as part of a larger alternative model of development or societal transformation.
It must be in harmony with nature if nature is to sustain us, we must sustain nature ;. It must be people centred and oriented people have to be seen as the subjects, not the objects, of development ;. It must be women centred recognizing the responsibility that women have always assumed for catering to the basic needs of society ;. It must cater to the needs of the majority consumption levels of the rich and industrialized world must be reduced ;. There must be decentralization of decision-making and control over resources within countries and internationally;. Democracy must become more participatory and direct, unleashing the latent energies of the people; and.
At every level, sustainable development must promote the politics of peace, nonviolence, and respect for life. In short, sustainable development for many feminists from the South and North implies a new kind of political, economic, social, and cultural system and a new value orientation.
The seeds of the women-and-development concept a broad-based term that includes a number of approaches to women's development; see below were planted during the s and s. During this time, 50 countries were freed from colonialism, and the women who had participated in independence movements acted on their convictions that they must join with men in building these new nations.
For example, at the beginning of the s, women of East African countries, led by Margaret Kenyatta, met at seminars to adopt strategies aimed at reaching their goals. This was at a time when the revived feminist movement in the North had not yet found a distinct voice and The Feminine Mystique Friedan ,. Before that time, in , just 2 years after the formation of the United Nations, the Commission on the Status of Women CSW was established to monitor United Nations activities on behalf of women. To a large extent, however, its efforts were limited within the legalistic context of human rights.
By the s and s, women of these newly independent countries began taking their delegations to the United Nations though in small numbers and were able to challenge the legalistic agenda of CSW by raising development-oriented issues. By , when the-United Nations General Assembly reviewed the results of the First Development Decade of the s, three factors that would eventually converge to foster the various approaches to women's development had become evident:.
It was found that the industrialization strategies of the s had been ineffective and had, in fact, worsened the lives of the poor and the women in Third World countries. The Second Development Decade was therefore designed to address this and "bring about sustainable" improvement in the well-being of individuals and bestow benefits on all. Boserup, an agricultural economist, used research data from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin America to highlight women's central positions in the economic life of these societies, and she described the disruptive effects of colonialism and modernization on the sexual division of labour through the introduction of the international market economy.
Among other things, this process drew men away from production based on family labour and gave them near-exclusive access to economic and other resources. Boserup concluded that the economic survival and development of the Third World would depend heavily on efforts to reverse this trend and to more fully integrate women into the development process. The feminist movement reemerged in Western countries around , alongside other social movements for civil rights.
Although the movement's energies were, for the most part, directed internally, some Western women used their position to pressure their government's foreign-aid offices to ensure that grants to recipient countries supported women as well as men. The central point of the original women-and-development approach was that both women and men must be lifted from poverty and both women and men must contribute to and benefit from development efforts.
Its formulation is based on the following suppositions:. Because women comprise more than half of the human resources and are central to the economic as well as the social well-being of societies, development goals cannot be fully reached without their participation. Women and development is thus a holistic concept wherein the goal of one cannot be achieved without the success of the other.
Women, therefore, must have "both the legal right and access to existing means for the improvement of oneself and of society. International Women's Year was declared by the United Nations in , and the celebration of this at the First International Women's Conference in Mexico City marked the globalization of the movement. This unique intergovernmental conference and the nongovernmental International Women's Tribune Centre TWTC , a networking and communications institution, brought together women from nearly all countries of the world under the theme Equality, Development and Peace and extended its work during the United Nations Decade for Women, This sparked the creation of institutions and networks world-wide as "women and development" became an area of specialization in the development field.
At the national level, "national machineries" — commissions on women, women's desks, and women's bureaus — were soon established in most countries. New women's organizations and networks sprang up at the community and national levels. These contributed to the institutionalization of women and development as an internationally recognized set of concepts and did much to generalize knowledge and consciousness about women's issues internationally. Visit the national machinery for women's affairs in your country. It may be a women's desk, a women's bureau, or a ministry of women's affairs.
Write a short history of its emergence and analyze its interpretation of the term women and development. The concern with gender emerged as feminist theorists sought to understand the complexities of women's subordination. The word gender came into mainly academic use some 15 years after the reemergence of lateth-century feminism, which has, unlike its earlier manifestations, made a significant dent in male-dominated androcentric scholarship at least, I like to think so.
Feminist scholars argued that the Western academic tradition, of which most universities and colleges in the world are part, has systematically ignored the experiences of women in its fields of learning, concepts, theories, and research methods. Additionally, although claiming to be scientific, it has really embodied mythical assumptions about women's and men's capabilities, the sexual division of labour in early human history, and, as a result, women's place in today's society.
These assumptions were extended to non-Western societies, with the result that Western assumptions and values influenced relations between the sexes and between groups within each sex, relations that ranged from egalitarian to highly patriarchal and stratified. The word gender, like development, had a specific usage before feminist theorists extended its meaning. One of the earliest uses of gender in feminist theory can be traced to the University of Sussex Workshop on the Subordination of Women and the school of thought that emerged from this workshop.
Scholars such as Olivia Harris, Maureen Mackintosh, Felicity Odium, Ann Whitehead, and Kate Young argued that women, like men, are biological beings but that women's subordination was socially constructed and not biologically determined. They argued further that to conceptually differentiate between these two realities, it is necessary to identify "sex" as the biological differentiation between male and female, and "gender" as the differentiation between masculinity and femininity as constructed through socialization and education, among other factors.
What is biological is fixed and unchangeable, but what is social is subject to change and should be the focus of attention for feminist theorists. In its more recent use, as you will see in Chapter 3 , gender has come to be used, like class and ethnicity or race, to designate an analytical social category, one that interacts with other social factors in influencing life experiences of groups and individuals see Box 3. Firstly, what is gender? It is somewhat ironic that the term "gender," which was first coined by psychologists and then used by feminists to get away from the biologistic referent of the word sex, is now virtually synonymous with the latter word.
Yet by using gender we are using a shorthand term which encodes a very crucial point: that our basic social identities as men and women are socially constructed rather than based on fixed biological characteristics. In this sense we can talk about societies in which there are more than two genders and in the anthropological record there are several such societies , as well as the historical differences in masculinity femininity in a given society.
Since that time this concept has gained widespread acceptance in a range of groups and often for different reasons. Some of these reasons are as follows:. The need to include men in our analysis:. Those who worried that women's studies scholarship focused too narrowly and separately on women used the term In its simplest recent usage, "gender" is a synonym for "women. In some cases this usage In these instances, the use of "gender" is meant to denote scholarly seriousness of a work, for "gender" has a more neutral and objective sound than does "women. Recently, the phrase "women in development" WID is also being replaced in some circles by "gender and development" GAD or "gender concerns in development" GCID The details of these approaches will be dealt with in more explicitly in Chapter 3.
Today, however, two types of critiques have emerged in relation to the concept of gender. One of these comes from a movement perspective. As noted by Joan W. Scott, gender has become a useful and almost inescapable concept in women's studies and feminist theory Scott Many people in the women's movement fear, however, that this is leading to a situation in which women are once more invisible.
They note that the fields of WID, GAD, GCID, feminist theory, and women's studies all owe their origins to the women's movement and the struggles of women in the streets, towns, villages, and academies. Yet, today, with the growing acceptance of academic women's studies and gender specialists, the concern with the day-to-day problems and struggles of women and the movement is being marginalized and, indeed, no longer even acknowledged. The divisions between male and female are not as fixed and clear cut as once thought — the male-female dichotomy is seen as being just as problematic as other dichotomies in Western thought; and.
It is not so simple to extricate what is "sex" from what is "gender," as these two phenomena, as described, intertwine. Although the concept of gender can never substitute for that of woman, it has added to our understanding of the complexities of human social relations in numerous ways. Clearly, it is a concept that is here to stay. It is important that we recall the richness of the history of most developing countries before colonialism and the era of development.
It is also important for us to understand the nature of social relations in the earlier periods of that history. As I noted earlier, the Third World, or the South, really comprises most of the world. It is a mistake to speak of this vast and varied area as if it were all the same. Until recently, most of our history of this region was androcentric. It focused on the period after the encounter with Western Europe and emphasized male action or agency.
In addition, it was often first written in Western languages by Western male scholars who, with few exceptions, were Eurocentric and intolerant of the people they studied. As a result, our historical records are laced with racism, sexism, and imperialist sentiments.
The following 17th-century European male's description of matrilineality in West Africa is a clear example:. The Right of Inheritance is very oddly adjusted; as far as I could observe, the Brother's and Sister's Children are the right and lawful Heirs, in the manner following. Although development theorists paid little attention to the complexities of these societies before the era of development, social anthropologists did. However, they also took with them androcentric and ethnocentric biases that clouded their view of these societies and of gender relations in these societies.
In the heyday of Third World nationalism, in the s and s, indigenous historians sought to correct this wrong. Most of these historians were male or trained in the androcentric worldview, so knowledge of women's experiences in precolonial society continued to be hidden. To counteract centuries of what Peter Worsley called "imperialist history," nationalist historians often distorted this history to highlight a great and glorious past, stressing the kings and queens, wealth and empire. In so doing, they often ignored the traditional egalitarianism of many precolonial societies, in which women had greater power and autonomy and life was more in tune with nature and the environment, not based on its destruction.
Today, as feminist activists and other concerned scholars reevaluate development and modernization, there is a renewed appreciation of the positive features of the ways of life in earlier societies, although we realize the limitations of those times. We also understand the need to preserve and protect the egalitarian and environmentally friendly practices that have survived in our societies and have been adapted to serve people's needs, often outside mainstream political and economic structures.
Collect examples of women's knowledge of medicine and healing and the ways in which these have been passed on from one generation to another.
Since the late 18th century, social scientists have sought to develop a schema to explain the variety and differences in human experience. Early evolutionists incorporated the notion of progress: human development moving from primitive, backward forms to advanced and developed ones. Functionalist anthropologists in the midth century concentrated on seeing each society as an integrated whole.
They could not help interpreting what they observed through their biased perspectives and basing conclusions on their customary assumptions. Today, although critical scholars no longer attribute value to societies in terms of progress or backwardness, they do recognize that precolonial societies may have been at different stages of social development. These stages are usually described in relation to the production systems that predominated at the time. Several feminists have also attempted to understand the gendered nature of globalization.
Spike Peterson has divided the globalized economy into three sectors. The third sector, which Peterson gives equal weight as the other sectors, is the reproductive economy.
The reproductive economy includes pregnancy, parenting, household maintenance, elderly care, and socialization. Feminists argue that these three categories taken together are more suited to finding women and gendered structures in the global political economy, and a more accurate reflection of how the world works more generally.
They have looked in unconventional places, like households, sweatshops, and camptowns, for economic knowledge. These inquiries have led feminist to suggest restructuring the health care industry on the basis of care see the recent work of Fiona Robinson. Feminists have also argued against the treatment of sexuality as a commodity. Feminists have suggested that the gendered structure of the political economy and the gendered distribution of resources in the global economy require attention not only among feminist scholars, but also in IR more generally.
Feminists have argued that we cannot understand the global political economy without reference to gender, and feminist political economists have built a research program to explore these questions. This is a guest blog by Jarrod Hayes, who is is an assistant professor of International Relations at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
His research broadly focuses on the social construction of foreign and security policy. While the Panetta move is interesting in its own right i. I find the move puzzling hence the title and would like to forward a possible explanation for the move as well a negative repercussion that could result. First, the explanation. In June , when Obama fired then U. Seven months earlier, Obama had announced a large troop increase to Afghanistan as part of an effort to prevail in a conflict claimed to be vital to US national interest. The obvious answer was hero-of-Iraq-and-counterinsurgency-demigod Petraeus, and so the President demoted lateral move?
Petraeus from Central Command Commander to head up the Afghan mission. However, the appointment presented its own problems. Would Petraeus, a man now vested with an immense amount of military and security legitimacy, resist when Obama decided to pull the plug? Obama appears to have found a solution by promoting Petraeus to CIA director. Moving Petraeus to the CIA also shifts his institutional context, and if Graham Allison was right about where you stand depends on where you sit, being at the CIA ties Petraeus hands for two reasons: 1 CIA has global concerns less dog in the Afghan fight and 2 CIA has a firm institutional emphasis on not making policy.
- Life of a Child Bride (Strong Women Series Book 1);
- Discipleship in the New Age Vol II.
- Au Fil du Wouri (French Edition);
- Destruction and Reconstruction (Annotated)?
So the promotion is a win-win all around. Petraeus gets out of a fight that may be impossible to win and Obama removes or at least lessens a potential political landmine. The only downside is the poor guy who will get tagged with whatever comes in Afghanistan after the US leaves.
- Theoretical Perspectives on Gender and Development.
- Feminist theory - Wikipedia;
- Sonetos (Spanish Edition);
- GI BRIDES – June’s Story: Exclusive Bonus Ebook.
- Services on Demand.
There is, however, a dark side to promoting Petraeus to the CIA. These changes are not cost free. Rolf Mowatt-Larssen and Andrew Bacevich regarding foreign policy broadly among others has argued that the CIA since September 11 has become increasingly militarized at the expense of its traditional role as a collector and analyzer of political intelligence. The shift to a more militarized CIA means that the Agency no longer focuses on that kind of information perhaps encouraging technological workarounds?
The appointment of Petraeus creates the real possibility that this pattern will not only continue but also be cemented and accelerated. If that is the case, Americans and their policy-makers will be increasingly in the dark about the world and what happens in it.
Dan Drezner asks what the global political community would look like it the undead walked among us. What if the undead were aggressive attackers looking to exterminate humanity? How would people react? How would states? What would mainstream International Relations theory have to say about the security threats posed by Zombies? About the differences between zombies and humans? How might IR theory suggest ways to minimize, or potentially eliminate, conflicts and or injustices brought about by the presence of zombies among us?
Why not celebrate IR analyses of wizardry, the majestic, and the fantastic? What are the muggle sports between states?
Gendering Global Conflict
They discuss the ethics of inclusion, the problems of difference, liminality brought about by uncertainty, security dilemmas created by differential positionally, epistemological issues brought about by performances of otherness, and the like. But the world as if women existed and as if gender needed to be taken seriously remains taboo. What are the ethics of sex, gender, and sexuality inclusion? What are the problems of sex, gender, sexuality difference and differentiation? What liminalities are brought about by gender uncertainty?
What security dilemmas are created by differential positionalities of gendered bodies and gendered actors? What epistemological issues are brought about by performances of gender ings? You will tell me and you may be right that this is not a zero-sum game … and you may be right.
- Decision Making | Women and Public Policy Program, Harvard Kennedy School?
- Horse, My Heart Gallops with Thee. (horse my heart gallops with thee)!
- Up in Flames!
- Interview – Laura Sjoberg.
- 1. Feminist Ethics: Historical Background;
But you may not be. I believe it is and remains true that IR needs gender analysis to make its worldview less partial, and to increase the explanatory value of its theoretical propositions, and to clarify its empirical observations. And I worry that books like International Relations Theory and Zombies are at once widening that gap and making it invisible.
That, of course, makes her current position all the more confounding to me, but is neither here nor there. Great Britain and Nazi Germany had things in common, of course — that they were states, and that they were states with patriarchal social orders, but neither of these or any other similarity merited similar moral value or similar foreign policies. One can recognize characteristics of social orders as complex and multidimensional, and not calling either of those states patriarchal would only accomplish one thing — blindness to their very different brands of patriarchy.
My argument was that Elshtain needed to engage that work, not mine, on the gendered nature of the state. I have no desire to attach normative value either to femininity or to masculinity, and I do not do so in the article Elshtain is replying to. Anything but. This is the part of Waltz with which I am the most familiar, and the part of the discussion of gender and the levels of analysis with which I am most intimately involved. For this, Elshtain has no answer. Some of you might have seen the summer issue of International Relations; a retrospective on Man, the State, and War, by Kenneth Waltz, and its fiftieth anniversary.
That said, I think that it is the very high level of esteem in which I hold her work that compels me to question the positions she took in her original article in the Waltz special issue, and in her response to my article. But I can decide not to greet it with silent complicity, and I have. A leader of the feminist movement in hard times? Why is she writing normatively ridiculous things like Just War Against Terror , rather than work that expands on, institutionalizes, and deepens Women and War?
Why is she going out of her way to harm the feminist cause in the field, rather than to build it up? That aside, since it is irrelevant to the argument, two theoretical observations are important. Elshtain then replies to my argument that her examples of what counts as feminism were anomalous, and her interpretation of feminist theory is outdated and therefore inaccurate. From her reply, Elshtain clearly reads if selectively current work on gender in the biological sciences and neurology. What would be so hard about reading the current work in gender and war to write an essay about gender and war , just to see if there was a good idea that one had not thought of?
Feminist IR was new then, and the arguments have developed substantially since Elshtain apparently stopped reading in it. Those arguments have changed, become more nuanced, and frankly, gotten better. Why use generation-old arguments as a strawman when the new ones could be argued with more skillfully and more persuasively? Frankly, I do not see how this is even controversial. Due to space limitations, I will not talk about them specifically, but am willing to discuss in the comments, should anyone be interested. It would behoove you to, say, google it, if not read it. I would still disagree, and present evidence to the contrary, but the argument could be made carefully, and with intellectual integrity.
More in Part II. Women are supposed to be those innocent of war, protected by chivalric warriors. The Trojan War was made over Helen. Rather than indulging in gender stereotypes, feminist international relations theory has always pushed back against gender essentialism. The argument that Dowd misreads is actually that aggression is often associated with masculinity and thus expected of men and conciliation is often associated with femininity and thus expected of women , despite neither sex holding those characteristics naturally or essentially.
It is the expectation of masculinity rather than the presence of men, or their inherent manliness that shapes especially security politics. They have argued that, so long as masculinity remains a standard in politics, both men and women will be constrained by that standard. That is really a story of masculinity being required not only of Barack Obama but also of his male and female advisors. Masculinity strength, decisiveness, aggression, dominance is something we assume men possess when they enter the public sphere — but a characteristic women must prove.
The missiles flying over Libya were a victory for masculinity as a standard in U. These stories remain relevant and perhaps become more so as Barack Obama defends his masculinity and perhaps innocent, feminized Libyan civilians in Libya in the coming months. There are a number of angles through which feminist lenses can look at the continued military presence in Iraq.
Thinking about the international arena as structurally gender-hierarchical allows us to think both about the relative gendered positionings of the United States and Iraq, and how the initial and continued United States military presence there impact those relative positionings. Bush scolded and punished a hypermasculine Iraq, where George H. While masculinity as an idealized characteristic of the state was an underlying assumption in many of the gendered discourses between the United States and Iraq, the two states disagreed on the ideal content of masculinity during the first Gulf War, and their masculine state self-identities changed fairly significantly over the evolution of the conflict.
The relative positions of the states was expressed through gender hierarchy, and the relative genders of the states changed over time and in relation to each other. The continued US military presence in Iraq has also been framed in terms of gendered state personality-characteristics: the United States has alternately been framed as a bully, an evangelist, etc. Is Iraq a democracy? How much trade does it do with the United States? The same questions could be asked the other way around. Relationships, even those like the one between the United States and Iraq with radically disparate power dynamics, are also always hybrid — the powerful actor is always influenced by perception about its relationship with the less powerful actor, and the powerful actor is often for those reasons insecure.
Any analysis of the continued United States military presence in Iraq would also benefit from the feminist questions — where are the women? Enloe tells the story of the war through the lives of eight women — four U. Through the eyes of a woman who owns a beauty parlor, Enloe tells the story of the crucial role of the politics of private spaces in the continuation and redevelopment of Iraqi social structures.
This is, of course, too broad to be truly illustrative, so, the next substantive post will focus on a particular dynamic of the conflict specifically and in detail. In practice, this almost never works, and seems like a dying standard anyway. That said, for the purposes of this rant, take it as a given: reviews should be, and often are, double-blind. To me, if the authors have published anything of any note in the field, 2 is a clear answer.
Intentional civilian victimization and the deployment of private and military security agencies must be understood in reference to gender. In chapter 8 rape and forced impregnation are researched as gendered tactics of war- fare. Conversely, women can become the weapons of war mostly for the shock effect that they create. Tactics become part of logistics in that the gendered economies and the human suffering are linked to military movement and the upkeep of militaries.
Chapter 9 relates the gendered experiences of war including both men and women in its con- text. This chapter provides personal experiences from people living in war zones. Sjoberg finds that countries with supposed gender equality return to gender subordination during war often using gendered violence as a way to emotionally devastate and ruin the enemy. Feminist war theory provides a way to view the world without a decisive conclusion as to what the world actually is. Most importantly, it calls for political action and social justice. In addition, a feminist war theory should have an ethical component in that it should divulge the secrets of those who actually experience war when the media and others ignore the call for justice.
Gendering Global Conflict: Toward a Feminist Theory of War is some- what complex in its portrayal of the subfield of conflict and conflict resolution. Beginners and undergraduate students will have problems navi- gating and grasping the content of this book. The recommended audience includes graduate students and scholars in the field of international relations and subfield of conflict and conflict resolution.
Most importantly, this book might be interesting to include in graduate introductory courses on conflict and conflict resolution because it provides a revolutionary view of the causes of war. It is obvious that Sjoberg does a painstaking job of academically grounding her work in established international relations theory.
Regrettably, the book did not progress farther than providing the justification for the rightful inclusion of feminist war theory in the field of conflict and conflict resolution. It would have been nice to have seen something more concrete in the final chapters although the work hints at the possibility of a follow- up project from Sjoberg. Sjoberg acknowledges that a feminist war theory is possible, but she did not step up to the precipice and jump.