The realm of International Politics is a realm of
patriarchy. The realms of military and policy making are considered to be least
appropriate for women. Strength, power, independence, autonomy, rationality are
all characteristics associated with men and masculinity. J. Ann Ticker in
“Gender in International Relations, Ch. 1” outlines a historical account about
the development of IR theory and how it was structured upon a masculine
worldview. She is of the opinion that women have been excluded from the
political realm precisely because IR theory was established by men and focused
on men’s experience. Having been socialized in an environment where war and politics
are considered to be men’s activity, women have been excluded indiscriminately.
The purpose of her work is to analyze how world politics would look like if
gender as a category would be added to the analysis of IR theory.
Masculinity and politics go far back. The glorification of
male power has indeed created a gender dichotomy. Women in politics are
channeled into “women issues”. Even when women have acquired a certain strong
position in the political sphere, they are overshadowed by the negative perception
of how women are incapable of being part of that realm and nobody takes them
seriously.
The author mentions R.W. Cornell’s idea about hegemonic
masculinity-the stereotypical image of a man (powerful, courageous, toughness)
does not fit most of the men but it is the socialization process whereby a
cultural ideal is internalized which sustains patriarchal authority and
legitimizes patriarchal order. It is in
this very context do we see the absence of women in the political sphere. They
aren't masculine to do what it takes to be a ‘man’.
Though there are various strands of feminist theory,
concepts like sovereignty, power and security need to be challenged using a
feminist lens. A most fundamental start could be from reviewing the gendered
dichotomy in world politics. Why is it that women are still considered to be
soft? Isn’t gender just a social construct? If it is then why can’t we escape
this gender discrimination?
Gender in my view is not a social construct. To be honest, I negate the idea that when feminist talk about femininity they are not actually talking about biological differences but they are actually concerned with characteristics. However my contention is that it is not realistic. Although women participation is to be supported and is necessary in every walk of life, the biological difference are important and these directly effect the characteristics of each other. If women would have been that strong, people in construction industry specifically the manual labor could have been majority of women.The ability and efficiency derived from the biological traits shapes the way women act and the way they are perceived. American president Donald Regan also talks in a similar fashion in the reading.
ReplyDeleteGender as a concept will always remain a social construct. You may be confusing sex with gender because in the former there are biolgical differences which set both of them apart. But ideas like masculinity, feminity and power are not to be associated with a particular sex type. All of these notions are indeed social constructs. It is how we have been socialized into believing. This nature Vs. nurture debate will always continue.
ReplyDelete