Search

This paper seeks to highlight how the imagery of Hindu women (which has been discursively utilized by the BJP to support its nationalist/ communalist agenda) is also being used by the party to support a ?Pakistan-centric/ communalized? version of Indian nuclearisation, in defense of a Hindu rashtra. Building upon existing feminist (Chakravarti 1993; Bagchi 1995; Sinha 1995; Chowdhry, 1998; Sarkar 2000; and Gupta 2001) and non-feminist (Nandy 1983 and Chatterjee 1995) scholarships that have demonstrated the centrality of gender in the context of anti-colonial as well as post-colonial India?s nationalist identity formation, I explore in this paper a discursive relationship between a Hindu patriarchy, its quest for Hindu nationalism, and gender and the ways in which this patriarchy, which I term in this study as a Brahmanical/ cultural patriarchy, uses women as markers of communal differences to sustain India?s nuclearisation. Far-fetched or indirect as it may seem on the surface, I explore how this construct of a Brahmanical/ cultural patriarchy based on the fictitious assumption that ?men can do no wrong to women be Hindu or Muslim by religion,? (Chowdhry, 2000:107) both uses and (ab)uses the image of Hindu women to establish Pakistan as a threat to India and bestows upon the Indian state as a patriarchal institution the task of protecting the status of women in India. I argue that, that what makes the case of Indian nuclearisation unique is the Brahmanical/ cultural violence undergirding Indian nuclearisation-- making the issue a matter of cultural sensitivity experienced by the nation, with special imbrications on gender. A corollary of this, which forms the concluding section of this paper, is the Indian state?s role under the political leadership of the BJP in maintaining a communalized, militarized, and a Hindu patriarchal violence at three inter-connected levels, namely between gender (ordering of Hindu women by Hindu men), communities (bordering between Hindu and Muslim communal identities), and inter-state (Othering between India and Pakistan) identities. I argue that this demarcation of identities (which I term in this study as ?Ordering, Bordering, and Othering?) is an outcome of the BJP?s Brahmanical/ cultural patriarchy, to sustain a nuclear India. This is a part of my Ph.D Dissertation which is in progress. If you have any questions concerning this ongoing project, or an updated manuscript of this, then please feel free to contact me at Runa.Das@nau.edu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the meaning and practice of gender mainstreaming in the policy world of peacebuilding and its implications for the role of feminist security theorizing. The focus is Security Council Resolution 1325 and the increasing number of national action plans formulated to implement its commitments. Although Resolution 1325 symbolises the power of rhetorical commitments, this symbolism is not enough to bridge the gap between critical feminist security theory and the tools devised to navigate solutions to women's and men's insecurity. The Resolution is enshrined within a narrow neo-liberal problem-solving approach, in which gender roles ascribed to are rather one-dimensional and unproblematised. Women are 'added' to the peacebuilding discourse and power relations are left unexamined. Similarly, the essence of gender mainstreaming dissipates when national action plans draw only on women's experiences as a resource in peacebuilding and lose sight of the importance of gender as an analytical tool for rethinking peacebuilding policies, thus potentially exacerbating inequality and prolonging the conflict. Feminist critical security scholars have a responsibility to ensure that critical questions - more than bureaucratic issues - inform the contemporary debates on peace and security. They therefore need to challenge international and national role players in how they frame gender. The paper thus aims firstly, to analyse and compare the content of a number of NAPs from the developed and developing world to establish the way in which they frame gender; and secondly to explore the implications of this for constructive linkages between feminist theory and gender policy work. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores the ways in which feminist scholarship is creatively unsettling the disciplinary imaginary of International Relations, by disturbing the very notion of the legitimate units in the organisation of knowledge and by challenging the centre-periphery organisation of disciplinary topography. This 'silent revolution' in IR is observed by looking at a series of position-takings and dialogues that occurred during the past two decades in IR academic publications, regarding the 'feminist question' in IR. In the space of these dialogues, feminists in IR have talked about their disciplinary self and also about the way their niche of scholarship fits into the discipline of IR more broadly. Beyond discussing feminist forms of creativity, the paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the production of novelty in intellectual fields and to explore the overlooked connection between programmatic texts (or talk of self) and disciplinary change. Making sense of disciplinary change is no longer a case of recording trends, but a case of observing local modes of subversive action, performed by reflexive artisans, in a unique intellectual locality. Within this conception of change, feminist 'talk of self' is recuperated as a complicated case of resistance to domestication. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to explore the issue of hegemony with respect to women’s rights protection. To what extent does the hegemony of liberal theory, traditionally present in international law, interfere with the ability of feminist theory to ameliorate the conditions of women in practice? In 1979, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Women’s Convention) became the fourth significant human rights instrument to be adopted by the United Nations. Despite the existence of prior conventions protecting economic, social, and cultural rights (ICESCR), guarding civil and political rights (ICCPR), and combating racial discrimination (CERD), supporters of the Women’s Convention argued for its necessity by highlighting gaps within the existing human rights regime regarding the treatment of women. Specifically, proponents of the Convention reasoned that ICESCR, ICCPR, and CERD dealt principally with public acts, excluding from consideration much of the discrimination directed at women, as such discrimination frequently occurs in the private sphere. The Women’s Convention established the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women as the central monitoring body of the instrument. The CEDAW committee has broadly construed the Convention, applying the provisions both to non-state actors and non-public activities. Indeed, committee members have investigated the behavior of nations with respect to a diversity of issues, such as domestic violence, rape and sexual offenses, trafficking, prostitution, sexual harassment, the abuse of female prisoners, acid attacks, pornography, and advertising. While extensions of international human rights protection surely advance the normative policy agenda of feminism, they represent a departure from the western, liberal system of governance, which aspires to be individualist, ‘value-neutral’ and is predicated upon effectuating ‘negative’ liberty. This tension between the liberal ideal of non-interference and the alternative feminist conception of women’s rights protection as necessarily substantive and outcome-determined is present in the organization of the CEDAW system and the types of protections afforded by it. Further, this conflict, once institutionalized, has resulted in ongoing debates, representing the major issues currently surrounding CEDAW, including the tension between western, often liberal and individualist conceptions of rights protection and non-western, feminist, or collectivist visions of the interests of women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feminist engagement with the discipline of international law has secured an established place in the academy since the early 1990s. Despite the ostensible acceptance ? or tolerance - of feminist theory by international lawyers, there is little indication that the substantive insights and challenges to international law presented by feminist theory have been recognized. This paper is the introductory chapter to International Law: Modern Feminist Approaches, Buss and Manji (eds), (Hart publishing, forthcoming 2004), an edited collection reviewing the progress made and challenges posed by feminist engagements with international law. In this chapter, I look at the emerging body of feminist analyses of international law as yielding insights to the spatialisation of law, policy, and the disciplinary knowledge of international law. I argue that feminist perspectives on international law can been seen as challenging both the shape of international law, and the meaning of the international. Both of these challenges entail a spatial sense of international law; where and what is the international, and where should we look for law. By making explicit the spaces drawn by and through international law, feminists, I argue, expose the mechanisms by which law?s boundaries structure and regulate inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reflects on some of the contours and paradoxes of feminist methodologies as they have manifested in the discipline of International Relations over the last two decades or so. The practice and metaphor of "distraction" is employed as a methodological device; one informed by work on "haunting and the sociological imagination" along with the "methodology of getting lost" and the thinking strategies of Luce Irigaray. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article demonstrates how by using J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings (LOTR) as a text in the classroom, instructors can relay the International Relations (IR) "Great Debates" and ideas from feminist theory to students through the framework of "where you stand depends on where you sit." It overviews how J. R. R. Tolkien's acclaimed trilogy is relevant to learning about IR, and then presents a number of "cuts" into using LOTR to inform IR teaching of both problem-solving and critical theory. It begins by parsing the three "Great Debates" of IR theory and three "waves" of feminist theory in terms of different worldviews by relating them to characters from the trilogy. Next, the paper suggests that a critical evaluation of this analysis conveys that concerns, goals, and understandings of problems and insecurities are influenced (although not determined) by context, such as gender, race, class, sexuality, and postcolonial position. It concludes by suggesting that further use of popular culture and the humanities can help IR teaching both illustrate and critically reflect on IR scholarship. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a paper on the disparate conditions that globalization creates for transnational business elite (TEB) and the low-wage sector (LWS) women in New York City discussed at the International Studies Association Annual Convention in Honolulu, Hawaii on March 5, 2005. It relates domestic violence to state-sanctioned and military violence. The experience of the workplace is said to be affected by an increasing number of women in the TBE. Feminist theory cites that community and a shared identity make a difference in global politics.

Over the past decade there has been much debate within IR/political theory about the nature and status of knowledge with much of the tension revolving around the conflicting positions of so called ‘modernist’ and ‘postmodernist’ scholars. This paper aims to critically evaluate the insights of both these approaches to knowledge in light of feminist theory and the practices of one social movement, that is, the women’s reproductive rights movement. The paper argues that any understanding of the nature and sources of knowledge claims deployed within movements needs, on the one hand, to draw from both these perspectives ? rather than choose between them ? and, on the other, to reach beyond them. More specifically, it argues that we need to learn from feminist theory and explore different sources of knowledge which include, but are not limited to, reason. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mainstream IR epistemological approaches remain focused on the state and the market as units of analysis. Yet, many of these studies have relegated problems of women’s activities, and labor/exploitation to the margins of epistemological relevance. This paper engages the following methodological/pedagogical issues: How is feminist knowledge produced and at what sites, for whom, and for what purpose? I focus on the IR feminist production of knowledge and examine critical incidents in the research/pedagogical process. I address the following issues: (1) Consuming knowledge labor: What’s exploitation got to do with it; (2) mimesis as performative praxis or critique toward collective, democratic social change; (3) writing the text for substantive democracy: Where are fenced-off peoples’ equality in all of this? The paper provides suggestions for a democratic, public, and deliberative mode of inquiry (and provides criteria for assessing its viability) that produces knowledges that contribute to the goal of freedom from necessity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper critiques power transition theory through gendered lenses, contending that it is gendered in its language and conceptual framework. It presents a feminist reformulation of power transition hypotheses. It then compares a power transition approach with a feminist approach to the United States’ interpretation of and options regarding the “rise of China”.The first section of this paper asks how power transition theory contains, reflects, reproduces, and reflects certain assumptions about gender in global politics and scholarship about it. It applies general feminist critiques of security studies to power transition theory, then evaluates some gender-based issues with the language and structure of power transition theory specifically. It critiques the statist approach to security thinking within the power transitions research program and those scholars’ assignment of moral value to hierarchy. Instead, it proposes, gendered lenses can add tools to deal with the question of power transition to make the theory both more representative and more aware of its gendered implications. These tools include searching for silences, disrupting dominant discourses, employing empathy and discourse ethics, analyzing the competition between masculine and feminine values, critiquing us/them dichotomies, and critiquing the sexualization of relationships. The second section of the paper applies these insights to power transition theory’s observations about the rise of China, interrogating which people and states are included in that theory, which needs are neglected by a narrow interpretation of what “security” and “satisfaction” mean, the role of gendered militarized culture, and the social construction of gendered states and their contributions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiculturalism is now becoming a core concept in international politics, especially in new debates about diversity. This paper considers the concept of multiculturalism in the context of globalization, and feminist perspectives on the individual and society. How does feminist analysis and its critique of abstract individualism contribute to considerations of multiculturalism? How has such analysis generated fresh reflections on the idea of multiculturalism? What kinds of specific contributions do traditionsof feminist thought offer to debates about multiculturalism? This paper considers such questions and includes a focus on recent policy-related assessments of multiculturalism in Britain in the new 'war on terror' security climate. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will explore the possible directions in feminist contributions to international relations theory with the use of intersectionality as a tool for analysis, advocacy and policy development. Intersectionality addresses multiple discriminations and helps us understand how different sets of identities impact on access to rights and opportunities. The use of intersectionality in international relations moves the participants beyond theory and into personal experience as well as offers strategies of survival to those who have been marked as ?other? based on their gender, race, class, sexual orientation and/or nationality. This analysis speaks to power and oppression in ways that often remain silent in mainstream IR discussions. The example of how intersectionality is applied to the understanding of the trafficking of women and girls is discussed. The paper concludes with looking at how we, as feminist scholars, move the discipline forward to dialogue around intersectionality and thus use it as a tool for widening the discipline of international relations, which is often resistant to theories traditionally on the margin. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper, which is a part of a larger dissertation project, focuses on the practices of female genital cutting and breast implantation. In particular I examine the results of six months field research involving nearly ninety interviews conducted in Senegal in 2005. One of my main goals in carrying out these interviews was to create the space for the inevitable issues of power and agency to be challenged or over-turned in the relationship between white, Western academic interviewer and black, Senegalese interviewee. What I mean by this is that after listening to the men and women providing their viewpoints, stories and opinions on the topics under examination, I turned the tables and asked for their judgment on my American society. I presented each interviewee with photos of breast implantations, before and after pictures of women's bodies undergoing the procedure and of the actual silicone implanted in the breasts. After showing the Senegalese women and men these photographs, I then asked several questions regarding the practice. This was done with the hope of allowing them, for once, to be the entities passing judgment on Western culture and to hold the position of power that is capable of critiquing a practice in another culture rather than constantly being restricted to the category of judged and critiqued. The responses I received were nothing short of incredible. What I want to accomplish with the continuation of this research is to stress the idea that the oppression of women through the control, manipulation and the mutilation of their bodies should not, and must not, remain on the level of discourse and action that pits powerful and influential Westerners against Africans and others (in both senses of the word) concerning their respective practices. Rather, all sides must first recognize that there is a larger umbrella of oppression and control that is continually occurring which constantly restrains and harms women, and then must fight together against this oppression, regardless of which form it takes. The broader fight against the corporeal control of women, be it on an absolute physical level, or a more ideological or psychological level, must be won if either practice is to permanently end, particularly without simply having a new oppressive practice there to take its place. Finally, this paper directly speaks to several of the questions asked in the Call for Papers. One in particular, 'What are our responsibilities to our research subjects for whom we profess to speak but whose voices we my co-opt?' is addressed by the research I carried out. My responsibility to my 'subjects' was to firstly not speak for them, nor co-opt their voices, but rather to simply act as a vehicle for their voices to travel to places normally restricted. Secondly, I attempted to reverse the subjectification so that the academic 'interview' transformed into a dialogue among women that challenged conventional norms and structures. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much of the work on nongovernmental organizations' (NGOs) in international politics focuses on their ability to influence states. In diplomatic studies literature, there has been a growing interest in understanding challenges facing modern diplomacy, including the roles of NGOs and communications technology, among other issues. Communications literature has noted the importance of some NGOs in public diplomacy. However, feminist scholars Locher and Prugl argue that IR scholars' approach to NGOs generally fails to "endow" NGOs with a "subject quality" and as a result, they miss out (Locher and Prugl 2001: 111-29). This paper starts by engaging Locher and Prugl's suggestion that NGOs are worthwhile 'subjects', not just 'objects' in international politics. Therefore, NGOs must be actively negotiating their roles in international politics. I use the political interaction between human rights NGO Amnesty International and the U.S. government in the specific case of Amnesty International's (AI) 2005 Annual Report forward. The forward included the claim that the U.S.-run Guantanamo Bay detention facility "has become the gulag of our times", a statement that elicited sustained attention in the U.S. media. The paper concludes that some NGOs can successfully influence state behavior in their roles as norms entrepreneurs and norms enforcers, but those NGOs that develop lasting roles in international politics must also be influenced and constrained by state society. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on enduring North/South issues of inequality in the Information Age and explores the ethics of access, including in relation to issues of gender. It foregrounds diverse roles of feminist theory and practice in aiding critical thinking about technology, including the importance of historically grounded perspectives on it. It examines the extreme material and other associated inequalities of contemporary globalization, and the concentration of technological development and power in the rich economies of the North. It emphasizes, in this respect, the enduring importance of North/South frameworks of analysis. Historical developments discussed include the gendered nature of technologies and social processes shaping their production, application and use. The paper asks questions about the ideological tensions between enduring neoliberal discourses of equality and long-term trends of inequality. It examines long standing feminist contributions to exposing and addressing these tensions. The paper also considers feminist and women's activism and community building across North/South, South/North and South/South, and their implications for the study of International Relations. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper revisits Virginia Woolf's classic work 'Three Guineas' and some of its key points on masculinity, conflict and war, in the context of the current 'war on terror'. It focuses on the continuities and discontinuities in feminist perspectives on th ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Social Forum is a novel form of political organizingâ€"a new principle of progressive politics that brings together numerous movements for exchange and dialogue in a single space. Feminists and/or women’s organizations are an active part of the forum and gender and the rights of women have been present in its thematic organization and in the various events held. Yet many feminist and women’s organizations are critical of the Forum and Forum organizers and the reluctance to include women in leading committees and locate gender inequality and the subordination of women as an important nexus of neo-liberalism.Feminist literature that reviews women and feminism in progressive or leftist struggles such as anti-colonial or nationalist struggles, trade union movements, and the US civil rights movement, often make the case that women active in these struggles were encouraged by men leaders or decided on their own to put the struggle for gender equity and women’s rights aside until what was determined the “larger battle”â€"national independence, higher wages and better labor conditions, or racial equalityâ€"was fought. Yet in most cases women’s equality remained neglected after these struggles were over. In this paper we review the literature on women and social movements and assess the World Social Forum. Empirically we focus on events organized by feminist organizations and the women’s movement during and prior to the forum such as the Feminist Dialogues. Drawing on both participant observation and content analyses of activist-generated documents we consider: 1) if and how the WSF operates differently from other leftist or progressive struggles on the question of gender equality and women’s rights and 2) how the forum as a transnational space may have shaped and constrained the development of transnational feminist agendas and discourses. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years much concern has been directed at the mental health of soldiers serving in the Canadian military. Indeed, a public debate has emerged over the prevalence and authenticity of diagnoses of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) amongst Canadian soldiers. On one side of this debate it is argued that ill mental health is the price of service, and that soldiers should have access to better treatment (in both the medical and social sense). In practice, numerous strategies aimed at remedying the state of soldiers’ psyches have been created, such as peer-support centres, 24-hour hotlines, decompression sites, amongst other programs. On the other hand, there are those who resist these new programs, and assert that soldiers claiming to suffer from PTSD are generally fakers and malingerers who use their diagnoses for financial gain and in order to evade deployment. This attitude is deeply entrenched in the masculine culture of the military, and in the valuing of stoicism as well as mental and physical toughness.This paper provides three feminist critiques of these debates in the Canadian military. The first questions to what extent such new programs aimed at ensuring soldiers’ mental health could constitute a shift in masculinist military culture. Ultimately, however, I argue that such a critique is insufficient, as it does not challenge militarism more broadly. Instead, there is a need to raise a second critique, aimed at questioning the ways in which such programs are ultimately aimed at making the military - and militarism - simply ‘work better,’ and at the way in which military wives have been enlisted in this project through a ‘whole family’ approach. Yet a third critique is needed: one that seeks to raise questions about the medicalization of trauma and the governance of soldiers for the purpose of returning them to war-making (sometimes in the name of ‘peace’). By bridging feminist approaches with Foucauldian anti-racist and disability studies scholarship, this final critique suggests that attention to governmental processes in various militaries opens up broader questions about militarism, masculinity, violence, sovereignty and the self. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is a rich feminist literature that addresses the gendered nature of war, arms control, in comparison, has attracted relatively little attention from feminist theorists. At first glance, war and arms control appear to have quite different characteristics. Negotiations aimed at disarmament would seem to be aimed at ending war, not pursuing it. Yet, arms control has been called “war by other means.” The first part of this paper will investigate the meaning of this claim. In particular, it will ask about the extent to which war and arms control draw on the same gendered foundations that value dominance, competition, and distancing of “the Other” over cooperation and empathic negotiation. The second part will ask how arms control would change if it were to draw on feminist values. The history of the international bans on nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons will be used as sources of examples. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to set the context for the panel. We do so both by introducing the histories and significance of 'queer theory,' and by expanding the notion of what it means to do 'queer theory' beyond that of simply discussing sex and sexuality. Instead, we argue that 'queer' theory functions as a 'critical' theory. We do so by first explicitly examining sex and sexuality as recasting the conditions of possibility for analysis of the discipline and practice of international relations. If we think of queer theory in terms of its basic claim--that the social world is produced and reproduced through essentialist norms and practice of sex and sexuality but, in turn, these essentialist norms function as the basis for organizing relations of power-- then queer theory is not moored to sex and sexuality (as those who work in the intersection of feminist theories and queer theories claim) but is ALSO a theory of power, and of particular forms of power hitherto unaddressed by the discipline of international relations. (And, here, we also suggest that while feminist theories of IR are highly significant, feminist theories of IR have yet to incorporate norms of sexuality sufficiently into their critique of IR) To demonstrate our argument, we take up the relationship--most famously captured in the 'bare branches' book by den Boer and Hudson--between 'surplus males' and conflict. (Bare Branches: Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population (MIT Press), Valerie M. Hudson and Andrea M. den Boer) We do so not only to prove the importance of 'queer theory' to the discipline and practice of IR, but to suggest specific policy implications that can follow from its use. After all, a basic premise of this panel is that critical theories, queer theories, are not an end in themselves. Rather, each has a practical political end. This means that queer theory is not only critical of the discipline of international relations, but of the social reality that this discipline is intended to grasp. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the post-colonial India-Pakistan war of partition somewhere between 80.000 and 100.000 women were abducted and raped. That women were abducted and raped was not particular to the conflict. What was particular was the large number of victimised women and the subsequent official acknowledgement of the violence. Half a century later the world faced the consequences of two other post-colonial conflicts during which women were specifically targeted through organised abductions and rape on a mass scale. This time, however the world reacted by defining rape as a weapon of war and as a war crime for which organisers and executors of rape during war and conflict could be accused and sentenced at international courts of justice. Also, research on sexualised violence during war increased, in particular studies mapping sexualised violence against women during war and conflict. However, theoretical explanations are lacking in precision and clarity with the result that we are still badly equipped to understand the complexities of organised sexualised violence, as explanations for such violence are often grounded in outdated andro- and/or ethnocentric theories about male and female roles and behaviour. In this paper I will argue that we need to bring peace and conflict theory up to date through the introduction of contemporary postcolonial and feminist theory. Applied to the examples above the theoretical explanations for the massive abductions and rapes, in particular in the case of India/Pakistan in the late 1940s and Rwanda in 1994, must include an analysis of the colonial and post-colonial context and the sexualisation of the Other as part of colonial and post-colonial identity formation and the consequent image of the Others? Selves. Reading contemporary post-colonial conflicts at the intersection of peace, conflict, feminist and postcolonial theory has academic implications both in terms of research and teaching within the field of peace and conflict studies. The rather conservative androcentrism of traditional peace and conflict studies will through the introduction of feminist and postcolonial theory have to approach both gender and the consequences of colonialism as fundamental to contemporary conflicts and the new wars. The demands from students on the inclusion of such perspectives on teachers and researchers are growing but few are willing to take on the task of renewing the subject. My contribution to the ISA 2007 annual conference is hence focused on the exploration of the implications of the theoretical intersection of peace, conflict, feminist and postcolonial theory, and should be read both as academic politics?i.e. a reaction against the too slow awakening of researchers in this field?and as an engagement with demands from students of peace and conflict. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For scholars of international relations, policing reform in Northern Ireland illustrates the impact of global governance on transforming a key institution of state power --the police-- in a conflict or post-conflict society. The Independent Commission on Policing (aka the Patten Commission) and its incorporation of international "best practices" in its recommendations for policing reform in Northern Ireland qualify it as an authoritative interlocutor of global governance. For feminist scholars of IR, the policing reform question in Northern Ireland also reveals important gender constructions and gender politics at work, both in the Patten Commission recommendations and in the debates over their implementation within Northern Ireland. This paper explores the competing models of hegemonic masculinity at work in the debates about policing and the implementation of policing reform in Northern Ireland in the context of neoliberal globalization.. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will set out to draw some preliminary thoughts based on current debates about "globalization" and "empire". It will focus in particular on the question of what kinds of critiques and contributions feminist scholarship can bring to such debates. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I consider the development of gender mainstreaming in diverse neoliberal contexts, and assess some of its significance in a theory-practice sense. I ask a number of questions about whether such developments may help to transform the ?inferior? status allocated to feminist IR in relation to mainstream (masculinist) IR. In looking at the problem of this inferior status, I explain the historical background to it and reasons for its perpetuation. I ask whether developments related to gender mainstreaming can raise consciousness in the wider IR discipline about the nature of feminist IR, and its contribution as an inclusive approach to humanity, focusing on both men and women and relations among and between them. I argue that gender-mainstreaming policies related to the core IR area of human security and violence are a key challenge to the constraints of masculinist IR. I conclude that gender mainstreaming could be a site of new conversations and understanding between feminist IR and masculinist IR scholars. Please email me gy4@le.ac.uk for copy of paper which I am unable to upload due to publication issues. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The construction of gender and gender relations has been elaborated by feminist theorists to challenge the ?natural-ness? of the gender hierarchy, while additionally problematizing the essentialization of ?women? and ?femininity? inevitably produced and reinforced by its dichotomous, oppositional structuring. In light of the recognition by contemporary feminist theorists of identity as socially constructed ? and therefore mutable ? any attempt to identify fundamental attributes shared by all women everywhere is understood to be unavoidably exclusionary. Acknowledging the fluidity of the subjectivity of ?women? in light of the intersection of gender with other bases of identity has led to an interrogation of power relations amongst women and resistance against the attempt of some women (mainly white, Northern, heterosexist women) to speak for or represent all women. But while insisting on recognition of the complexity of the subjectivity of women, ?men? and ?masculinities? have largely been left undifferentiated in feminist discourse and action, thus feeding into a clear preoccupation with ?women? in feminist(-inspired) practices, even when the impossibility of moving beyond gendered relations of dominance and subordination through women-centered tactics alone is acknowledged. Research on men and masculinities has proliferated in recent years across academic disciplines. Most of the work on multiple masculinities so far, however, has been conducted by men, with many feminists being reluctant to engage this literature. In raising the ?man question? with feminist colleagues in both the academic and activist worlds, I have commonly heard the complaint that ?once again, it?s all about men? and ?everything these days seems to be about men and masculinity.? On the contrary, in my proposed paper I argue that the study of men and masculinities remains an insufficiently tapped area ? particularly in terms of research that looks beyond Northern contexts. As a consequence of the resistance among many feminists to engage more fully with this emerging area of research, the construction of masculinities continues to be studied separately from the construction of femininities. But given that femininities and masculinities are relational ? with all gendered subjectivities being measured against the dominant notion of masculinity in any given society ? the unpacking of masculinities and femininities needs to be undertaken together. Building on field research conducted in Malaysia and South Africa, I argue that one area meriting far more interdisciplinary, contextual study is the relationship between the construction of gender subjectivities and violence. The relationship between gender and violence not only reveals the practical consequences for feminist scholars and activists of failing to take gender seriously through a more direct engagement with men; it additionally underscores the necessity to interrogate masculinities alongside femininities if cycles of violence ? whether interpersonal or inter-group ? are to be disrupted. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three out of the seven US soldiers charged in the sexualized torture case at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq were women. This has caused many to rethink Carol Gilligan’s thesis, that women are more moral and compassionate than men (Ehrenreich, 2004). This paper explains the heterosexist and misogynistic nature of torture techniques used against Iraqis, in the context of the expropriation and privatization of Iraqi nationalized resources (Linebaugh, 2004). Marx reminds us that capital comes into the world dripping from head to toe from every pore, with blood and dirt. The agents of capital can be women or men. Feminist materialist theory reminds us that the pursuit of capitalist control is the latest manifestation of patriarchy, the rule of male elites. Postcolonial feminist theory reminds us that in the Western imperial project of global capitalism, oppression is both raced and gendered. I argue that the US intended the use of torture was a method by an advanced country of the “North” in its campaign to dismantle the national sovereignty of a country from the “South”, subordinate its population, and appropriate its oil resources. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay considers the experiences of women and other marginalized sectors of society within the processes of globalization, based on the feminist theory on international relations (IR). It presents a review of the findings and contributions academic of the academic feminist literature on globalization, including studies by Safa, Vickers, Bakker, Elson & Pearson and Nash. Books by Peterson and Bakker and Gill are cited as examples of collective feminist insights on globalization.

This essay reviews recent research on women's activism in the Southern Cone, Venezuela, on the U.S.-Mexico border, and internationally. It argues that, although women's movements no longer have the momentum or visibility they had during the transitions from authoritarianism in the Southern Cone and Central America, there are important arenas of activism that have received little academic attention. Many women's groups continue to raise feminist issues and to have an impact at the level of civil society and national legislatures, on laws and the use of the courts, and in international forums. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]