There are some interesting connections between conflict, violence and the position of women in society. Jenny Pearce of the University of Bradford wrote a book in the 1980s about her experiences living with the resistance forces of the Frente Farabundo Marti para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) in El Salvador. Conducting research which would have failed any kind of
‘risk assessment’, Jenny lived with the guerrilla forces of the FMLN while they fought a bloody civil war against a highly repressive state and army backed by the USA.
Many women fought in this struggle which sought to free the Salvadoran population from decades of military repression and human rights abuses. Although not a dominant strand of debate – given the necessities of violent struggle in terrain hardly perfect for a guerrilla force – some attention was given to the question of whether women’s liberation would occur as a result of the revolutionary struggle or whether it should be a priority and precede it. In the case of both post-war El Salvador and post-revolutionary and nearby Nicaragua, women appear to have lost gains as traditional machismo society has returned and women have been forced to re-adopt accepted roles in society.
AUTHOR BOX
Figure 6.3 During the Second World War, women’s football became very popular, but soon disappeared again once the war was over. This is just one example of women
‘being allowed’ to play ‘men’s’ roles in wartime.
Source: Hulton Collection/Corbis.
Summary
1. Feminism is a broad church with many different strands. There are important differences in fem-inist theories, but also commonalities.
2. Contemporary feminist theory does not focus solely on the lives of women but is an analysis of the socially and culturally constructed category ‘gender’.
3. A great deal of feminist scholarship is concerned with practices of discrimination and exclusion.
However, feminists do not regard women as ‘victims’. Feminism is also concerned with uncov-ering and highlighting ways in which women are empowered to achieve positive changes in their social position.
4. Contemporary feminism does not regard ‘women’ or, indeed, ‘men’ as a single category, but is sensitive to the nuances of gender identities. Given the great variety of women’s experiences and gender relations it is clear that oppression takes many forms.
5. Feminism has gained influence in International Relations theory since the 1980s, though the scholarship which informs it has a much longer history.
6. Feminist scholarship has made a valuable contribution to very many areas long held to be central to international relations.
7. Some (male) commentators argue that the gender ‘variable’ can be incorporated into mainstream IR research agendas. At the same time, feminism challenges conventional ideas about what is central or marginal, important or unimportant in IR; in effect what constitutes a ‘mainstream agenda’.
8. The central insight of feminism is, perhaps, the way in which the notion of a clear private/public distinction renders invisible a particular set of power relations. From a feminist perspective, the private is not only political, but increasingly international or global.
Criticisms
One criticism which could be levelled is that, while ostensibly concerned with gender relations, fem-inists tend to concentrate on women, in their empirical work particularly. This is probably an accurate observation in relation to the first wave of feminist writing in IR, but more work is now appearing on masculinities in IR. Many feminists would counter that they are interested in gender relations because these explain how women are locked into unequal relationships, or indeed, how ideas about gender are used to legitimise the unequal status accorded to women. Concentrating on women is thus con-sistent with the desire to look at the world from the ‘bottom up’.
Another potential criticism is that, while offering important insights, feminists have failed to con-struct a coherent account of the nature of international relations, akin to, say, realism or liberalism.
Certainly, there is no one ‘feminist paradigm’ or feminist theory of IR. However, many post-structuralist feminists working in the field would contend that the construction of one coherent world view is neither possible nor desirable (see chapter 5).
It might also be argued that feminism does not take into account other major divisions between women based on, say, social class or ethnicity. This is a criticism which has been levelled at liberal and radical feminism particularly, and with some justification. Most contemporary approaches to gender attempt a more nuanced analysis which explores the ways in which culture, class, race, and so on intersect and cut across gender divisions.
Another possible criticism is that feminism relies ultimately upon the notion that there is a
uni-versal category ‘woman’ and that women share certain common experiences or interests. In reality, gender relations, ‘women’s experiences’ and the social meaning ascribed to gender difference differ from society to society and from culture to culture. This criticism is central to postcolonial and post-structuralist critiques of Western feminism. Again, the response has been to try to develop a more nuanced understanding of how female (and indeed male) subjectivity is constructed. However, while accepting that difference must be taken seriously, many feminists in the critical and standpoint tra-ditions maintain that this concern with difference should not obscure the continuing existence of stark gender inequalities and the degree to which women are discriminated against in all cultures and soci-eties.
Common misunderstandings
1. Men cannot be feminists. As we noted above, to adopt a feminist lens or gender lens is a political act. Most feminists in IR would probably regard male scholars (and students) as ‘good feminists’
when they engage seriously with feminist ideas and arguments and incorporate feminist concepts and analyses into their own work. Liberals would hold that feminism is a demand for equal rights, and would be happy to attach the label ‘feminist’ to men who support the cause of equal rights for women. However, some feminists hold that ultimately one’s identification with femi-nism arises out of personal experiences of discrimination and a feeling of empathy and solidarity with other women. In this view men cannot be feminists, but only sympathisers and supporters.
2. Gender is the same as sex. No. Sex describes the anatomical, or biological differences between men and women. Gender describes the social significance or meaning ascribed to those differ-ences.
3. The study of gender in IR is about women. Although many feminists tend to concentrate on the position of women (see above), the main focus of contemporary feminism is in gender identities and gender relations. The position and status of women cannot be understood without some ref-erence to prevailing ideas about gender and how gender relations are organised in specific societies.
4. All feminists are lesbian man-haters. This unwarranted and abusive ‘criticism’ is sometimes lev-elled at feminists by those who for whatever reason – ideology or personal insecurity perhaps – are strongly opposed to feminist beliefs and practices. For example, one-time US Presidential candidate Pat Robertson famously, or infamously, described feminism as ‘a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practise witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians!’ The equation of all feminism with lesbian separatism and/or man-hating is without foundation. Feminism is above all about understanding and combating specific aspects of power and inequality rather than closed-minded condemna-tion.
5. The study of gender and IR is only of interest to women. No. The study of gender in IR requires men to reflect on questions of masculinity, masculine identity and power as well as female identity, femininity and inequality. Many feminists would argue that the often trite dismissal of feminist analysis as ‘marginal’ or a ‘women’s issue’, both reflects and reinforces the dominant social position of men and their refusal to engage with any discourse or practice which threatens their privileged position.
6. Feminism is another world view or paradigm. No it is not. See above.