The Feminist Challenge to Realism and Liberalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Feminist Theory and International Relations: The Feminist Challenge to Realism and Liberalism Tricia Ruiz Since the end of the Cold War and the increased gender is the notion of power and power dynamics interdependence resulting from the globalization between genders.”1 Simply put, using the concept of process, the field of international relations has faced gender, feminists analyze relations of power major challenges to its core theoretical structure. It involving men and women, how that power is no longer revolves solely around the realist issues of exerted, and how that interaction has been habitually, war and security, but rather, international relations historically, and socially implemented over time has broadened to include traditionally liberal (though not as a result of inherent or biological concerns, such as the international political economy, differences of either sex). socioeconomic development, human rights, non-state Lorraine Code helps us to understand the second actors, and civil society. Apart from the two main term critical to feminist theory, ‘patriarchy’, which theories of realism and liberalism, the feminist theory she defines as a system in which females are brings new perspectives to the international relations subordinate to men, in terms of power and status, and table. This paper will consider the feminist theory in which is based on the belief that “it is right and international relations, and what can be learned from proper for men to command and women to obey.” this perspective. Patriarchal roots, she notes, can be found as far back The first section will provide some key terms and as Aristotle’s assertion that women’s biological main ideas in feminist theory, and will share its inferiority is akin to her reasoning capabilities; later viewpoint with respect to world politics. The second such systems became perpetuated by “the Judaeo- section will present feminist critiques of existing Christian world as under most other world international relations theory, and discuss how religions.”2 feminist theory explains the shortcomings of realism How do feminists use gender and patriarchy to and liberalism. The paper will conclude by assessing describe the field of international relations (IR)? the feminist theory in relation to the frameworks of Overall, feminist theory says that most of the key realist and liberal theories. This section will ask: players in IR, such as diplomats, policymakers, heads Does feminist theory have a separate argument strong of government, and academic professionals, have enough to transform the field of international been, and still are, males who come from patriarchal relations? Or if it is more a subset of other theories, social and political backgrounds. Thus, discussions can it still enhance and expand the discourse of within IR remain largely constrained by those who international relations in significant ways? lack consideration of women’s roles in world politics Prior to presenting the main ideas in feminist (because they have not been trained to value and international relations theory, we need to define two include the perspective of women). Should IR key terms -- ‘gender’ and ‘patriarchy’ – that are perpetuate the exclusion of women from its central to feminist discussion. ‘Gender’ is not a synonym for the term ‘sex’, or the biological 1 difference between men and women, but instead Diana Thorburn, “Feminism Meets International Relations.” SAIS Review v20, i2 (Summer-Fall 2000): 2. Expanded “refers to the complex social construction of men’s Academic ASAP, Infotrac (15 November 2003). and women’s identities...[and] behaviors...in relation 2 Lorraine Code. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. (London; to each other. Fundamental in the discourse on New York: Routledge, 2002), PAGE, Netlibrary/eBook Collection (29 November 2003). discipline, along with their potential contributions areas within feminist IR theory, standpoint feminism and additional viewpoints, IR will remain a prime and radical feminism.6 example of patriarchy, in both its practice and Standpoint theory considers how “the gendered accomplishments. Indeed, IR is frequently referred construction of knowledge...[helps to] understand to as the “last bastion of the social sciences,”3 traditional topics in international relations” and is indicating how rigid it remains in reconsidering itself “alerting us to the idea that gender may be structuring through the ‘gender lens’. how we think in the international context.”7 Author Feminists also apply the terms ‘gender’ and Martin Griffiths classifies feminist scholar J. Ann ‘patriarchy’ when analyzing how situations have Tickner as a standpoint feminist.8 Before even been shaped to exclude women from the international addressing existing IR theory, Griffiths first argues political arena. For example, Eric M. Blanchard that the purpose and definition of ‘theory’ is in itself refers to a ‘catch-22’ situation, in which a candidate male-centered, because it is “oppressingly normative seeking political office will highly depend on past rather than conjectural and analytic.”9 Simply put, military service as qualification for the position, the processes of forming and learning theory is putting women at a disadvantage since they generally constructed around on automatically-accepted ideas have less military experience. This significantly of what is standard and normal, rather than first limits a woman’s chances to attain a national challenging the ‘norm’ and questioning if the government position directly involved with ‘standard’ is objective enough. In this case, ‘theory’ international issues of defense and security.4 From lacks female perspective because it is not objectively this example alone, we can understand how the areas sought at the onset of formulating ideas. of domestic politics, the military, and even the topic Tickner argues that IR is gendered to of education (which is directly related to this “marginalize women’s voices,” and stresses “that example), are issues with respect to which feminists women have knowledge, perspectives and would argue that gender and patriarchy do not allow experiences that should be brought to bear on the women equal access to power positions in world study of international relations.” For example, politics. Tickner would argue that security, a main topic in IR, As with many theories, “feminist theory” reflects should not only be understood as “defending the state a wide range of perspectives generating many from attack,” but should also consider that security internal debates concerning how it should be for women “might be different because women are represented. As Diana Thorburn notes, “there can more likely to be attacked by men they know, rather never be a truly singular voice of feminist foreign than strangers from other states.”10 policy simply because of the diversity of views In other words, in contrast to traditional IR views within feminism itself.”5 However, a brief look at that view security as protecting the state from other some relevant facets of the discipline can be seen states, feminists argue the topic of security should through Lorraine Codes’ summary of two salient 6 Lorraine Code. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. (London; New York: Routledge, 2002), 273, Netlibrary/eBook Collection (29 November 2003). 7 Lorraine Code. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. (London; New York: Routledge, 2002), 273, Netlibrary/eBook Collection (29 November 2003). 3 Diana Thorburn. “Feminism Meets International Relations.” 8 Martin Griffiths, Fifty Key Thinkers in International Relations. SAIS Review v20, i2 (Summer-Fall 2000): 3. Expanded (London; New York: Routledge, 1999). Netlibrary/eBook Academic ASAP, Infotrac (15 November 2003). Collection (29 November 2003). 4 Eric M. Blanchard. “Gender, International Relations, and the 9 Kjell Goldman, “International Relations: An Overview,” in A Development of Feminist Security Theory.” Signs v28, i4 New Handbook of Political Science, edited by Robert E. Goodin (Summer 2003): 1289. Expanded Academic ASAP, Infotrac and Hans-dieter Klingemann. (New York: Oxford University (15 November 2003). Press, 1996), 423. 5 Diana Thorburn. “Feminism Meets International Relations.” 10 Lorraine Code. Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. SAIS Review v20, i2 (Summer-Fall 2000): 1-10. Expanded (London; New York: Routledge, 2002), 273, Netlibrary/eBook Academic ASAP, Infotrac (15 November 2003). Collection (29 November 2003). address acts of rape and violence, not only from trafficking and migration of labor. Enloe would foreign perpetrators, but from their own fellow argue that though such issues may be considered less citizens as well. Feminists would also add that important than the forefront issues of military and occurrences of rape increase during times of war, and war, they serve to uphold the critical processes of is even used as a method of ethnic cleansing among smooth diplomacy and local relations between the rivalries within their state,11 yet would never enter foreign states, in such areas as military bases in times into typical IR discussions that focus solely on state- of war, or at state dinners for foreign diplomats. to-state interaction, simply because IR discussions Radical feminism stresses that women have never traditionally remain focused on states as the key really been excluded from the core of international actors. Thus, the topic of security shows how gender relations, but have simply not been publicly or consideration, excluded from the very beginning of professionally acknowledged