CANS 406 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Systems Analysis, Jerry Falwell, American Civil Liberties Union
22 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Conversations between Feminist and “Mainstream” IR
-Often the conversation between feminist and mainstream IR isn’t much of a conversation at all
– we rarely get to feminism in political science/IR classes, for example
-Mainstream IR theorists argue that feminist IR theorists don’t really study international politics,
not addressing the big picture
-The experience of 9/11 and the issue of security are big issues in IR discussions, but the ways in
which feminists have approached them haven’t been resonant with central IR questions
-E.g. of a central IR question: What is security? How is security achieved between states?
-Recognition that security is not just about military security
-Realism defines security in political and military terms, protection of boundaries, integrity of
state and its values against dangers of a hostile international environment (Tickner)
-Neo-realists would emphasize the anarchical structure of the international system and how that
shapes state insecurities
-States seen as unitary actors whose “internal characteristics, beyond an assessment of
their relative capabilities, are not seen as necessary for understanding their vulnerabilities
or security-enhancing behavior” (Tickner)
-Many feminist IR scholars have a particular interest in defining security in multidimensional
terms
-Tickner: “diminution of all forms of violence, including physical, structural, and
ecological”
-Start with “the individual or the community rather than the state or the international
system” (Tickner)
-Sylvester talks about security as something “elusive and partial and involves struggle and
contention; it is a process rather than an ideal in which women must act as agents in the
provision of their own security”
-Bringing women to center of analysis, focus on structural inequalities and how they
affect lived experiences
-Feminists question the notion that the danger and anarchy is on the outside, and security is on
the inside
-We tend to see the state as the provider of security, ignoring how the state can create
insecurities
-Militaries as a threat to security rather than guarantor: “if women are thought to be in
need of protection, it is often their protectors who provide their greatest threat” (Tickner)
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Often the conversation between feminist and mainstream ir isn"t much of a conversation at all. We rarely get to feminism in political science/ir classes, for example. Mainstream ir theorists argue that feminist ir theorists don"t really study international politics, not addressing the big picture. The experience of 9/11 and the issue of security are big issues in ir discussions, but the ways in which feminists have approached them haven"t been resonant with central ir questions. Recognition that security is not just about military security. Realism defines security in political and military terms, protection of boundaries, integrity of state and its values against dangers of a hostile international environment (tickner) Neo-realists would emphasize the anarchical structure of the international system and how that shapes state insecurities. States seen as unitary actors whose internal characteristics, beyond an assessment of their relative capabilities, are not seen as necessary for understanding their vulnerabilities or security-enhancing behavior (tickner)
