Feminist Theory: Redefining International Relations
written by Raisha Jesmin
Cynthia Enloe asked the question ‘where are the women?’ in her book Beaches, Bananas and Bases published back in 1990, confronting the issue of lack of women in world affairs. This was during the time Feminist Theory was gaining momentum in the realm of International Relations (IR). Feminist theorists have come a long way since then, and have not only pervaded, but broadened, the conventional borders of International Relations. The theory aims to redefine the field of IR using a gender sensitive lens and to achieve political, economic, and social equality for women.
Feminism as an academic discipline emerged because of the feminist movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Feminist theory continued to develop between the 1980s and 1990s, when several conferences, women’s development projects and books (Cynthia Enloe and J. Ann Tickner being some of the notable authors) opened the door to more feminist thinking. International Relations ‘has only recently made a place for feminist analysis, and then only grudgingly’ (Blanchard 2003: 1); the world of IR is mostly a masculine zone that neglects the role of gender in global politics and fails to acknowledge women’s contributions. For feminist theorists, the gender variable is significant because it shows the way in which the fundamental concepts and institutions central to the field of IR can be shaped by gender. Gender in feminist theory does not simply mean the biological sex of individuals, it ‘refers to the complex social construction of men’s and women’s identities and behaviors in relation to each other. Fundamental in the discourse on gender is the notion of power and power dynamics between genders’ (Thornburn 2000: 3). This concept of gender is best explained by Simone de Beauvoir who stated that ‘one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman’. Feminists argue that certain characteristics such as power, autonomy, and rationality are stereotypically associated with men whereas traits like emotion, weakness, dependence are associated with women. This construction of gender can place not only women in a subservient position, but also privilege a brand of masculinity that could be harmful to men. Feminist theorists therefore suggest using gendered lenses to view the world and they employ various theories (such as Liberal Feminism) to facilitate understanding. According to Jill Steans (2003: 435), all feminist perspectives of IR have four goals, which are: to emphasize the omissions and biases of mainstream IR; to make women visible in international politics; to understand the origins of gender inequalities in the school of IR; and lastly, ‘to empower women as subjects of knowledge by building theoretical understandings of IR from the position of women and their lived, embodied experiences’.
Feminist theories have challenged the power and knowledge of mainstream Realism and Liberalism, which have long dominated the field of IR. These theories, developed primarily by men and sculpted around the experiences of men, are paraded to be objective and universal; this is misleading, and therefore these theories require re-conceptualization and re-analysis. With increasing conflicts around the globe, such as wars and ethnic conflict, along with growing economic inequalities, IR can no longer look solely at the global economy and the sources of war and conflict, with no particular focus on the people. With an overemphasis on the abstract ideas of the ‘state’ or the ‘system’, the people have been practically eliminated as an actor in the field, which is paradoxical given the field emerged to give the people a more active role in the world of politics (True 2013: 213). Women, in particular, have been excluded, which is problematic because the gender variable gives us unique and valuable insights on IR. Feminist theorists thus raise important questions that were previously not acknowledged; they question the lack of women in foreign and military policy, and why there continues to be such an exclusion, and they further ask why foreign policies are ‘often legitimated in terms of typically hegemonic masculine characteristics, and why wars were mostly fought by men’ (Tickner 2005: 2177). The theory also criticizes conventional Realist definitions of power and security, believing them to be too ‘androcentric’ and failing to include the role of non-state actors in its analysis (pp.224–225). Feminist theory therefore asks, would power and security appear different if women were to define them? And in its critique of Liberalism, Feminist Theory highlights the growing economic polarization between men and women, and how the ‘male-centered macroeconomic indicators, such as Gross National Product’ fail to effectively consider women’s input in the economy (True 1996 cited in Ruiz 2003: 4). They further challenge the leading liberal institutions, such as the UN, and the lack of women in these institutions, and question the extent to which these institutions empower women socially and politically.
Feminist theory identified the deficiencies of the male-dominated IR and appeared as a beacon of hope for women by creating a space for feminist inquiry in the field. Its contributions, which are numerous, go beyond the scope of this piece of writing. Since IR itself is an evolving field, Feminist theory will take time to develop as well. In recent times, for instance, perspectives of intersectional feminists and post-colonial feminists have been aiming at a more inclusive form of feminist theory. As women continue to face challenges (economic, social, and political), feminist theory will be instrumental in empowering them. To reiterate, with the recent wars around the globe, the cases of ethnic cleansing, the worsening of the refugee crisis and the impact of neoliberal restructuring, the struggles of subdued people should be the focal point of any kind of theory. As such, Feminist IR aims to be supportive of and responsible for the struggles of these people; this will require more than just investigating worldly oppressions and conflicts but also dissecting oppressive practices and introducing alternative conceptual frameworks for reevaluating global politics. Even if progress is slow, the theory has the potential to make the field of IR more pragmatic and inclusive, and more efficient in terms of problem-solving.
Raisha is currently a second-year PHIR student and a committee member of the UNM Femsoc Club. She considers herself a passionate Feminist, having been interested in feminist and social justice related discussion since her school years.
Editor’s note: This article is an abridged version of the author’s assignment submitted to the University of Nottingham Malaysia.
The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of PHIR-Nott.
