Tickner, in his work ''Gendering World Politics'', alludes to a rather understated piece of the larger international relations puzzle, and that is the role of women and feminism with respect to the larger picture of international relations. Tickner expounds on the clash of International relations and feminism, like the three debates which IR theory has undergone. Exploring her ideas in the post cold war era, Tickner speaks about the issues that arise between mainstream approach and feminist school of thought.
What is perhaps not surprising is that there exists a large social construct where women are the suppressed force under the over arching strength of contemporary and ancient chauvinism. Masculinity is seen as the main factor that empowers a person to gain traction in the social and political structures of society. Extending these ideals to the study of IR, Tickner states that many theories of IR revolve around the idea of man and his masculinity. Taking war, for example, it is shown to be the embodiment of man's primal nature. Further, actions such as shaming women after winning a war and other such rituals, are proof of the volatile nature that women's rights has had in history.
Tickner perhaps hits the nail with the point that impresses upon women's role in the international realm. It is said that their inclusion will lead to a direct decrease in war, something that has always been labelled as masculine and only to men. The efficacy of such an argument is perhaps debatable. However, there is no doubt that greater inclusion of the 'other sex' can only take us ahead, giving greater insight and possibly greater wisdom with which to take the world forward.
What is perhaps not surprising is that there exists a large social construct where women are the suppressed force under the over arching strength of contemporary and ancient chauvinism. Masculinity is seen as the main factor that empowers a person to gain traction in the social and political structures of society. Extending these ideals to the study of IR, Tickner states that many theories of IR revolve around the idea of man and his masculinity. Taking war, for example, it is shown to be the embodiment of man's primal nature. Further, actions such as shaming women after winning a war and other such rituals, are proof of the volatile nature that women's rights has had in history.
Tickner perhaps hits the nail with the point that impresses upon women's role in the international realm. It is said that their inclusion will lead to a direct decrease in war, something that has always been labelled as masculine and only to men. The efficacy of such an argument is perhaps debatable. However, there is no doubt that greater inclusion of the 'other sex' can only take us ahead, giving greater insight and possibly greater wisdom with which to take the world forward.
Okay post. But first off, Tickner is a women. Next, do you really buy the argument that with more women in politics, this will lead to a decrease in war? After all, many women leaders have been just as blood thirsty as their male counterparts.
ReplyDelete