Proceedings of the 8th International Academic Conference on Research in Social Sciences
Year: 2024
DOI:
[PDF]
How Does Gender Improve Our Understanding of World Politics?
Sana Mohammed
ABSTRACT:
Cynthia Enloe (1989) suggests that we can “acquire a more realistic understanding of how international politics functions if we consider women’s experiences in global politics”. This essay will explain how ideas about gender have influenced the study of world politics. I will be focusing specifically on the female perspective since mainstream theories in world politics are based mainly on the ideas of men and masculinity. Firstly, I will provide some key terms and main ideas in feminist theory with respect to world politics. Next, I will explain why mainstream disciplines in world politics have not taken gender into account. Finally, I will explain how feminist approaches seek to reconstruct fundamental concepts in world politics such as states, security and peace in a more gender-neutral way. In conclusion, this essay argues that ideas about gender help to broaden the depth and scope of world politics. The feminist approach consists of many theories “that we can categorise according to the ways in which they view the causes of women’s oppression” (Tong, 2009). For example, liberal feminism focuses on women’s equality in world politics and other public spheres by removing legal obstacles. Poststructuralist feminism aims to expose and deconstruct gender hierarchies in discourse. Post-modern feminism argues that we cannot generalise about women because they have different experiences of subordination when we take into account race, class and gender. Despite the fissiparous nature of feminism, all scholars are united by a concern in gender which “refers to the complex social construction of men’s and women’s identities…[and] behaviours…in relation to each other” (Thorburn, 2000) as opposed to sex which refers to the biological differences between a man and a woman. In different ways, feminists aim to explain the impact of gender on world politics and examine ways to reconstruct mainstream theories in a gender-neutral way. Firstly, ideas about gender help us understand why world politics does not take into account the perspective of women. “Most of the key players” in world politics “have been and still are men who come from patriarchal social and political backgrounds” (Ruiz, 2005). This is because gender and patriarchy do not give women equal opportunity to reach positions in world politics. For instance, women on average have less socioeconomic power than men which means they are less able to finance a political campaign and are likely to have lower levels of political efficacy. This is also because of the problems women encounter when they enter world politics, such as a high level of criticism and media scrutiny. For example, in 1987, people in America began to question the suitability of Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder as a presidential candidate when a picture of her crying on her husband’s shoulder was published in newspapers (Tickner, 1993). This suggests that even women who have experience in world politics suffer from the negative stereotype of being perceived as “too weak and too emotional” and therefore, not appropriate for military and foreign policy decision-making. On the other hand, characteristics associated with “manliness” such as independence, rationality and power are most valued in the conduct of world politics, all of which are concepts that correspond with the discipline’s mainstream theory, realism. Therefore, because women are underrepresented and undervalued in politics, the study of world politics is constructed almost entirely on automatically accepted ideas about the activities and experiences of men. This causes us to equate what is masculine with what is human. Liberal feminists have made significant contributions in dealing with this problem by introducing the concept of ‘gender mainstreaming’ and increasing the inclusion of women in world politics. However, poststructuralist feminists go further and help us understand how such gender biases are unnoticed and accepted. They do so by examining socially constructed gender language, more specifically, the use of binary oppositions like “public versus private, objective versus subjective, self versus other, reason versus emotion, autonomy versus relatedness, and culture versus nature” (Broverman, 1972). The first word of each pair refers to the masculine, which we subconsciously judge to be of higher value than the second, feminine. The word “combat” includes men working in the public realm who defend the state in war but excludes women working in the private realm deployed as porters, cooks and forced “wives” of male combats. Hence, use of such gendered language shows “how women’s activities are made invisible on the international scene” (Code, 2000), which is the main focus of radical feminism. Failing to acknowledge the important role of women in word politics means they are excluded from the discussion of who need what in war and other conventional spaces in the discipline. This leave us “with a political analysis that is incomplete, even naïve” (Enloe, 1989) which leads to policymaking that is exclusive of and so, detrimental to women. Therefore, feminist theories can offer new insights about the needs of individuals in worlds politics and will ultimately lead to more consideration of marginalised issues or “low politics” in the discipline. These binary oppositions also perpetuate the unequal social relations between men and women because the meaning of the first word depends on the second word, so they are not given equal value and imply that women need to depend on men. This view has had a large impact on how we view fundamental concepts within world politics as we will see in the next paragraph. Analysing socially constructed gendered language can re-define core concepts in world politics in a more gender-neutral way and in ways that are more relevant to modern day problems. Realism defines power as the ability to facilitate domination which causes states to seek security through the military. However, feminist theory defines power as the ability to act in concert with other states. This view of power is more relevant to modern day problems. For example, economic interdependence which relies on diplomatic relations between countries as well as the health of individuals within the state and economic degradation which requires more that military power to be properly addressed (Buskie, 2013). The concept of security in realism “has been equated with the threat to a country’s borders” (UNDP, 1994) and because states are viewed as the most important actors, not enough emphasis is placed on the individual with even less emphasis being placed on the female individual which effectively excludes women from the discussion. Moreover, the unequal social relations between men and women as highlighted above forces women to rely on men and the state for support. However, though realism views the state as a form of protection, this can be disproven by the negative impact of war of women, or the particular economic hardships women experience. Hence, feminist theory has introduced the concept of ‘humans security’ to account for the problems women and individuals endure. Re-examining our definition of such concepts can then allow for new ways to deal with problems in world politics. For instance, feminist theory focuses on the concept of positive peace which looks at the absence of structural violence, rather than just the absence of physical violence and war (Melancon, 2023). This can help “create a more just, lasting and equal peace” (Kaya, 2022). Hence, ideas about gender and including women’s experiences, can change and also add to our understanding of core concepts in the discipline to better deal with modern day problems. In conclusion, ideas about gender and feminist theories have contributed significantly to our understanding of world politics. Feminist theories help us understand why mainstream theories in the discipline, especially realism, are rooted in ideas and assumptions based almost entirely on men and masculinity. The causes include a lack of inclusion of women in world politics, as stated by liberal feminists and the use of social constructed gendered language in world politics discourse, as stated by structuralist feminists. To expand on this, using a gendered lens to re-examine the way we talk about world politics will help us better acknowledge the invaluable yet invisible role of women in world politics. This will also allow us to re-formulate our understanding of core concepts in world politics to take into account the experiences and so needs of women, rather than just focusing on the state. So, ideas about gender and feminist theory can change our understanding of the discipline, by challenging underlying normative biases and broaden our understanding the discipline, by introducing new concepts that are more relevant to individuals and so, modern day problems.
keywords: World politics, realism, liberal feminism, post-structuralist feminism