Summary
Summary The Politics of Conflict and Peace Notes
- Institution
- Cambridge University (CAM)
3rd year politics exam notes. Details notes of all key readings.
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Gender: Masculinities, Patriarchy and Conflict 2Joshua Goldstein, War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War System and Vice
Versa. Cambridge University Press, 2003. 3
Hunt, K. (2010), ‘The War on Terrorism’, in L. J. Shepherd (ed.), Gender Matters in
Global Politics: a Feminist Introduction to International Relations. London and New York:
Routledge. Pp. 116-126. 4
Marks, Z. (2019) ‘Gender, Social Networks, and Conflict Processes’ feminists@law, 9(1).
5
*Carol Gentry and Laura Sjoberg, Beyond Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Thinking about
Women’s Violence in Global Politics, London: Zed Books, 2015. 7
Buvinic, M., Das Gupta, M., Casabonne, U., & Verwimp, P. (2013). Violent Conflict and
Gender Inequality: An Overview. 8
Carpenter, R. C. (2006) ‘Recognizing Gender-Based Violence Against Civilian Men and
Boys in Conflict Situations’, 10
Berry, M. E. (2017) ‘Barriers to Women’s Progress After Atrocity: Evidence from Rwanda
and Bosnia-Herzegovina’, 11
Mediation and peace negotiations 13
*Stephen Stedman, ‘Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes’, International Security (22:2,
1997). 13
*Desirée Nilsson and Mimmi Söderberg Kovacs. 2011. “Revisiting an Elusive Concept: A
Review of the Debate on Spoilers in Peace Processes.” International Studies Review
13(4): 606-626. 16
*David Cunningham 2013. “Who Should be at the Table?: Veto Players and Peace
Processes in Civil War.” Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs 2, 1: 38-47. 18
*Desiree Nilsson, ‘Anchoring the Peace: Civil Society Actors in Peace Accords and
Durable Peace’ International Interactions, Vol. 38, No. 2, 2012. 19
*M.A. Kleiboer, “Understanding Success and Failure of International Mediation,” Journal
of Conflict Resolution, (Vol. 41, 1996): 360-389. 20
Case study: Bosnia 24
Colombia: negotiation 26
Nasi and Rettberg: Colombia’s farewell to Civil War 2019 28
Colombia: Spoilers - Bouvier (ed) 2009, Nasi (author) 29
,Gender: Masculinities, Patriarchy and Conflict
How is the production of conflict and violence gendered? Should sexual violence in war be treated
differently to other forms of violence? To what extent is ‘patriarchy’ relevant to understanding political
violence and conflict?
What is gender?
Goldstein definition (2001:2): he does not use “gender” as the socio-cultural opposite to the
biological “sex”. Instead, it is used to cover masculine and feminine roles and bodies in their biological
and cultural entirety, including structures, dynamics, roles and scripts; similar approach to Steans,
Enloe and Allison
, Joshua Goldstein, War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War
System and Vice Versa. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
https://www.e-ir.info/2014/11/16/does-gender-shape-the-war-system-and-vice-versa/
● ‘crux of his argument is that there is a universal dichotomisation of the masculine aggressor
against the feminine peacemaker’
○ n.b. masculine/feminine not male/female - key impact on approach to role of gender;
Goldstein says there are real biological differences that are relevant but don’t take the
nuances of gender groups into a consideration, though do make starting point for
examining realities of military practice
● gendering of warfare also has socio-political validations that can be summarised as follows:
(a) “male bonding” is important to conduct of war, (b) heterosexual men operate better than
women and homosexual men in hierarchies, (c) heterosexual men see intergroup relations,
as between two sides of a war, differently from women and homosexual men, and (d)
childhood gender segregation leads to segregation in combat forces (Goldstein, 2001: 5)
● Argues masculinity acts as motivation for soldiers across cultures, norms include (a) war as a
“test of manhood” (b) masculine war roles balanced by feminine war roles e.g. mothers,
sweethearts (c) women’s roles in actively opposing war, furthering idea of masculine war,
peace as feminine
○ Thus the presence of women or feminised men in combat forces nullifies the
normative aspects of war… therefore war reinforces often if mobilise along
gender?
● Warfare seen as act of licensed misogyny, where some attempt to dominate others into
submission - combatants generally associated with masculinity (2001:6)
○ Women involved as seen as acting ‘as men would’ - clinton hawkish likened to male
toughness not genderless rationale when Osama operation // Lynndie England Abu
Graib (Morris 2008) - women acting against norms but positioned as masculine?
England reinforced masculinity bc nature of her torture worse bc she was a woman -
humiliation… intentional weaponising of gender in war
○ Similar notion of masculinity given to female perpetrators of war crimes (Hale,
Maciejczak) how can you tell? Rhetoric? How can you link this to gender norms?
● Masc increasingly linked with warfare bc women increasingly visible as peace activists as part
of demands for equality e.g. women in black network
○ But this further stresses the dichotomy of masc/aggressive fem/passive
○ Women in active mil roles treated as unfeminine and anomalous - perpetuate bc
masc norms prized over fem norms during warfare - to fight is better - prized by
who? Public conscious? (Via, 2010:43)
● Military spouses (Enloe, 2000: 182-183)
○ Spouses symbols of national pride - raise children
● Recent changes to dichotomy of masc/aggressive and fem/passive
○ Female suicide bombers more common after WoT
○ Seen now as having same grievances as males - not gendered motivations
● Rhetoric regarding warfare reliant on social constructs
○ Rhetoric on masc//agressive feeds back into war system (Peterson, 2010: 21) -
protection, masculine nature… saving women .. WoT feminised (Hunt, 2010:117)
○ Male bonding - popular culture idea of conflict not just structural impacts of
conflict itself
● I.e. masculine/aggressive and feminine/passive nexus has become a staple of the war system
and its parts not directly associated with the act of warfare
○ Numerical makeup, training, secual violence, perceptions. Feeds into how war is
gendered and how the nexus is seen
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller barjac00. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £14.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
68175 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now