Week 12: Moving Forward: Feminism, Gender and Knowledge

Earlier this week I watched a short documentary on Aljazeera, in which a Zimbabwean journalist, Stanley Kwenda, tells a story about child smuggling. Kwenda wrote an article to compliment his documentary and it expressed the value of his work. He believes it represents an indigenous voice on the issue, with knowledge on the land and the culture, as opposed to the voice of a “white foreign correspondence.” Though Kwenda did not outright discuss standpoint theory in his article, I believe this theory informs his ontology. As I watched the documentary I kept thinking about knowledge and power and I found myself thinking back to Carol Cohen’s “Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals.” One of Cohen’s points, which resonated with me, was her reminder to always ask, who is the subject? The subjects of Kwenda’s documentary are three Zimbabwean children and through the use of standpoint theory, Kwenda creates a space for their marginalized voices. I found the question of subjects to be significant in both Sandra Harding’s “Gender, technology, and militarism: An engagement with Eric M. Blanchard” and Judith Hicks Stiehm’s “These on the military, security, war and women.” Therefore, I will consider the way these authors conceptualize the issue of subjects and how this issue intersects with notions of power and knowledge.

Harding discusses two central points in her article. First, she argues that the relationship between militarism and advancements in scientific and technological knowledge simultaneously drive one another. Harding ties advancements in military technologies to patriotism, using the example of the atom bomb. She explains how “Western science and Western militarism have co-produced, or co-constituted each other.” This relationship shapes our ontology; the way we value advancements in knowledge and consider progress to be “good” thing. She reminds us that we need to ask: who do these advancements benefit and who suffers as a consequence of “progress”? Second, she articulates the value of feminist standpoint theory. This theory opens space for and attributes value to women’s voices. Thus, Harding addresses questions of power and knowledge within security discourses by reminding us of the multifaceted meanings of violence and security, while also reminding us of the importance of women as subjects in these narratives.

Judith Hicks Stiehm’s “These on the military, security, war and women” also addresses themes of power within security discourses. Her many points address the intersections of gender and international relations. My response examines thesis xxx, which is as follows:

The government is said to have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. If men have a near monopoly on force, what can we learn from how women manage in a culture where they are, essentially, unilaterally disarmed?

In asking what can be learnt from women, Stiehm is asking us to consider women as subjects in security and political discourses. Her thesis is shaped by the underlying assumption that men and women (can) experience violence differently. Further, her thesis is related to Harding’s point, in that the monopoly of force men possess is part of a larger project of expanding scientific knowledge on technology. This discourse values certain types of knowledge and power (read: objective and rational) over others (read: qualitative and emotional). Stiehm’s thesis illuminates the different and gendered voices we need to consider in security discourses.

Stanley Kwenda’s documentary illuminates several important themes discussed in Harding and Stiehm’s work. Embedded in a postcolonial context, his article illuminates the significance of standpoint theory, for as a Zimbabwean man he is able to tell a story about youth in Zimbabwe. The documentary traces the experience of three youths (two girls and one boy) who engage with smugglers in their attempts to flee Zimbabwe to South Africa. While Kwenda’s documentary and article can be seen in one way to represent local knowledge, the concept of gender is invisible. While watching Kwenda interview the two girls, Julia and Juliet, I found myself wondering, if they were being interviewed by a woman how different would the stories they told have been? Kwenda’s status as an educated male demonstrates a hierarchy of knowledge (he is a journalist and speaks English with his crew before switching back to the local language) that separates him from the girls.

Furthermore, one of the girls he interviews explains that she is living with a man she met at the “taxi rent,” who pays her to sell oranges and eggs. Kwenda does not question this arrangement, nor does he consider the exploitative (whether in a labour or sexual context) implications it may have. In anther scene he mentions girls do not go down to the river by the border alone, as they are putting themselves in danger of being raped. But Kwenda does not elaborate on why there is a high risk of sexualized violence, or how this contributes to different definitions of “security” for girls and boys. He lumps girls and boys into one subject category, thus silencing any gender differences. In conclusion, the above readings and Kwenda’s documentary demonstrate the significance of feminist standpoint theory as well as the need to ask who is the subject and also, who is telling the story?

Bibliography

Harding, Sandra. “Gender, technology, and militarism: An engagement with Eric M. Blanchard.” In Feminism and International Relations: Conversations about the past, present and future. Edited by J. Ann Tickner and Laura Sjoberg. New York: Routledge, 2011,  164-168.

Kwenda, Stanley. “The African Story, told the African Way.” Aljazeera. Accessed November 24, 2011.<http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/africainvestigates/2011/11/2011111683134191559.html?utm_content=automateplus&utm_campaign=Trial6&utm_source=SocialFlow&utm_medium=MasterAccount&utm_term=tweets>.

Stiehm, Judith Hicks. “These on the military, security, war and women.” In Gender and International Security: Feminist perspectives. Edited by Laura Sjoberg. New York: Routledge, 2010, 17-23.

Week 11: Peace and Moving Beyond Violence

Nadine Puechguirbal’s chapter “Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding, and Post-Conflict Resolution” provides insight to the relationship between gender and the United Nations (UN). Puechguirbal highlights several important developments to the UN’s incorporation of gender, such as Resolution 1325 and the efforts of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations to recognize the multifaceted meaning of gender mainstreaming. But there are many deeply gendered structures which continue to restrict the impact of these changes. Puechguirbal explains that one of the central limitations of incorporating gender sensitivity in peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions is the UN’s use of language. In texts like Resolution 1325, men and women are continually divided into traditional binaries (men=fighters and protectors, women=victims and protected). Furthermore, these texts conflate women with children, the disabled and the elderly, thus removing women’s agency.

A second obstacle Peuchguirbal identifies is the way the UN uses gender as a tool rather than a critical way of viewing the world. This observation reminded me of The Whistleblower, a film I watched a few weeks ago. This film tells the story of Kathryn Bolkovac, an American police officer who participated in the UN's peacekeeping mission in post-war Bosnia. While serving as head of the Gender Affairs unit, she discovered rings of sex smuggling. She uncovered layers of corruption, as the perpetrators of the smuggling ranged from the local police, through an American private military firm (DynCorp) and up into the executive branches of the UN. 

 Puechguirbal’s chapter and The Whistleblower both highlight the impact of the UN’s use of gender as a “problem-solving” tool in peacekeeping. In contrast, Taking Root: The Vision of Wangari Maathai, shows that peace and development can be possible when gender is used as a world view. Comparing these films, two different models of “peacebuilding” are illuminated; The Whistleblower represents an institutional top-down approach, whereas Taking Root represents a local, grassroots one. 

Examining The Whistleblower through the frame of Peuchguirbal’s chapter illustrates the causes of Bolkovac’s challenges. The way gender sensitivity was included in the UN’s mission in post-war Bosnia utilized gender as a “problem-solving instrument.” Thus, gender was kept as separate, as seen by the Gender Affairs unit Bolkovac was in charge of. Also, this approach prevented recognition of the masculinized military presence on women and men in, which was complicated by the presence of a private military firm. Lastly, gender as a tool rather than a critical perspective made it difficult for some personnel to take gender sensitivity seriously. This is epitomized in a scene where local Bosnian policemen ignore the case of a woman who has suffered several injuries as a result of domestic violence. This scene also addresses the intersectionality of race, gender and violence, as the policemen state their belief that the women deserved her injury because she is Muslim. 

            Although the example of Bosnia in The Whistleblower represents a UN mission and Taking Roots is focused on local activism in Kenya, both speak to the idea of building peace and security. The grassroots approach advocated by the Green Belt Movement shows there are alternative and gender sensitive approaches. This film tells the story of Wangari Maathai, a Kenyan woman who founded the Green Belt Movement. Her actions demonstrate that she was using gender as a critical tool rather than a problem solving tool. By talking with women about their daily lives she found the deforestation around their communities was causing a lack of firewood and water. This was changing their cooking habits; the women shifted from cooking traditional meals to using food that had many carbohydrates and was highly refined. The change in diet had a substantial impact on the health of their families and communities. As a way to change this, Maathai encouraged the women to plant trees to reduce the detrimental impact of deforestation. Gradually the movement grew and as it developed, the knowledge, confidence and livelihood of the women involved (as well as their communities) grew too. 

This film shows the vital role women play in peacebuilding. It demonstrates that approaches to change do not always need to be “culturally sensitive.” As several of the women note, some men were opposed to the women in their communities planting trees, as it was not a “traditional role” for Kikuyu women. As many cultures are patriarchal, the gender roles have been shaped according to hegemonic masculinities. This is reflected in the Puechguirbal chapter, as she reminds us that after a conflict, women are expected to return to their post-war roles. The everyday, lived experiences of women are foundational for the peace, security and sustainability of their communities. Thus, it is absolutely necessary to use gender as a world view rather than as a problem solving tool. 

Bibliography 

Puechguirbal, Nadine. “Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding, and Post-Conflict Resolution.” In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations. Edited by Laura J. Shepherd. Routledge: Oxen: 2010, 161-175.

Taking Root: The Vision of Wangari Maathai. Directed by Lisa Merton and Alan. Canada: Mongrel Media, 2009.  

The Whistleblower. Directed by Larysa Kondracki. Canada: Gen One, Canada Inc. and Barry Films, 2010. 

Week 8: Technology, Masculinity, and Violence

As I was reading the Globe and Mail this past Saturday the caption of the above photo caught my eye; it read “A Liberated Nation Ponders a New Beginning.” This photo depicts the Libyan nation as represented by soldiers, religious figures and boys. Women are rendered invisible. The description of the photo notes the Libyan interim government is facing “pressure to move toward democracy” and as I read this I wondered what role women will play in the peace building and democratic process. My analysis discusses the way masculine and feminine subjects are divided in war and how this divide is exaggerated by the public-private dichotomy. By discussing this photo in the context of Cristina Masters’ “Cyborg Soldiers and Militarised Masculinities” and Zainab Salbi’s speech “No Peace Without Women” I reflect on the notion of gendered subjects and how this impacts the framing of war and peace building. 

            Masters’ chapter explores the idea that military technology could be a “transgressive force” and collapse the gendered understanding of conflict (men as protectors and women as needing protection). But her analysis finds that technology continues to perpetuate gendered power structures. Masters examines the “cyborg soldier” to show the way the masculine subject of war has changed. Thus, masculine subjectivity has shifted from the masculine body to military technology. She concludes by stating this masculinised technology contributes to a more violent type of war because it allows for a distancing and dehumanization of the enemy other.

            As the CEO and founder of Women for Women International, a key theme in Salbi’s speech is the vital role women play in peace building. Similar to Masters, Salbi discusses the masculine-feminine divide that frames the war discourse. More specifically, she describes men as experiencing the “frontline” and women experiencing the “backline.” These experiences reflect the gendered roles of the public and private sphere. Furthermore, these gendered experiences shape different conceptions of peace and security. Thus, Salbi articulates the need for a dialogue between men and women during nation building. 

            The masculine depiction of the Libyan nation reflects the way subjects are gendered in war and peace processes. Masters discusses the masculine subject of military technology as it embodies supposed masculine qualities, like objectivity and rationality. Human bodies are seen as fragile, “unreliable” and “unruly.” Thus, the physical body of the soldier is no longer seen as the” hardware,” but rather as “wetware.” The masculine subject has shifted from the body and is now embedded as the “hardware” of the military technology. This “fetishization of technology” focuses on the violence of war and privileges the “frontline” experience over the “backline” experience. As such, gendered subjects of war are perpetuated.

            Also, by continuing to categorize masculinity with the “frontline” and femininity with the “backline,” women are excluded from the peace building process. Salbi highlights the way security is performed by women during war; women keep schools open, they keep families fed and they play uppets for their children during bombing raids to keep them calm. These examples differ from a frontline perspective of security, but as Salbi reminds us, both perspectives are necessary to achieve equitable peace building. Her speech documents the way Afghani women are being left out of the nation building process. An examination of the Libyan nation as represented by the Globe and Mail photo is worrisome for the prospect of feminine subjects participating.

            Lastly, these three texts all speak to the inherent weakness of the rigid categories of masculinity and femininity. Masters’ chapter demonstrates the impossible standards of masculinity; machines have absorbed this subjectivity, as physical bodies and minds experience emotions like fatigue and remorse that hinder performance in war. Salbi articulates the fluidity of courage, with women who lived through rape camps finding the strength to stand up, again and again. This shows that our qualities do not belong in categories divided by the public-private, masculine-feminine divide. In order to reframe our perceptions of war and peace all perspectives must be considered.

Bibliography

Masters, Cristina. “Cyborg Soldiers and Militarised Masculinities.” In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations. Edited by Laura J. Shepherd. Routledge: Oxen: 2010, 176-186

Salbi, Zainab. “No Peace Without Women.” Lecture, Distinguished Women in International Affairs and United States Institute of Peace’s “Women and War” conference, Washington DC, 3 November 2010. <http://media.elliott.gwu.edu/video/165.> Accessed 26 October 2011. 

Longari, Marco. “A Liberated Nation Ponders a New Beginning.” Getty Images. From “Successful NATO Mission lets rebels define conflict.” Globe and Mail, 22 October 2011. <http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/africa-mideast/successful-nato-mission-let-rebels-define-conflict/article2210127/> Accessed 26 October 2011.

Blog Week 7: Economics, Nationalism and Consumerism



Blog Week 7 – Economics, Nationalism and Consumerism

            On Tuesday October 18th, Jian Ghomeshi, the host of CBC's Radio Q, interviewed Sasha Houston Brown. The topic of the interview was Houston Brown’s reaction to Urban Outfitter’s new line of “"Navajo" themed products.” At the time of their interview, Urban Outfitters had released a statement exclaiming that they would not change the name of these products, but the next day the word Navajo was removed from the products and replaced with "printed." Thus, "Navajo Hipster Underwear," is now described as "Printed Hipster Underwear." On Columbus Day (irony fully intended), Houston Brown wrote an open letter to Glen Senk, the CEO of Urban Outfitters. Her letter articulated the cultural disrespect and legal issues regarding the appropriation of Navajo culture into mass consumer goods. She explained how these products belittle the Navajo Nation, as their cheap and tacky representation of the Navajo culture is "racially demeaning" and ignorant. Her letter outlines how the use of the word “Navajo” is illegal for Urban Outfitters use in describing their products, as this word is patented and only the Navajo Nation or those with express permission may use it. The Navajo inspired product line and the response it evoked is a clear demonstration of the way consumerism, nationalism and the global political economy are inherently linked. By examining Kristen Ghodsee’s “Potions, Lotions and Lipstick: The Gendered Consumption of Cosmetics and Perfumery in Socialist and Post-Socialist Urban Bulgaria” and Dibyesh Anand’s “Nationalism,” I will discuss how these articles illustrate the gendered nature of consumption. Furthermore, these articles highlight the significant role the state plays in shaping national, consumerist identities.

           

Ghodsee’s article traces the consumption of health and beauty aids (HBAs) in socialist Bulgaria through to the introduction of capitalism, within the wider realm of globalization. She demonstrates how the socialist state created a producerist identity and the way this shifted to a consumerist identity after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This notion of consumerist identities is gendered, as women were overwhelmingly the consumers of new products in Bulgaria. The sexualisation of women through HBAs is also discussed in this article, as she points to how women expressed their desire for cosmetics as a way to look “young” and “attractive.” Physical appearance was also understood by some women as part of their resume; one of the women interviewed stated “[y]ou have to be good looking to get a job.” Thus, this article reminds us to study consumerism and capitalism with a gendered lens.

           

Anand’s chapter outlines the dominant discourse of nationalism and the way women and notions of gender are silent within it. She argues that nationalism is not “natural,” but instead is constructed everyday through the lives and actions of its subjects. The concept of Orientalism is also present in this chapter and Anand discusses the way the dichotomy of Self and Other is strengthened during times of stress and conflict. She reminds us of the gendered construction of the Self and the Other, in which the Self is masculine and the Other is feminine.

           

By considering these two readings in relation to the Navajo products, several themes and connections emerge. First, all these texts reveal the gendered nature of consumption and how this shapes an envy and sexualisation of the Other. This is demonstrated through one of Ghodsee’s interviews, as the interviewee recalls how younger Bulgarian women would use Western deodorants rather than the state produced rose scented perfume. Deodorants were preferred because these women considered Western products to be “prestigious.” For these women, having Western products were a marker of status and women judged one another according to how “they smelled.” Ironically, these women later discovered that the deodorants to be “supermarket brands, like Rexona and Nivea.” Thus, their sense of Self and Other was convoluted by state control and their resistance. The gendered character of consumption is also evident in the recent popularity of Indigenous trends in fashion. Moccasins, feather earrings and Navajo Hispter underwear are a few examples of this. These products are marketed towards women and they also reveal an underlying notion of Othering. The corporate appropriation of Navajo culture is a misrepresentation of Indigenous peoples and Indigenous women. It demonstrates state interest in shaping consumer identities and the tension involved in this process. The Houston Brown’s demand that Urban Outfitters remove the word Navajo from these products is an example of resistance to this top-down state constructed nationalism.

            Another key theme that emerges in this analysis is the gendered layers of consumption, international relations and the global political economy. As the economy becomes more global, the production of goods becomes cheaper and labour conditions worsen. This is examined in Ghodsee’s article in her discussion of the consumer surplus, which contributes to availability of HBAs ready for women to purchase. In Houston Brown’s letter she notes the role the globalized economy has played in the creation of the “cheap knock-off trinkets made in factories overseas,” which supposedly represents the culture of the Navajo Nation. She continues in her criticism by stating that “[S]elling imported plastic and nylon dreamcatchers disrespects our history and undermines our sovereignty as Tribal Nations.” Many women are employed by transnational companies and Export Processing Zones and it is likely that many of these Navajo products were produced under these conditions. Thus, the global political economy and consumer identities reinforce one another.

             

Bibliography

Anand, Dibyesh. “Nationalism” In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations. Edited by Laura J. Shepherd. Routledge: Oxen: 2010, 280-291.

Ghodsee, Kristen. “Potions, Lotions and Lipstick: The Gendered Consumption of Cosmetics and Perfumery in Socialist and Post-Socialist Urban Bulgaria.” Women Studies International Forum 30:1 (2007), 26-39. 

“Houston Brown, Sasha. “An Open Letter to Urban Outfitters on Columbus Day,” October 10, 2011. Indian Country Today Media Network.< http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/10/an-open-letter-to-urban-outfitters-on-columbus-day/> Accessed October 20, 2011.

“Is this a Fashion Crime?,” Tuesday October 18, 2011. Q Blog: CBC Radio.< http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/> Accessed October 20, 2011.

“So-Called Navajo Products Vanish from Urban Outfitters Website, October 19, 2011.” Indian Country Today Media Network.< http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/10/so-called-navajo-products-vanish-from-urban-outfitters-website/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=so-called-navajo-products-vanish-from-urban-outfitters-website&utm_campaign=fb-posts> Accessed October 20, 2011.





Blog Week 6: Control, Women's Bodies and Sexuality

         In the news this week I have been following the Missing Women Commission and the issues surrounding this inquiry. More specifically, I am interested the way many groups are refusing to participate, as they believe women are not being allocated a significant role and therefore, any meaningful change is unlikely to occur. An article posted on CBC discussed the findings of the inquiry and it is suggested that “a combination of the law, police tactics and bad attitudes among officers” contributes to the marginalization of sex workers in Vancouver.

           

            The themes we discussed this week in class related to control, women’s bodies and sexuality are reflected in a local setting through this article. By examining Barbra Sullivan’s “Trafficking in Human Beings” and Edward E. Baptist’s ““Cuffy,” “Fancy Maids,” and “One-Eyed Men”: Rape, Commodification, and the Domestic Slave Trade in the United States,” these themes are illustrated in a global sense. By considering the continuing intersection of control, women’s bodies and sexuality, it is evident that these themes pervade all levels of politics.

           

            Sullivan’s chapter makes several key observations in her study of human trafficking. First, she discusses the gendered construction of international trafficking laws by comparing trafficking and smuggling laws. She examines the language that frames trafficking laws and finds it to be feminine and passive, whereas the language of smuggling laws is masculine and implies consent and freedom. Second, this gendered construction shapes the way sex trafficking is the central focus for media and political institutions, rather than acknowledging the way trafficking involves men, women and children in different ways. Third, Sullivan discusses the negative impacts anti-trafficking laws have upon women’s rights.

           

            The theme of control of women’s bodies is discerned through the harmful implications of law, both at the international level with anti-trafficking laws and also at the Canadian level, with sex worker laws. As is noted in the CBC article, Canadian laws regarding sex workers is vague and tends to criminalizes prostitution. This means many sex workers do not seek help from the police, as it could result in lawful repercussions. The CBC article also notes how many sex workers have been “ridiculed by police officers when reporting assaults, and harassed while on the streets.” This type of institutional discrimination is highlighted in Sullivan’s article, as she focuses on how immigration officers stereotype women coming from countries like Brazil and refuse them entry.

           

            Baptist’s article examines the intersection between slavery, rape and commerce during the American slave trade. His analysis reveals the commodification of African women’s bodies and how these bodies were desired by the “one-eyed-men,” as a way to establish their domination. A second theme to his article is the connection between political economy (the trade of bodies) and globalization (the slave trade and domestic trade).

            At the heart of Baptist’s article is the notion of control. Through his interpretation of the letters sent between slave traders Isaac Franklin and Rice Ballard, Baptist concludes that these men “passionately wanted ‘mulatto’ women, and black people generally; as bodies to rape and bodies to sell.” The control of the slave trade was underpinned by racial constructions of law, in which Africans were considered sub-human and therefore had no rights. The bodies and sexuality of these African women was controlled through white political dominance. These political power relations are also a cause of the discrimination faced by sex workers in Vancouver. The CBC article notes how sex workers have been pushed out of “safer” neighbourhoods due to complaints from residents. As a result many sex workers have been displaced to industrial areas, which are rarely policed. The CBC article also notes the Highway of Tears and the way many Indigenous women have gone missing, yet this has escaped the focus on many mainstream media sources. Furthermore, both the Baptist article and the CBC article note the lack of power these women have, as they are socially marginalized and therefore face structural discrimination in attempting to change their circumstances.  

           

            In conclusion, the connections between Sullivan, Baptist and the CBC article all demonstrate the multifaceted ways in which control, sexuality and women’s bodies emerge in politics. The Sullivan article reminds us that many of the discourses ignore the deeper social, political and economic reasons as to why people are trafficked. This is reflected in the CBC article, which urges us to think about the broader issues surrounding sex work, like poverty and institutional discrimination. Baptist reminds that control of women’s bodies and sexuality has a very long history and there are deeply entrenched notions of dominance. Considering these sources together, trends in international politics parallels local politics and the intersection between these themes is clear.

Bibliography

Baptist, Edward E. ““Cuffy,” “Fancy Maids,” and “One-Eyed Men”: Rape, Commodification, and the Domestic Slave Trade in the United States.” The American Historical Review 106:5 (2001), 1619-1650.

Canadian Political Press. “Police make sex workers “easier targets,” inquiry told,” October 12, 2011. CBC News: Canada. Accessed October 13 2010. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/10/13/bc-missing-women-prostitution-expert.html?cmp=rss>

Christopher, Ben. “First day of missing women hearings marred by protests, more withdrawals,” October 11, 2011.  The Hook. Accessed October 11, 2011. <http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Rights-Justice/2011/10/11/Missing-Women-Hearings-Begin/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thehookblog+%28The+Hook%29>

Sullivan, Barbra. “Trafficking in Human Beings.” In Gender Matters in Global Politics: A Feminist Introduction to International Relations. Edited by Laura J. Shepherd. Routledge: Oxen: 2010, 89-101.

Reflecting on Language and Gender: Week 4 Blog

On September 23^rd the Globe and Mail published an article entitled “Canadian Teens Ambivalent about Gender Equality.” This article compared the prevalence of gender stereotypes among teenagers in Canada, India, United Kingdom and Rwanda.  Canadians ranked high in their adherence to traditional gender roles; men’s primary responsibility as being in the public sphere, earning money to support his family, whereas women belong in the private sphere, taking care of the home and raising children. One of the central themes of the article was gender equality and many of the interviewees stated that women and men ought to be in conversation with one another in order to achieve this aim.

This article resonated with me, as it reflects this week’s questions and themes. As I read through it I wondered how language continues to shape the public-private dichotomy and how this in turn perpetuates gender stereotypes. I will discuss how Aili Tripp’s article “Why So Slow? The Challenges of Gendering Comparative Politics” and Claire Duncanson and Catherine Eschle’s artcile “Gender and the Nuclear Weapon State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government’s White Paper on Trident” relate to the themes of gender and language.

Tripp’s article is concerned with the lack of gender within the subfield of comparative politics.  Her article is divided into five subsections: the small number of women researching these topics, the invisibility of gendered comparative politics, methodological issues, trends in research and a lack of mentors and classes devoted to this subject. The central argument of her article is the way these five issues perpetuate the small niche gender currently represents in comparative politics.  

The gender stereotypes discussed in the Globe and Mail article are present in Tripp’s analysis.  The public-private divide is exemplified in her discussion of how men conducting field work often bring their spouse assist in child care, whereas women engaged in field work usually bring their children, but leave their spouse. Tripp also points to the difficulty many women face in conducting field work abroad, as academic and funding agencies rarely offer enough (financial) support for their children. This means fewer women receive their PhD’s after having children and in turn, fewer women obtain tenure in comparison to their male colleagues. These examples show how terms like “public” and “private” have serious repercussions on gender stereotypes.

The impact of language and gender is highlighted in Tripp’s methodology section. Quantitative research is characterized by statistics and mathematical models and this type of approach neutralizes gender. As Tripp points out, it is this type of research that is found in the top political science journals. In contrast, research focused on gender tends to incorporate a qualitative methodology, which is less likely to be published in the top journals. This means that research focused on gender is marginalized within academic structures. How can teens be less ambivalent about gender equality when research presents itself as neutral when it ought to be read as deeply gendered?  

           

The way gender and language intersect and reflect common stereotypes is also illustrated in Duncanson and Eschle’s article. Their work builds on Carol Cohn’s findings of the masculinised and sexualized language that characterizes the nuclear state discourse. Using a post-structural textual analysis, they deconstruct the UK government’s White Paper on Trident. Duncanson and Eschle claim that while the White Paper is not seeped in overtly sexualized language, nuclear discourse is still relies on a gendered language. For instance, they discuss how security is conceptualized using a realist perspective, whereby the state is understood as the protector (read: masculine and public sphere) and the citizens are understood as in need of protection (read: feminine and private sphere).  Also, the discourse on the “enemy Other” illuminates the way language dichotomizes gender, as the “enemy Other” is irrational and emotional thus casting the UK in the role of controlled and rational. This is reflected in the Globe and Mail article, as about 45% of the Canadian teens interviewed said an important characteristic of men is “being tough.” 

Duncanson and Eschle also discuss the way the White Paper shapes a role for the UK as a “responsible steward.” They found this to be laden with contradictions, as paper claimed the UK would act unilaterally, which ignores the strategic influence of the United States as well as the UK`s dependence on this alliance. Imagining itself as a “responsible steward” reflects the notion that the UK is a protector and by deconstructing this, Duncanson and Eschle demonstrate the inherent contradictions in dichotomies. The language used in this article is heavily gendered, which helps to shape gender stereotypes.

           

The Globe and Mail article articulated the importance of gender equality, but before this can be achieved, it is necessary to reflect upon the way language and gender intersects. Tripp, Duncanson and Eschle all discuss these themes and their work illustrates the very real way in which language impacts our practices and beliefs regarding masculinity and femininity.

Bibliography

Baluja, Tamara. Globe and Mail, September 27,011. Accessed September 28, 2011. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadian-teens-ambivalent-about-gender-equality/article2177091/

Duncanson, Claire and Catherine Eschele. “Gender and the Nuclear Weapon State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government’s White Paper on Trident.” New Political Science 30:4 (December 2008), 545-563.

Tripp, Aili. “Why So Slow? The Challenges of Gendering Comparative Politics.” Politics and Gender 2:2 (2006), 249-263.