Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 144

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

Feminism Ks
Feminism Ks...........................................................................................................................................................1
International Relations 1NC (1/)..............................................................................................................................................................9

International Relations 1 ! "1/#.......................................................................................................................... $


International Relations 1NC (2/) ...........................................................................................................................................................10

International Relations 1 ! "2/# ....................................................................................................................... 10


International Relations 1NC (3/) ...........................................................................................................................................................11

International Relations 1 ! "%/# ....................................................................................................................... 11


Link Realism/Security........................................................................................................................................................................12

&in' ( Realism/Securit)...................................................................................................................................... 12
Link Realism/Security........................................................................................................................................................................13

&in' ( Realism/Securit)...................................................................................................................................... 1%
Link tilitarianism..............................................................................................................................................................................1!

&in' ( *tilitarianism........................................................................................................................................... 1+
Link "omen#s $m%o&erment ...........................................................................................................................................................1'

&in' ( ,omen-s .m/o0erment ........................................................................................................................11


Link "omen#s $m%o&erment............................................................................................................................................................1(

&in' ( ,omen-s .m/o0erment.........................................................................................................................12


Link "ar/Security ..............................................................................................................................................................................1)

&in' ( ,ar/Securit) ........................................................................................................................................... 13


Link *mission.....................................................................................................................................................................................1+

&in' ( 4mission................................................................................................................................................... 15
Link *mission.....................................................................................................................................................................................19

&in' ( 4mission................................................................................................................................................... 1$
Link ,roli-eration................................................................................................................................................................................20

&in' ( Proli6eration............................................................................................................................................. 20
Link .e/emony/0ilitarism/.umanitarianism....................................................................................................................................21

&in' ( 7egemon)/8ilitarism/7umanitarianism.............................................................................................. 21
Link 1emocracy .................................................................................................................................................................................22

&in' ( Democrac) ...............................................................................................................................................22


Link 1emocracy .................................................................................................................................................................................23

&in' ( Democrac) ...............................................................................................................................................2%


Link 1emocracy .................................................................................................................................................................................2!

&in' ( Democrac) ...............................................................................................................................................2+

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars

Feminist IR/Feminism JP K Link 1emocracy..................................................................................................................................................................................2'

&in' ( Democrac)................................................................................................................................................21
Link International Institutions.............................................................................................................................................................2(

&in' ( International Institutions........................................................................................................................22


Link State ...........................................................................................................................................................................................2)

&in' ( State ..........................................................................................................................................................23


Link 2en3ere3 Lan/ua/e....................................................................................................................................................................2+

&in' ( Gen9ere9 &anguage.................................................................................................................................25


Link "ar on 4error.............................................................................................................................................................................29

&in' ( ,ar on :error..........................................................................................................................................2$


Link "ar on 4error.............................................................................................................................................................................30

&in' ( ,ar on :error..........................................................................................................................................%0


Link I5La&..........................................................................................................................................................................................31

&in' ( I;&a0.........................................................................................................................................................%1
Link I5La&..........................................................................................................................................................................................32

&in' ( I;&a0.........................................................................................................................................................%2
Link I5La& .........................................................................................................................................................................................33

&in' ( I;&a0 ........................................................................................................................................................%%


Link I5La&..........................................................................................................................................................................................3!

&in' ( I;&a0.........................................................................................................................................................%+
Link Nukes .........................................................................................................................................................................................3'

&in' ( u'es ........................................................................................................................................................%1


Link Nukes .........................................................................................................................................................................................3)

&in' ( u'es ........................................................................................................................................................%3


Link Nukes .........................................................................................................................................................................................3+

&in' ( u'es ........................................................................................................................................................%5


Link Nukes..........................................................................................................................................................................................39

&in' ( u'es.........................................................................................................................................................%$
Link State ...........................................................................................................................................................................................!0

&in' ( State ..........................................................................................................................................................+0


Link International Con-lict ................................................................................................................................................................!1

&in' ( International !on6lict .............................................................................................................................+1


Link 46ir3 "orl3 "omen .................................................................................................................................................................!2

&in' ( :hir9 ,orl9 ,omen ..............................................................................................................................+2


Link IR ...............................................................................................................................................................................................!3

&in' ( IR ..............................................................................................................................................................+%

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars

Feminist IR/Feminism JP K Link/Im%act National Security ...........................................................................................................................................................!!

&in'/Im/act ( ational Securit) .......................................................................................................................++


Link/Im%act 0ilitary 7ction...............................................................................................................................................................!'

&in'/Im/act ( 8ilitar) <ction........................................................................................................................... +1 ===Im/acts===......................................................................................................................................................+2


Im%act "ar..........................................................................................................................................................................................!)

Im/act ( ,ar........................................................................................................................................................+3
Im%act Laun3ry List............................................................................................................................................................................!+

Im/act ( &aun9r) &ist.........................................................................................................................................+5


Im%act "orl3 ,olitics ........................................................................................................................................................................!9

Im/act ( ,orl9 Politics ......................................................................................................................................+$


Im%act 5 Li8eralism................................................................................................................................................................................'0

Im/act ; &iberalism............................................................................................................................................. 10
Im%act .el%er ,atriarc6y Root Cause o- "ar....................................................................................................................................'1

Im/act 7el/er ( Patriarch) Root !ause o6 ,ar.............................................................................................. 11


Im%act .el%er ,atriarc6y Root Cause o- "ar ...................................................................................................................................'2

Im/act 7el/er ( Patriarch) Root !ause o6 ,ar ............................................................................................. 12


Im%act .el%er ,atriarc6y Root Cause o- "ar....................................................................................................................................'3

Im/act 7el/er ( Patriarch) Root !ause o6 ,ar.............................................................................................. 1% ===<lternati>e===................................................................................................................................................ 1+


7lt $t6no/ra%6y..................................................................................................................................................................................''

<lt ( .thnogra/h)............................................................................................................................................... 11
7lt Sol9ency 5 Re:ection........................................................................................................................................................................')

<lt Sol>enc) ; Re?ection.......................................................................................................................................13


7lt Sol9ency 2en3ere3 Lens .............................................................................................................................................................'+

<lt Sol>enc) ( Gen9ere9 &ens ...........................................................................................................................15


7lt Sol9ency 5 $t6no/ra%6y...................................................................................................................................................................'9

<lt Sol>enc) ; .thnogra/h)................................................................................................................................1$


7lt Sol9ency 5 $t6no/ra%6y...................................................................................................................................................................(0

<lt Sol>enc) ; .thnogra/h)................................................................................................................................20


7lt Sol9ency Nuclear 1iscourse/Nuclear Security.............................................................................................................................(1

<lt Sol>enc) ( uclear Discourse/ uclear Securit).........................................................................................21


$%istemolo/y ;irst.................................................................................................................................................................................(2

./istemolog) First............................................................................................................................................... 22
In3i9i3ual 7ction <ey ...........................................................................................................................................................................(3

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

In9i>i9ual <ction Ke) ........................................................................................................................................ 2% ===<:-s===...........................................................................................................................................................2+


74= ,erm................................................................................................................................................................................................('

<:@ Perm.............................................................................................................................................................. 21
74= ,erm................................................................................................................................................................................................((

<:@ Perm.............................................................................................................................................................. 22
74= ,erm/Link >eni/n Lo/ic/Reason................................................................................................................................................()

<:@ Perm/&in' ( Aenign &ogic/Reason.............................................................................................................23


72= Realism...........................................................................................................................................................................................(+

<2@ Realism...........................................................................................................................................................25
72= Realism ..........................................................................................................................................................................................(9

<2@ Realism ..........................................................................................................................................................2$


72= Realism/1eterrence.........................................................................................................................................................................)0

<2@ Realism/Deterrence.......................................................................................................................................30
74= Realism...........................................................................................................................................................................................)1

<:@ Realism..........................................................................................................................................................31
74= Realism ..........................................................................................................................................................................................)2

<:@ Realism .........................................................................................................................................................32


74= Realism...........................................................................................................................................................................................)3

<:@ Realism..........................................................................................................................................................3%
74= Realism...........................................................................................................................................................................................)!

<:@ Realism..........................................................................................................................................................3+
74= Not Real "orl3...............................................................................................................................................................................)'

<:@ ot Real ,orl9.............................................................................................................................................31


74= $ssentialism....................................................................................................................................................................................)(

<:@ .ssentialism.................................................................................................................................................. 32
74= >utler..............................................................................................................................................................................................))

<:@ Autler.............................................................................................................................................................33
74= Social Constructi9ism Not 4rue.....................................................................................................................................................)+

<:@ Social !onstructi>ism ot :rue..................................................................................................................35 ===!uomo===.......................................................................................................................................................3$


Cuomo 0o3ule Link 5 "ar as an $9ent.............................................................................................................................................+0

!uomo 8o9ule ( &in' ; ,ar as an .>ent.........................................................................................................50


Cuomo 0o3ule Crisis ,olitics............................................................................................................................................................+1

!uomo 8o9ule ( !risis Politics..........................................................................................................................51

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

===<66 <ns0ers===.............................................................................................................................................. 52
7--= No 7lt Sol9ency.............................................................................................................................................................................+3

<66@ o <lt Sol>enc)............................................................................................................................................ 5%


7--= Link 2en3ere3 State....................................................................................................................................................................+!

<66@ &in' ( Gen9ere9 State.................................................................................................................................5+


7--= Link 0ilitary...............................................................................................................................................................................+'

<66@ &in' ( 8ilitar)............................................................................................................................................. 51


7--= State <ey .......................................................................................................................................................................................+(

<66@ State Ke) ......................................................................................................................................................52


7--= ,erm Sol9ency ...............................................................................................................................................................................+)

<66@ Perm Sol>enc) ............................................................................................................................................. 53


7--= ,erm Sol9ency ...............................................................................................................................................................................++

<66@ Perm Sol>enc) ............................................................................................................................................. 55


7--= 72= Link ni9ersalism ...............................................................................................................................................................+9

<66@ <2@ &in' ( *ni>ersalism .............................................................................................................................5$


7--= 72= Link ,ri9ate S%6ere .............................................................................................................................................................90

<66@ <2@ &in' ( Pri>ate S/here ..........................................................................................................................$0


7--= "ar ?@ ,atriarc6y..........................................................................................................................................................................91

<66@ ,ar BC Patriarch).......................................................................................................................................$1


7--= "ar ?@ ,atriarc6y..........................................................................................................................................................................92

<66@ ,ar BC Patriarch).......................................................................................................................................$2


7--= State 2oo3......................................................................................................................................................................................93

<66@ State Goo9.....................................................................................................................................................$%


7--= State 2oo3 .....................................................................................................................................................................................9!

<66@ State Goo9 ....................................................................................................................................................$+ == Feminist Juris/ru9ence==..............................................................................................................................$1


Auris%ru3ence 1NC (1/3)........................................................................................................................................................................9(

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "1/%#..................................................................................................................................... $2
Auris%ru3ence 1NC (2/3)........................................................................................................................................................................9)

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "2/%#..................................................................................................................................... $3
Auris%ru3ence 1NC (3/3)........................................................................................................................................................................9+

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "%/%#..................................................................................................................................... $5
Link State............................................................................................................................................................................................99

&in' ( State...........................................................................................................................................................$$
Link 5 State...........................................................................................................................................................................................100

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

&in' ; State......................................................................................................................................................... 100


Link State .........................................................................................................................................................................................101

&in' ( State ........................................................................................................................................................101


Link State..........................................................................................................................................................................................102

&in' ( State.........................................................................................................................................................102
Link State .........................................................................................................................................................................................10!

&in' ( State ........................................................................................................................................................10+


Link Austice ......................................................................................................................................................................................10'

&in' ( Justice .....................................................................................................................................................101


Link .uman Ri/6ts...........................................................................................................................................................................10(

&in' ( 7uman Rights........................................................................................................................................ 102


Link .uman Ri/6ts/International La&.............................................................................................................................................10)

&in' ( 7uman Rights/International &a0........................................................................................................103


Link .uman Ri/6ts/Ri/6ts 1iscourse..............................................................................................................................................10+

&in' ( 7uman Rights/Rights Discourse.......................................................................................................... 105


Link .uman Ri/6ts/In3i9i3ual Ri/6ts..............................................................................................................................................109

&in' ( 7uman Rights/In9i>i9ual Rights......................................................................................................... 10$


Link International La&.....................................................................................................................................................................111

&in' ( International &a0..................................................................................................................................111


Link Ri/6ts 1iscourse.......................................................................................................................................................................112

&in' ( Rights Discourse.....................................................................................................................................112


Link La&/In3i9i3ual Ri/6ts..............................................................................................................................................................113

&in' ( &a0/In9i>i9ual Rights...........................................................................................................................11%


Link La& .........................................................................................................................................................................................11!

&in' ( &a0 ........................................................................................................................................................11+


Im%act *%%ression/*t6eriBation.......................................................................................................................................................11'

Im/act ( 4//ression/4therization...................................................................................................................111
Im%act Nuclear .olocaust.................................................................................................................................................................11(

Im/act ( uclear 7olocaust..............................................................................................................................112


7lternati9e 2en3er 7nalysis.............................................................................................................................................................11)

<lternati>e ( Gen9er <nal)sis..........................................................................................................................113


7lternati9e Consciousness Raisin/ ..................................................................................................................................................11+

<lternati>e ( !onsciousness Raising ...............................................................................................................115


7lternati9e 5 Re:ection <ey ................................................................................................................................................................119

<lternati>e ; Re?ection Ke) ..............................................................................................................................11$


7lternati9e 5 In3i9i3ual 7ction <ey ...................................................................................................................................................120

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

<lternati>e ; In9i>i9ual <ction Ke) ................................................................................................................120


7lternati9e 5 In3i9i3ual Re:ection Sol9ency........................................................................................................................................121

<lternati>e ; In9i>i9ual Re?ection Sol>enc)....................................................................................................121


72= ,erm .............................................................................................................................................................................................122

<2@ Perm ............................................................................................................................................................122


;rame&ork 5 1iscourse ;irst ..............................................................................................................................................................123

Frame0or' ; Discourse First ........................................................................................................................... 12%


;rame&ork Re:ection ;irst ..............................................................................................................................................................12!

Frame0or' ( Re?ection First ...........................................................................................................................12+ ==<66 <ns0ers==................................................................................................................................................ 121


7--= No 7lternati9e Sol9ency .............................................................................................................................................................12(

<66@ o <lternati>e Sol>enc) ........................................................................................................................... 122


7--= ,erm Sol9ency..............................................................................................................................................................................12)

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)............................................................................................................................................ 123


7--= ,erm Sol9ency..............................................................................................................................................................................12+

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)............................................................................................................................................ 125


7--= ,erm Sol9ency..............................................................................................................................................................................129

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)............................................................................................................................................ 12$


7--= State 2oo3/,erm Sol9ency...........................................................................................................................................................129

<66@ State Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)........................................................................................................................12$


7--= State 2oo3/,erm Sol9ency...........................................................................................................................................................130

<66@ State Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)........................................................................................................................1%0


7--= State 2oo3....................................................................................................................................................................................131

<66@ State Goo9...................................................................................................................................................1%1


7--= State 2oo3....................................................................................................................................................................................132

<66@ State Goo9...................................................................................................................................................1%2


7--= State 2oo3....................................................................................................................................................................................13!

<66@ State Goo9...................................................................................................................................................1%+


7--= State 2oo3 ...................................................................................................................................................................................13'

<66@ State Goo9 ..................................................................................................................................................1%1


7--= State 2oo3....................................................................................................................................................................................13(

<66@ State Goo9...................................................................................................................................................1%2


7--= State 2oo3 ...................................................................................................................................................................................13)

<66@ State Goo9 ..................................................................................................................................................1%3


7--= La& 2oo3/,erm Sol9ency...........................................................................................................................................................13+

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


Scholars Feminist IR/Feminism JP K

<66@ &a0 Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)......................................................................................................................... 1%5


7--= 7lternati9e Causes........................................................................................................................................................................139

<66@ <lternati>e !auses..................................................................................................................................... 1%$


7--= 1iscourse 1oesn#t S6a%e Reality.................................................................................................................................................1!0

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit).............................................................................................................. 1+0


7--= 1iscourse 1oesn#t S6a%e Reality.................................................................................................................................................1!1

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit).............................................................................................................. 1+1


7--= 1iscourse 1oesn#t S6a%e Reality.................................................................................................................................................1!2

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit).............................................................................................................. 1+2


7--= 1iscourse 1oesn#t S6a%e Reality.................................................................................................................................................1!3

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit).............................................................................................................. 1+%


7--= ;ocus on 15Course ;ails .............................................................................................................................................................1!!

<66@ Focus on D;!ourse Fails ...........................................................................................................................1++

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

International Relations 1 ! "1/#


:he a66irmati>e is roote9 in attem/ts at masculine action ( their 6ocus on troo/ 0ith9ra0al ultimatel) sub>erts the 6eminine ten9encies in International Relations. Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical
Science 30(!)C %. '(0)I0 Nonet6elessC the >ritis6 state isD an9 must beD ca/able o6 9ecisi>e action. Such ca/abilit) is central to Realist un3erstan3in/s o- the state an9 shot through 0ith masculine associations in contrast to 6eminise9 /assi>it) an9 succumbing to constraint. 46us acti>e >erb constructions an9 9escri/tions o6 9ecisi>e action /re9ominate t6rou/6out t6e teDt. 46e -ore&or3 an3 eDecuti9e summaryC 6or eEam/leC mention re%eate3ly t6at E0e belie>eF an9 G0e ha>e 9eci9e9.F90 .>en 0hen the state is 9oing nothingD or re9ucing its stoc'/ileD it is acti>el) choosing to 9o so@ G0e 9eci9e9 not to ta'e an o/tion . . . ,e 0ill re9uce . . . &e 6a9e not con3ucte3 . . . &e 6a9e increase3 our trans%arency . . . 0e ha>e cease9 %ro3uction . . . "e continue to make %ro/ress.F91 :here is also an o>ert em/hasis on a>oi9ing inaction or constraint. EG*Hur ca%acity to actF must Enot 8e constraine3 8y nuclear 8lackmail 8y ot6ersCF92 E0e must not allo0 such states to . . . 9eter us an3 t6e international community 6rom ta'ing t6e action
reIuire3 . . . or -un3amentally constrain our %olicy o%tions.F93 46e %ossi8ility o- a E3ormantF nuclear &ea%ons ca%a8ility cannot 8e entertaine3C the ca/abilit) must be Gacti>eF an9 also Gcre9ible .F9! 46e nee3 -or >ritis6 nuclear &ea%ons ca%acity to 8e Ecre3i8leF is em%6asise3 at se9eral %oints so e9en i- &e 3o not actC it must 8e %ossi8le t6at &e canC an3 ot6ers must 8elie9e t6at &e can.

4ur Kriti' isn-t limite9 to militar) >iolenceD but the securit) /ara9igm inherent 0ith the masculine 0ar machine !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A 7nti5&ar 6eminists- o//osition to the /ractice o6 0ar is simultaneousl) /ragmatic an9 moral . ,e ha>e an abi9ing sus/icion o6 the use o6 >iolenceD e>en in the best o6 causes . 46e a8ility o- 9iolence to ac6ie9e its state3 aims is routinely o9er5estimate3C &6ile t6e com%leDity o- its costs are o9erlooke3. 4ur o//osition also stems 6rom the /erce/tion that t6e %ractice o- 0ar entails -ar more than t6e 'illing an9 9estro)ing o- arme3 com8at itsel-. It reHuires the creation o6 a G0ar s)stemDF 0hich entails@ armingD trainingD an9 organizing 6or /ossible 0arsI allocating the resources these /re/arations reHuireI creating a culture in 0hich 0ars are seen as morall) legitimateC e9en allurin/J an3 sha/ing an9 6ostering the masculinities an9 6emininities 0hich un9ergir9 men-s an9 0omen-s acHuiescence to 0ar . $9en &6en it a%%ears to ac6ie9e its aimsC &ar is a source o- enormous in3i9i3ual su--erin/ an3 loss. 0o3ern 0ar6are is also /re9ictabl) 9estructi>e to societiesD ci>il liberties an9 9emocratic /rocessesD an9 the non;human 0orl9. State securit) ma) sometimes be ser>e9 b) 0arD but too o6ten human securit) is not

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


10 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

International Relations 1 ! "2/#


:his masculine i9eolog) is the root cause o6 all /roli6erationD en>ironmental 9estructionD 9omestic >iolenceD an9 0ar ,arren an9 !a9) $+ "Karen JD Duane &D 6eminists an9 authorsD 7)/atiaD GFeminism an9 Peace@ Seeing connectionsDF /g 12;13#
0uc6 o- the current Junmanageabilit)J o6 contem/orar) li6e in %atriarc6al societiesC (3)C is t6en >ie0e9 as a conseHuence o6 a /atriarchal /reoccu/ation 0ith acti>itiesD e>entsD an9 eE/eriences that re6lect historicall) male;gen9er i3enti-ie3 8elie-sC 9aluesC attitu3esC an3 assum/tions. Inclu9e9 amon/ t6ese real5 li-e conseIuences are %recisely t6ose concerns 0ith nuclear /roli6erationD 0arD en>ironmental 9estructionD an9 >iolence to0ar9 0omenD &6ic6 many -eminists see as the logical outgro0th o6 /atriarchal thin'ing. In -actC it is o-ten onl) through obser>ing these 9)s6unctional beha>iors 55 t6e sym%toms o- 3ys-unctionality 55 t6at one can trul) see that an9 ho0 /atriarch) ser>es to maintain an9 /er/etuate them. "6en %atriarc6y is un3erstoo3 as a 3ys-unctional systemC t6is Kunmana/ea8ilityK can 8e seen -or &6at it is 55 as a %re3icta8le an3 t6us lo/ical conseIuence o- %atriarc6y. 11:he theme that global en>ironmental crisesD 0arD an9 >iolence generall) are /re9ictable an9 logical conseHuences o6 seEism an9 /atriarchal culture is %er9asi9e in eco-eminist literature (see Russell 19+9 C 2). $co-eminist C6arlene S%retnakC -or instanceC ar/ues t6at Ka militarism an3 &ar-are are continual -eatures o- a %atriarc6al society 8ecause t6ey re-lect an3 instill %atriarc6al 9alues an3 -ul-ill nee3s o- suc6 a system. <c'no0le9ging the conteEt o6 /atriarchal conce/tualizations that 6ee9 militarism is a 6irst ste/ to0ar9 re9ucing their im/act an9 /reser>ing li6e on .arthJ ( S%retnak 19+9 C '!). State3 in terms o- t6e -ore/oin/ mo3el o%atriarc6y as a 3ys-unctional social systemC t6e claims 8y S%retnak an3 ot6er -eminists take on a clearer meanin/= Patriarchal conce/tual 6rame0or's legitimate im/aire9 thin'ing (a8out &omenC national an3 re/ional con-lictC t6e en9ironment# 0hich is mani6este9 in beha>iors 0hichD i6 continue9D 0ill ma'e li6e on earth 9i66icultD i6 not im/ossible. It is a stark messa/eC 8ut it is %lausi8le. Its %lausi8ility ties in un3erstan3in/ t6e conce%tual roots o- 9arious &oman5nature5%eace connections in re/ionalC nationalC an3 /lo8al conteDts.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

International Relations 1 ! "%/#


4ur alternati>e is to >ote negati>e. Re?ection o6 a 6rame0or' that normalizes masculine 0ar6are is critical to a9o/t e/istemologies centere9 on a 6eminist ethic o6 /eace !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A >ot6 in %6iloso%6y an3 in E&esternF t6ou/6t more /enerallyC Eo8:ecti9eF kno&le3/e is %ro3uce3 8y socially autonomous reasoners &6o 6a9e transcen3e3 institutional constraintsC /en3er i3enti-icationsC an3 emotion. 0any 6eminists /ro/ose an Galternati>e e/istemolog)F 0hich stresses that all thin'ers are Gsituate9F 0ithin Ge/istemic communitiesF 0hich ask some 8ut not ot6er IuestionsC an3 legitimate some 8ut not other 0a)s o6 'no0ing. ,e are each o6 us also situate9 b) social i9entities an9 /ersonal histories . 4o take an eDam%le at 6an3= some o- us a33ress t6e 9olume#s Iuestions as 6eirs o- t6e E9ictimsF o- nuclear &ea%onsC or associate oursel9es &it6 t6em.1) *t6ers are 6eirs o- t6e attackers. Some a33ress t6e issue oE%roli-erationF o- nuclear &ea%ons -rom t6e situation o- a %ossessor stateC ot6ers -rom a situation in &6ic6 t6ey &oul3 -in3 t6e term E%roli-erationF ina%%ro%riate. one o6 us s/ea's 6rom no0hereI there is no /henomenon ( inclu9ing nuclear attac' or /roli6eration ( that can be seen in9e/en9entl) o6 the situation o6 the seers.1+ 46ree tenets o- t6is Ealternati>e e/istemolog)F seem es/eciall) rele>ant to our &ork. <no&in/ is ne9er &6olly se%arate3 -rom -eelin/s. In3ee3C in many kin3s o- inIuiry t6e ca%acity to -eel an3 to account -or one#s -eelin/s is 8ot6 a source an3 a test o- kno&le3/e. Secon3lyC as use6ul as h)/othetical thought eE/eriments an9 imagine9 scenarios ma) beD 0e begin 0ith an9 return to concrete o/en;en9e9 Huestions about actual /eo/le in actual situations. ;inallyC 0e measure argumentsC an3 i3eals o- o8:ecti9ityC %artly in terms o6 the goo9s 0hich the) )iel9D the /leasures the) ma'e /ossible an9 the su66ering the) /re>ent. 2roun3e3 in t6is alternati9e e%istemolo/yC anti;0ar 6eminists criticize the 9ominant /olitical/strategic /ara9igm 6or thin'ing about 0ea/ons o6 mass 9estruction C &6ic6 &e call Etechnostrategic 9iscourse.F19 In contrast to :ust &ar t6eoryC this 9iscourse is eE/licitl) not centere9 on the ethics o6 0ar6areD but on its material an9 /olitical /racticalities . 7s a tool -or t6inkin/ a8out &ea%ons o- mass 3estructionC it essentially restricts t6e t6inker to t6ree issues= t6e actual useC i.e. t6e 3etonationC ot6ese &ea%ons in state &ar-are or 8y terroristsJ t6e %6ysical an3 /eo5%olitical e--ects o- t6is useJ t6e 3e%loyment o- t6ese &ea%ons to 3eter attacks in9ol9in/ eit6er con9entional &ea%ons or &ea%ons o- mass 3estruction. In ot6er &or3sC the concerns o6 the 9ominant strategic 9iscourse are limite9 to the 9estructi>e e66ects o6 the 0ea/ons 0henC an3 only &6enC t6ey are 3etonate3C an9 to the /ossible 9eterrent e66ects o6 /ossessing these 0ea/ons. :here is scant attention to the /otential su66ering o6 targete9 societiesC an3 no attem%t to e9aluate com%licate3 e--ects on %ossessor societies o- 3e%loyin/ an3 3e9elo%in/ t6ese &ea%onsC nor to /ra%%le 0ith the moral signi6icance o6 0illingl) ris'ing such massi>eD total 9estruction. ,hen anti5&ar 6eminists thin' about 0arsD the) ta'e into consi9eration the /oliticalD socialD economicD /s)chological an9 moral conseHuences o6 acce/ting the /ractice o6 0ar . "6en assessin/ &ea%onsC the) 9o not single out or isolate 0ea/ons- /h)sicalD militar) an9 strategic e66ects 6rom their embe99e9ness in an9 im/act u/on social an9 /olitical li6e as a &6oleC nor 6rom the e66ects o6 the 9iscourses 0hich constitute G'no0le9geF about these 0ea/ons. .ence &6en aske3 to t6ink a8out &ea%ons o- mass 3estructionC 0e stri>e to consi9er the totalit) o6 the 0eb o6 socialD economicD /oliticalD an9 en>ironmental relationshi/s 0ithin 0hich 0ea/ons o6 mass 9estruction are 9e>elo/e9D 9e/lo)e9D use9 an9 9is/ose9 o6 ( all the 0hile starting 6rom the /ers/ecti>e o6 0omen-s li>es . It is not /ossible to 9o so 6rom 0ithin the boun9s o6 G?ust 0arF an9/or GtechnostrategicF 6rame0or's yet t6ose are t6e 9ery 3iscourses &6ic6 6a9e s6a%e3 t6e Iuestions &e are aske3 to ans&er in t6is 9olume. 46usC as &e res%on3 to t6e e3itors# IuestionsC &e -in3 &e nee3 to 8ot6 t6ink insi3e t6eir -rameC an3 a8out t6e -rame itsel-.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Realism/Securit)
Realist assum/tions are 6un9amentall) s'e0e9 ( the) ignore the structural im/lications 0ithin nations an9 in>o'e e/istemic >iolence <)otte an9 7usain 1 (<e9in AC 7ssistant ,ro-essor in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State
ni9ersity an3 0ary $C lecturer in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State ni9ersityC ESecurin/ 7-/6an "omen= NeocolonialismC $%istemic LiolenceC an3 t6e R6etoric o- t6e LeilC %. 1125113) ,A :he conce/t o6 Gsecurit)F has not al0a)s been consi9ere9 %articularly /roblematic in t6e stu3y ointernational relations. ;or muc6 o- t6e t&entiet6 centuryC an3 to a si/ni-i cant 3e/ree to3ayC muc6 o- t6e t6eory an3 %ractice o- international relations 6as 8een con3ucte3 -rom &it6in t6e %ers%ecti9e o- %olitical realismC realpolitikC or its 3eri9ati9eC neorealism (1esc6 199(C 3(1J LasIueB 19+3C 1(0)2). ,ithin the realist /ara9igmD securit) -lo0s 6rom /o0erD s/eci6i call) state /o0er an9 militar) strength. Recent 6eminist scholarshi/ has challenge9 this notion o6 securit) on the groun9s that 0omen ha>e ne>er been secure r 0ithin (or &it6out) the nation stateKthe) are al0a)s 9is/ro/ortionatel) a66ecte9 b) 0arD 6orce9 migrationD 6amineD an9 other 6orms o6 socialD /oliticalD an9 economic turmoil (0o6anty 2002C '1!J 4ickner 2001C '01). :he statist theoretical 6rame0or' o6 /olitical realism is t6us ina9eHuate to eE/lain the myria3 con9itions that ma'e 0omen insecure in t6e &orl3 to3ay. In t6e &ake o- t6e E0ar on terrorismF an9 its mobilization o6 0omen-s bo9ies to ?usti6) *.S. militar) inter>ention in <6ghanistanD 6eminist anal)ses o6 international relations must broa9en the conce/t o6 securit)D in A. 7nn 4ickner#s &or3sC to Eseek to un3erstan3 6o& t6e security o- in3i9i3uals an3 /rou%s is com%romise3 8y 9iolenceC 8ot6 %6ysical an3 structuralF (2001C !+). 4o t6e ty%es o- 9iolence eDamine3 8y -eminist international relations sc6olars6i%C &e &oul3 a33 t6e conce%t o- epistemic violence (see S%i9ak 1999C 2((#. ,hile the /h)sical an9 structural >iolence in6l icte9 u/on 0omen must remain a central com/onent o6 6eminist theor) an9 criticismD the 0ar on terrorism in 7-/6anistan also 9emonstrates that the ,estern a//ro/riation an9 homogenization o6 thir9;0orl9 0omen-s >oices /er6orm a 'in9 o6 e/istemic >iolence that must be a99resse9 along 0ith material o//ressions.1 46is essay ar/ues t6at re/resentations o6 the 0omen o6 <6ghanistan as gen9ere9 sla>es in nee9 o6 Gsa>ingF b) the ,est constitute e/istemic >iolenceD the construction o6 a >iolent 'no0le9ge o6 the thir90orl9 4ther t6at erases &omen as subjects in international relations. In claimin/ to secure 7-/6an &omen -rom t6e o%%ression o- t6e 4ali8anC t6e nite3 States 6as reinscri8e3 an ostensi8ly 8ene9olent %aternalism o- &6ic6 &e s6oul3 remain &ary. In %articularC t6e ima/e o- t6e 7-/6an &oman s6rou3e3 in t6e 8urIa 6as %laye3 a lea3in/ role in 9arious %u8lic ar/uments seekin/ to :usti-y .S. military inter9ention in 7-/6anistan -ollo&in/ t6e 9/11 attacks. :his rhetorical construction o6 <6ghan 0omen as ob?ects o6 'no0le9ge legitimize9 *.S. militar) inter>ention un9er the rubric o6 GliberationF at the same time that it mas'e9 the root causes o6 structural >iolence in <6ghanistan. 46e %ursuit o- /en3er security must t6ere-ore account -or t6e 3i9erse &ays in &6ic6 t6e neocolonialism o- some "estern 3iscourses a8out t6ir35&orl3 &omen creates t6e e%istemolo/ical con3itions -or material 6arm. 7lt6ou/6 t6e 3istinctions amon/ e%istemicC %6ysicalC an3 structural 9iolence in t6is article allo& -or analytic %recision in t6e sense t6at t6ese -orms o- 9iolence are in3ee3 3i--erent in kin3C &e must reco/niBe t6eir com%licitous relations6i%.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Realism/Securit)
Realist assum/tions an9 the securit) /ara9igm can-t sol>e structural /roblems an9 ignore constant structural >iolence. Pan9e) in 2'2 (7nu%amC t6esis su8mitte3 to -aculty o- /ra3uate stu3ies an3 researc6 in %artial -ul-illment o- t6e
reIuirements -or t6e 3e/ree o- 3octorate o- %6iloso%6y 3e%artment o- %olitical science Carleton uni9ersityC ;or/in/ 8on3s &it6 &omenC nature an3 t6e t6ir3 &orl3= an eco-eminist critiIue o- international relationsC %/. 1)51+) 1es%ite t6e -act t6at many si/ni-icant critiIues 6a9e ma3e t6eir %resence -eltC the 9isci/line o6 IR continues to be 9ominate9 b) the sub;6iel9 o6 militar) securit). :he c6ie- reason -or t6e same is t6e %re%on3erance o- the Realist /ara9igm 0hich nee9s to be situate9 0ithin the circumstances o6 the historical legac) an9 birth o6 IRD t6e Col3 "arC the emergence o6 a single hegemon /ost;!ol9 ,arD the rene0e9 threat o6 terrorismD etc. 46usC conce/ts o6 balance o6 /o0erD 9eterrenceD so>ereignt)D etc. ha>e come to occu/) the central an9 >ast ma?orit) o6 s/ace in the sub?ect matter o6 the 9isci/line. >ot6 t6eory an3 %ractice 6a9e ser9e3 to rein-orce eac6 ot6er an3 t6is %artners6i% 6as ser9e3 to mar/inaliBe all ot6er issues &6ic6 are re/ar3e3 as Enormati9eF concerns to t6e mar/ins o- t6e IR. 46usC issues such as :hir9 ,orl9 9ebt an9 /o>ert) are relegate9 to the realm o6 Glo0 /oliticsF an9 hence /ut on the bac'burnerD 0hile matters /ertaining to state securit)D 0arsD 0ea/onisation an9 so>ereignt) are stu9ie9 as an integral /art o6 the Ghigh /oliticsF 0hich 9eser>e salience. .o&e9erC the more recent inno>ation o6 human securit) stu9ies is rele>ant to the :hir9 ,orl9 b) sheer 9int o6 its sub?ect matter 0hich eE/lores human >ulnerabilit) across the globe that coul9 be the result o6 natural or man;ma9e 9isasters . Simon 1al8y states t6at tra3itionally t6ere 6a9e 8een t&o elements to 6uman security M -ree3om -rom -ear an3 -ree3om -rom &ant 8ut o9er t6e yearsC t6e -ormer element 6as o9ers6a3o&e3 t6e latter (2002= )). ;urt6erC 6e Iuotes t6e N1, .uman 1e9elo%ment Re%ort (199!) to 3e-ine 6uman security. 46usC issues o6 /o>ert)D 9iseaseD hungerD 6aminesD 6inancial crises 6eature /rominentl) here un9er the o>erarching to/ics o6 6ree9om 6rom 0ant an9 hunger (46omas an3 "ilkins 200!). In t6e comin/ centuryD the siE great threats to human securit) are unchec'e9 rise in /o/ulationD 9is/arities in economic o//ortunitiesD eEcessi>e international migrationD en>ironmental 9egra9ationD 9rug tra66ic'ing an9 international terrorism (1al8y 2002= +#. It becomes clear that these threats are the result o6 actions o6 millions o6 /eo/le rather than 9eliberate actions o6 s/eci6ic states. 46ere-oreC the conce/t o6 securit) must change 6rom the realistD statist an9 militarist /reoccu/ations to inclu9e human 0el6are . 1es%ite t6e -act t6at t6e a%%roac6 is 6olistic in its un3erstan3in/ o- &orl3 a--airs an3 emanci%atory in terms o- its a/en3aC its 3ra&8ack lies in t6at it lar/ely es%ouses a li8eral 6umanitarian -rame&ork rat6er t6an a ra3ical 3e%arture -rom eDistin/ structural constraints

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( *tilitarianism
tilitarianism re5%er%etuates %atriarc6al 6ierarc6ies 8y esta8lis6in/ a rationale o- &6o &ill an3 &on#t sur9i9e. Plum0oo9 2 (LalC 7ustralian Researc6 Council ;ello& at ni9ersity o- Sy3neyC $n9ironmental Culture= 46e
ecolo/ical crisis o- reasonC %. 1'051'1) ,A Sin/erNs 0inimalism is also a %olitical %osition ur/in/ minimal 3e%arture -rom %re9ailin/ li8eralC 6umanistic an3 $nli/6tenment assum%tions an3 -rom t6e %resent system o- economic rationality.KK >ut surely an ecolo/ical society &ill reIuire more t6an minimal 3e%artures -rom t6ese systemsC none o- &6ic6 6a9e 8een innocent 8ystan3ers in t6e 3e9elo%ment o- t6e rational mac6inery &6ic6 is 8rin/in/ t6e stri%%in/ o- t6e %lanet -or t6e 8ene-it o- a small elite o- 6umans to a 6i/6 %oint o- rational re-inement. Sin/erNs *tilitarianism re/ro9uces man) elements o6 rationalismD inclu9ing the a9o/tion o6 uni>ersalD abstract mathematicall);eE/ressible 6ormulae 6or 9ecisionD in the best uni>ersalist/Im/ersonalist tra9ition . 7lso in t6e rationalist tra9ition is the content o6 the *tilitarian 6ormulaD 0ith its maEimisations (al&ays 3ama/in/)C illusor) /recisionD its intellectualist re9uction o6 ethics to a matter o6 rational calculation an9 Huanti6icationD an9 its corres/on9ing re9uction o6 the im/ortant 9imensions o6 9ecision to as/ects o6 li6e su//ose9l) susce/tible to these rational mani/ulations. 7n3 as &e 6a9e seenC a&arenessC t6e c6ie- /roun3 o- et6ical consi3erationC is oneC 8ut only oneC %ossi8le 9ariation on reason or min3C alt6ou/6 one t6at mo3ernism can tie to %re-erences an3 6ence to a/ency an3 %ro%erty o&ners6i%. 46e most serious o8:ection to my min3 6o&e9er is t6at any ecolo/ical or animal et6ics 8ase3 on Sin/erNs *tilitarianism is committe9 to a massi>e /rogram o6 ran'ingD Huanti6ication an9 com/arison bet0een beings an9 s/ecies 5 a %ro/ram 0hichC as I ar/ue in t6e neDt c6a%terC is un0or'ableD ethicall) re/ugnantD an9 built on a /roblematic rea9ing o6 eHualit). 46eoreticallyC rankin/ com%arisons an3 tra3eo--s 8et&een 8ein/s are insiste3 u%on 8y tilitarianism at 9irtually e9ery le9el. 46is em%6asis on rankin/ 3oes not encoura/e t6e kin3 o- t6inkin/ t6at aims -or mutualC ne/otiate3 outcomesC 8ut rat6er ones t6at sanction a sacri-icial or3er 3etermine3 on t6e 8asis o- /reater a%%roDimations to t6e 6uman.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( ,omen-s .m/o0erment


<ttem/ting to assist <6ghan 0omen is a 6aLa9e create9 to sustain masculine hegemon) in <6ghanistan ( the alternati>e is the onl) 0a) to gi>e 0omen agenc). <)otte an9 7usain 1 (<e9in AC 7ssistant ,ro-essor in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State
ni9ersity an3 0ary $C lecturer in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State ni9ersityC ESecurin/ 7-/6an "omen= NeocolonialismC $%istemic LiolenceC an3 t6e R6etoric o- t6e LeilC %. 113511!) ,A 46e insecurity o- 7-/6an &omenC 3iscursi9e an3 materialC also re-l ects an3 in-l ects some rat6er lon/5 runnin/ t6eoretical 3e8ates &it6in -eminism. 1is%utes a8out t6e re%resentation o- race an3 class (or lack t6ereo-) in -eminist %oliticsC -or eDam%leC -ra/mente3 numerous or/aniBations an3 mo9ements o9er t6e %ast se9eral 3eca3esC :ust as t6eoretical 3e8ates a8out 3i--erence an3 essentialism 6a9e s%lintere3 -eminist intellectuals. :he case o6 the *.S. a//ro/riation o6 <6ghan 0omen an9 the burHa 9emonstrates the unsustainabilit) o6 these theoretical 9i>i9es. :he material o//ression o6 0omen in <6ghanistan cannot be re9uce9 to an arra) o6 6loating signi6iersI eHuall) clearD 6o&e9erC is the 9anger o6 re9ucing re/resentations o6 material con9itions to the /ur/orte9 essence o6 <6ghan 0omen. :hrough rhetorical criticism o6 *.S. re/resentations o6 <6ghan 0omenD this essa) argues 6or a theoretical s)nthesis that 0ill /ro>i9e a more com/leE un9erstan9ing o6 the nature o6 gen9er insecurit) in the /ost;col9 0ar 0orl9. 46e -irst section o- t6is article 8rie-ly re9ie&s rele9ant t6eoretical 3e8ates &it6in -eminism an3 -eminist international relations in or3er to 3emonstrate 8ot6 t6e 9alue an3 t6e limits o- 3iscrete critical a%%roac6es an3 to lay t6e -oun3ation -or t6e mi33le /roun3 a3o%te3 later. 46e secon3 section eDamines s%eci-ic *.S. re/resentations o6 <6ghan 0omen an9 the burHa an9 consi9ers the 0a)s in 0hich these 9iscourses in6lict an9 entrench certain 6orms o6 e/istemicD /h)sicalD an9 structural >iolence against 0omen. 46e conclusion eD%lores alternati>e re/resentations o6 <6ghan 0omen t6at o66er the /ros/ect o6 greater securit) through both critical re6leEi>it) an9 the /romotion o6 0omen-s agenc) 9ia in3i/enous social acti9ism.

Aenign rhetoric an9 0omen-s em/o0erment is use9 to ?usti6) im/erialist measures. <)otte an9 7usain 1 (<e9in AC 7ssistant ,ro-essor in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State
ni9ersity an3 0ary $C lecturer in t6e 1e%artment o- Communication at t6e Cali-ornia State ni9ersityC ESecurin/ 7-/6an "omen= NeocolonialismC $%istemic LiolenceC an3 t6e R6etoric o- t6e LeilC %. 11'511() ,A 46ere seems to 8e consi3era8le a/reement t6at the burHaC t6e 6ea9y /arment t6at co9ers t6e entirety o- a &oman#s 8o3y &it6 only a narro& mes6 screen -or 9isionC has become the uni>ersal s)mbol o6 0omen-s o//ression in <6ghanistan (<ensin/er 2003C 2J 78u5Lu/6o3 2002C )+'). In t6e conteDt o- t6e 4ali8an#s 6ars6 im%osition o- t6e man3atory 8urIa -or all 7-/6an &omenC &6ere t6e smallest 3e9iation in 3ress &as o-ten met &it6 %u8lic 9iolenceC suc6 sym8olism is easy to un3erstan3. It 6as 8een &ell 3ocumente3 t6at &omen in 7-/6anistan 6a9e 8een 8eaten sim%ly -or acci3entally lettin/ an inc6 o- skin s6o& ( nite3 Nations 2000C )J 7mnesty International 1999J ,6ysicians -or .uman Ri/6ts 199+C '2). *- courseC t6e 4ali8an#s o9er&6elmin/ miso/yny neit6er 8e/an nor en3e3 &it6 t6e im%osition o- t6e 8urIaC an3 t6e &i3e ran/e oo%%ressi9e %olicies t6at t6e 4ali8an in-licte3 u%on &omen 6as certainly 8een 3iscusse3 in t6e .S. ne&s me3ia. Oet in many casesD re/resentations o6 the burHa ha>e come to stan9 in 6or all o6 the other >iolence 9one to <6ghan 0omen b) an either >isual or linguistic s)nec9oche. It is not onl) the rhetoric o6 Gthe >eilF that is signi6icant in *.S. 9iscourses about <6ghan 0omen but also the /osition o6 the s/ea'ing sub?ect.3 $s%ecially %ro8lematic is t6e 9entriloIuism o- 7-/6an &omen 8y 3iscourses s%eakin/ -or (8ot6 Eon 8e6al- o-F an3 Ein %lace o-F) t6em. ;or eDam%leC Licki 0a8rey re%orte3 on C>S#s 60 Minutes II t6atC E-or t6e &omen o- 7-/6anistanC t6e 9eilC t6e 8urIaC 6as 8ecome t6e sym8ol o- t6e 4ali8an#s %o&erF (E n9eile3F 2001). *- courseC in one sense t6is may 9ery &ell 8e %er-ectly accurateC an3 t6e %oint oi3enti-yin/ t6is moment is not to su//est t6at .S. &omen (or men) s6oul3 not s%eak o- ot6er %eo%les# o%%ression. :he 'e) is to maintain a constantl) re6leEi>e s'e/ticism to0ar9 the a9eHuac) o6 our o0n ( .S.) re/resentations o6 the G/lightF o6 thir9;0orl9 0omen. 7lt6ou/6 0a8rey 3oes inter9ie& &omen -rom 7-/6anistanC &e must recall t6at E.umaCF ESoniaCF an3 t6e ot6ers inter9ie&e3 in t6e ne&s %ro/ram are al&ays alrea3y 9entriloIuiBe3 8y t6e me3ia narrati9e. .>en i6 their accounts coul9 be un/roblematicall) inter/rete9 as imme9iate an9 generalizable re6lections o6 realit)D that 9iscourse has alrea9) been e9ite9D /rom/te9 b) certain lines o6 HuestioningD i.e.D me9iate9. :his is not to suggest that the 0omen-s stories are 6alseD but rather that e>en their in9igenous narrati>es are in6lecte9 b) their re/resentation in an ine>itabl) ,estern 9iscourse (S%i9ak 1999C !9).

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( ,omen-s .m/o0erment


Don-t bu) into the ruse ( historicall) 0omen-s em/o0erment has been use9 as ?usti6ication to go to 0ar an9 /er/etuate >iolence all 0hile 9en)ing 0omen agenc) an9 >alue. S?oberg 3 (LauraC ,61 an3 9istin/ %ro-essor at 1uke ni9ersityC 2/13C
6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/LauraP20S:o8er/P205P202Q13Q0).%3-) <nother s)mbolic em/lo)ment o6 gen9er to moti>ate 0ar;6ighting came 6rom images o6 <merican 0omen li>ing in the <merican 9ream. 4o t6e nite3 StatesC t6e ;irst 2ul- "ar &as &6ere Gin %artH a8out %reser9in/ "estern &omen#s &ay o- li-e. ,resi3ent Aush an9 a number o6 other ,estern lea9ers tal'e9 about 6ree access to IraHi an9 Ku0ait oil as a Huestion o6 9e6ense o6 the 0a) o6 li6e that citizens ha9 become accustome9 to. Discussion o6 oil as 'e) to mothers- 9ri>ing their chil9ren to soccer /racticeD or heating their homesD or /er6orming other househol9 6unctions reliant on access to oil 9ominate9 the /art o6 the Gul6 ,ar ?usti6ication rhetoric 0hich tal'e9 about ,estern interests. &ac' o6 access to oil 0oul9 hin9er 0omen 6rom e66ecti>el) ser>ing as mothers an9 0i>esD an9 this 0as a /art o6 the ?usti6ication 6or going to 0ar. 7 common ima/e -or t6e R&ay o- li-e# ar/ument :usti-yin/ nite3 States in9ol9ement in t6e 2ul- "ar &as t6at o- a &oman unloa3in/ 6er c6il3ren out o- a car in -ront o- a 6ouse &it6 a yello& ri88on. S6e -ee3s 6er c6il3renC &aters 6er -lo&ersC an3 con9eys t6e messa/e t6at 6e 6us8an3 is in IraIC -i/6tin/ so t6at t6ey can kee% t6is &ay o- li-e. .ereC a &oman#s role as a mot6er is 6i/6li/6te3. 0ot6er6oo3 in &ar ser9es a num8er o- -unctions= %6ysical creation o- sol3iersC social creation o- t6ese sol3iersC su%%ort o- t6e sol3iers -rom 8ack 6omeC a &oman -or eac6 sol3ier to %rotectC an3 a com-ort -or &6o sol3iers are &oun3e3 in 8attle. In t6e 2ul- "arC in turnC sol3iers &ere cast as -i/6tin/ -or t6eir R&i9es an3 mot6ers#. 46ey 3e-en3e3 R-ree3om -or t6eir c6il3ren# an3 a Rne& &orl3 or3er# &6ere Rall -at6ersC mot6ers an3 c6il3ren# &oul3 8e a8le to li9e &it6out -ear -or t6eir li9es. 46e %a/eantry o- t6e &ar inclu3e3 9i3eota%e3 messa/es -rom sol3iers in IraI R8ack 6omeC# sayin/ 6ello to t6eir mot6ersC an3 to t6e mot6ers o- t6eir c6il3ren. 46is create3 t6e 3ou8le ima/e t6at mot6ers &ere 8ein/ -ou/6t -orC an3 t6at t6e sol3iers -i/6tin/ &ere tou/6C 8ut -ocuse3 on &6at t6ey &ere %rotectin/C >eauti-ul Souls at 6ome. >eauti-ul Souls at 6ome &ere not t6e only %rotecti9e %ur%ose o- t6e "estern sol3iers &6o s%ent 1991 in IraI. *ne o- t6e ar/uments ma3e -or t6e 3e-ense o- <u&ait &as t6e %rotection o- <u&aiti &omen an3 c6il3ren -rom t6e 6orrors in-licte3 8y IraIi sol3iers. 0uc6 a8use o- <u&aiti R&omenan3c6il3ren# is 3ocumente3 3urin/ t6e IraIi occu%ation. 7t t6e time it &as ar/ue3 t6at t6e a8use o- &omen in <u&ait 8y t6e IraIi military &as a %art o- t6e reason &6y <u&ait must 8e li8erate3 -rom IraIi control. 8an) <mericans a9>ocate9 continuing the Gul6 ,ar to o>erthro0 the go>ernment o6 IraH because o6 Sa99am 7ussein-s abuse o6 0omen. Sa99am 7ussein 0as accuse9 o6 s/onsoring ra/eD se>ere /s)chological traumaD /oliticize9 seEual >iolenceD an9 torture o6 mothers 6or their chil9ren-s /olitical acti>ities. :he Sa99am 7ussein go>ernment-s abuse o6 0omen /la)e9 an im/ortant /art in the argument that it 0as an illegitimate go>ernmentI legitimate go>ernments 0oul9 not abuse 0omenD 0ho are b) gen9er 9e6enseless . :his 9iscourse 6ails to mention the (o-ten 6orri8le) e66ects o6 0ar on 0omen. 46e claimC instea3C is t6at t6e 9iolation o- &omen is an international security issue. "omen must 8e -ou/6t forJ t6at t6e -i/6tin/ mi/6t 6urt t6em 3oes not enter %olitical con9ersation. In t6is situationC 7merican men an3 &omen must %rotect IraIi &omen -rom IraIi men (s%eci-icallyC -rom an IraIi manC Sa33am .ussein) 8y -orceC lest t6e security o- t6e international community 8reak 3o&n. :he 0omen 0ho are being /rotecte9 are omitte9 on a number o6 le>els@ their agenc)D their /re6erencesD their choicesD an9 their ultimate 6ate. <lsoD 0omen 0ho 6ight are generall) neglecte9 .

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


13 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( ,ar/Securit)
:he a66 treats 0ar as an account o6 societ) instea9 o6 a /racticeD 0hich eEclu9es it 6rom true criticism ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. 3C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0
*- courseC t6e -act t6at t&o lo/ically 3istinct lines o- IueryMt6e -ailure to reco/niBe similarities an3 t6e eDaltation o- a su8:ect matterM are 8oun3 to/et6er antici%ates one com%ellin/ res%onse. 46e 3isci%line t6at claime3 the stu9) o6 0ar as its o&n in t6e a-termat6 o- "orl3 "ar IC t6at isC international relationsD ecli/se9 critiHues that 0ere incline9 to locate 0ar 0ithin a broa9er eE/lanator) matriE. S/eci6icall)D the 6eminist an3 0arDist critiHues o6 0ar 0ere eEclu9e9 in t6e initial -lurry o- intellectual K6omestea3in/K t6at Iuickly came to 3e-ine t6e inci%ient -iel3.3 ;eminist critiIues t6at a33resse3 "orl3 "ar I in terms o- %atriarc6al culture an3 society &ere circulate3 t6rou/6out t6e &ar.! SimilarlyC ar/uments a8out t6e ori/ins o- "orl3 "ar I t6at -ocusse3 u%on t6e nature an3 3ynamics o- /lo8aliBin/ ca%italism &ere %resent -rom t6e 8e/innin/.' It is curious t6at a -iel3 &it6 t6e raison 3Netre o- eD%lainin/ &ar &oul3 cast t&o so8erin/ lines o- inIuiry asi3e at its %oint o- ince%tion. "6en 9ie&e3 in t6is mannerC the inaugural /hase o6 intellectual acti>it) in international relations C a %6ase t6at 6as 8een 3escri8e3 recently as neo5<antian in 9ie& o- its %enc6ant -or 3emocratic re%u8licanism an3 its -ocus u%on t6e coo%erati9e %ros%ects o- so9erei/n statesC a//ears as a 9iscursi>e /ractice aime9 at 6oreclosing ra9ical critiHues o6 0ar .( ;rom t6e outsetC in ot6er &or3sC t6e t6eoretical un3erstan3in/ o- international relations &as %ro-oun3ly %olitical in terms o- its consonance &it6 t6e re%ro3uction o- %atri5ca%italism. 46e t6eory5t6at58ecame5%raDis crystalliBe3 &it6in an early 20t6 century 3iscursi9e matriD t6at mar/inaliBe3 -eminist an3 0arDist critiIueC an3 &it6 it any %ossi8ility o- a33ressin/ &ar as a 6istorically em8e33e3 social %ractice. :he ten9enc) to rei6) 0arD t6at isC to 6ail to eEamine it as /art o6 a broa9er set o6 cultural un3erstan3in/s an3 %racticesC 0as intensi6ie9 9uring the %ositi9ist /all o6 international relations. :he imme9iate tas' at 6an3 became the a//lication o6 a naturalist mo3el o- science in t6e Iuest -or nomolo/ical t6eories o- &ar. Sc6olars coul3 a%%ly t6is theoretical 'no0le9ge to the 0orl9 Jout thereK in or3er to %romote an3 6oster a more /eace6ul 0orl9. K46e cause o- t6e 3isease once kno&nCK %resciently muse3 Aean5AacIues Rousseau in t6e 78stract o- t6e 788T 3e Saint5,ierreNs ,ro:ect -or ,er%etual ,eace in a manner t6at antici%ate3 t6e s%irit o- researc6ers t6rou/6out muc6 o- t6e 20t6 centuryC Ksu--ices to in3icate t6e reme3yC iin3ee3 t6ere is one to 8e -oun3.K :he >ie0 that 0ar might 8e relate3 to %atriarc6yC in3ee3C t6at it mi/6t be roote9 in /atriarchal cultureC or t6e %ossi8ility that 0ar might be un9erstoo9 better as one mani6estation o6 >iolence characteristic o6 a gen9ere9 societ)D 0as absent 6rom almost all research . Nor &as t6e 3e9elo%in/ -eminist critiIue 3eeme3 to 8e all t6at rele9ant or 6el%-ul in un3erstan3in/ &ar.) ,ar 0as treate9 as a thing in nee9 o6 an

account rather than a /ractice 6un9amentall) lin'e9 to other sociocultural /ractices.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


15 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 4mission
:he a66irmati>e-s 6ailure to a99ress the inherent masculinities an9 securit) /ara9igms in contem/orar) nuclear states ma'e their im/acts ine>itable ( the alternati>e is the best o/tion. !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A Muestion :hree as's &6et6er it is et6ical to 3e9elo% an3 3e%loy "01 as 3eterrents only. 46at isC it asks t6e classic Iuestion o- 0hether it is ethical to ha>e 0ea/ons an9 threaten to use thenD e>en i6 it is not ethical to use those 0ea/ons militaril). 7s t6e Iuestion is -rame3C t6enC E3e9elo%mentF an3 E3e%loymentF a%%ear not as %6enomena su8:ect to et6ical scrutiny unto t6emsel9esC 8ut merely as &ay5stationsC as a3:uncts su8sume3 un3er &6at is taken to 8e t6e core et6ical issueC &6ic6 is seen as 9eterrence. 46is -ormulation 9oes not 0or' 6or us. "e nee3 to %ause an3 reco/niBe t6at t6ere are really se9eral Iuestions en-ol3e3 in t6at one. ,e must not onl) as' about the ethical status o6 9eterrenceD but also 0hether its entailments 9e>elo/ment an9 9e/lo)ment ( are t6emsel9es ethical.2) *ne o- t6e constituti9e %ositions o- anti5&ar -eminism is t6at in t6inkin/ a8out &ea%ons an3 &arsC &e must accor3 -ull &ei/6t to t6eir 3aily e--ects on t6e li9es o- &omen. "e t6en -in3 t6at t6e 3e9elo%ment an3 3e%loyment o- nuclear &ea%onsC e9en &6en t6ey are not use3 in &ar-areC eDacts immense economic costs t6at %articularly a--ect &omen. In t6e &or3s o- a recent In3ian -eminist essay= G:he social costs o6 nuclear 0ea/onisation in a countr) 0here the basic nee9s o6 shelterD 6oo9 an9 0aterD electricit)D health an9 e9ucation ha>e not been met are ob>ious.... NSOince /atriarchal 6amil) norms /lace the tas' o6 loo'ing a6ter the 9ail) nee9s o6 the 6amil) mainl) u/on 0omenD scarcit) o6 resources al0a)s hits 0omen the har9est. Less -oo3 -or t6e -amily ine9ita8ly means an e9en smaller s6are -or &omen an3 -emale c6il3ren :ust as &ater s6orta/es mean an increase in &omen#s la8our &6o 6a9e to s%en3 more time an3 ener/y in -etc6in/ &ater -rom 3istant %laces at o33 6ours o- t6e 3ay.F2+ ,hile the *S is not as /oor a nation as In9iaD Pa'istanD or RussiaC it has remaine9C t6rou/6out t6e nuclear a/eC a countr) in 0hich /o>ert) an9 hunger are ri6eC 6ealt6 care still una--or3a8le to manyC lo&5cost 6ousin/ una9aila8leC &it6 crum8lin/ %u8lic sc6ools an3 in-rastructure D all 0hile the <merican nuclear 0ea/ons /rogram has come at the cost o6 +.1 trillion 9ollars.29 In a33ition to 8ein/ economically costlyC nuclear &ea%ons 3e9elo%ment 6as me3ical an3 %olitical costs. In t6e S %ro/ramC many %eo%le 6a9e 8een eD%ose3 to 6i/6 le9els o- ra3iationC inclu3in/ uranium minersJ &orkers at reactors an3 %rocessin/ -acilitiesJ t6e Iuarter o- a million military %ersonnel &6o took %lace in Eatomic 8attle-iel3F eDercisesJ E3o&n&in3ersF -rom test sitesJ an3 0ars6allese Islan3ers. 30 ,oliticallyC nuclear re/imes reIuire a le9el osecrecy an3 security measures t6at eDclu3e t6e ma:ority o- citiBensC an3 in most countriesC all &omenC -rom 3e-ense %olicy an3 3ecision5makin/.F31 From the /ers/ecti>e o6 0omen-s li>esD 0e see not onl) the costs o6 the 9e>elo/ment o6 nuclear 0ea/onsD but also the s/iritualD social an9 /s)chological costs o6 9e/lo)ment. *ne costC accor3in/ to some -eministsC is t6at ENuclearisation %ro3uces social consent -or increasin/ le9els o- 9iolence.32 7not6er costC -or manyC is t6at nuclear &ea%ons create 6i/6 le9els o- tensionC insecurity an3 -ear. 7s 7run36ati Roy %uts itC nuclear &ea%ons EGiHn-orm our 3reams. 46ey 8ury t6emsel9es like meat 6ooks 3ee% in t6e 8ase o- our 8rains.F33 ;urt6erC 6eminists are concerne9 about the e66ect o6 nuclear /olic) on moral thoughtD on i9eas about gen9erD an9 ho0 the t0o intersect. uclear 9e>elo/ment may legitimize male aggressionD an9 bree9 the i9ea that nuclear eE/losions gi>e a P>irilit)to the nation 0hich men as in9i>i9uals can someho0 also share . G4H6e stran/e c6aracter o- nuclear %olicy5 makin/ not only si3elines moral an3 et6ical IuestionsC 8ut /en3ers t6em. 46is elite /ets to 8e re%resente3 as rationalC scienti-icC mo3ernC an3 o- course masculineC &6ile et6ical IuestionsC Iuestions a8out t6e social an3 en9ironmental costs are ma3e to seem emotionalC e--eminateC re/ressi9e an3 not mo3ern. :his rather 9angerous 0a) o6 thin'ingC &6ic6 su//ests t6at Iuestions a8out 6uman li-e an3 &el-are are some6o& neit6er mo3ern nor %ro%erly masculine IuestionsC or t6at men 6a9e no ca%acity an3 concern -or %eace an3 moralityC can ha>e 9isastrous conseHuences 6or both men an9 0omen.3!

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 4mission
:he a66irmati>e-s scenarios subscribe to the tra9itional >alues o6 International Relations in that the) omit the in9i>i9ual su66erings an9 eE/eriences o6 a66ecte9 0omen. S?oberg 3 (LauraC ,61 an3 9istin/ %ro-essor at 1uke ni9ersityC 2/13C
6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/LauraP20S:o8er/P205P202Q13Q0).%3-) :he search 6or 6eminist 'no0le9ge can be seen as a ?ourne) to un9erstan9 an9 change the 0orl9 through Ggen9ere9 lenses.F In -eminist researc6C I am lookin/ to un3erstan3 international %oliticsC to -in3 its in:usticesC an3 to c6allen/e t6ose in:usticesC &6ile reco/niBin/ a %luralism concernin/ t6e 3e-inition an3 a%%raisal o- in:ustice. 7s 7nn 4ickner %oints outC this ma'es 6eminist metho9 not an e9entC 8ut a ?ourne) a :ourney t6at I take through obser>ationD critiHueD re>ealingD re6ormulationD re6leEi>it)D an9 actionD gui9e9 b) gen9ere9 lenses. "e &ill start &it6 in3i9i3ual /en3er. ;eminists in IR -reIuently /o out o- t6eir &ay to look for women in /lo8al %olitics. ,omen are necessaril) a /art o6 global /olitics@ the) ma'e u/ more than hal6 the 0orl9-s /o/ulation an9 are locate9 e>er)0here that men are. QetD the stories o6 global /olitics o6ten 9o not mention the 0omen 0hose li>es a66ect an9 are a66ecte9 b) international relations. 46e 6istories or IraIC IranC <u&aitC an3 Israel are contentious. ,olitical con9ictions in-luence t6e stories t6at %eo%le tell o- 0i33le $ast relations since t6e en3 o- t6e ;irst "orl3 "ar. Some s/ea' o6 Israel-s 6ight to sur>i>e in a region that threatens to re/licate the 7olocaust. 4thers recount the o//ression o6 the <rab 8i99le .ast b) rich an9 /o0er6ul outsi9ersD in Israel an9 abroa9. :hese stories 6rom 9i>erse /olitical /ers/ecti>es /erha/s share nothing but their ten9enc) to omit 0omen . "omen are lar/ely omitte3 -rom t6e 6istories o- t6e ;irst 2ul- "ar. ,here 0omen are mentione9D it is normall) in the conteEt o- eit6er t6eir nee3 -or %rotection or a 6uman interest story on t6e o33ity o- &omen in %artici%atory roles. 46e stories o- &omen t6at &ere tol3 in t6e ;irst 2ul- "ar (&6en t6ey &ere tol3 at all) &ere o- innocent &omen in nee3 o- %rotection or -eminine emulation o- masculine military 9alues. :elling the stories that remain untol9 in tra9itional histories is one o6 6eminisms- strongest tools. Feminisms loo' to /olitics at the margins to 6in9 0omen ; to see realities about their li>esD their actionsD an9 their su66ering. S/ea'ing about 0omen-s li>es ma'es it more 9i66icult to ignore them.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


20 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Proli6eration
Rhetoric o6 /roli6eration is /art o6 the securit) /ara9igm that ?usti6ies masculine >iolence on those /ercei>e9 as threats. !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A GProli6erationF is not a mere 9escri/tion or mirror o6 a /henomenon that is Gout thereDF but rather a >er) s/eci6ic 0a) o6 i9enti6)ing an9 constructing a /roblem. GProli6eration C F as use3 in "estern %olitical 3iscourseC 3oes not sim%ly re-er to t6e Emulti%licationF o- &ea%ons o- mass 3estruction on t6e %lanet. Rat6erC it constructs some "01 as a /roblemC an3 ot6ers as un%ro8lematic. It 9oes so b) assuming /re;eEistingD legitimate /ossessors o6 the 0ea/onsD im/licitl) not onl) entitle9 to those 0ea/onsD but to Gmo9ernizeF an9 9e>elo/ ne0 GgenerationsF o6 them as 0ell. 46e E%ro8lematicF "01 are only t6ose t6at Es%rea3F into t6e arsenals o- ot6erC -ormerly non5%ossessor states. 46is is %resuma8ly t6e 8asis -or t6e Elicit/illicitF 3istinction in t6e IuestionJ it 3oes not re-er to t6e nature o- t6e &ea%ons t6emsel9esC nor e9en to t6e %ur%oses -or &6ic6 t6ey are inten3e3 onlyC in t6e case o- nuclear &ea%onsC to &6o t6e %ossessor isC &6ere ElicitnessF is 8ase3 on t6e treaty5ens6rine3 E&e /ot t6ere -irst.F 46usC use o- the term G/roli6erationF ten9s to locate the /erson 0ho uses it 0ithin a /ossessor stateD an9 aligns him or her 0ith the /olitical stance 6a>oring the hierarch) o6 state /o0er enshrine9 in the current 9istribution o6 ,8D . 46e -ramin/ o- Uuestion ;our. E... is it %ro%er to 3eny G"01H %ossession to ot6ers -or t6e same %ur%osesVFC seems similarly 8ase3 in a %ossessor state %ers%ecti9eC as it is %resuma8ly t6e %ossessor states &6o must 3eci3e &6et6er it is %ro%er to 3eny %ossession to ot6ers. 7s &e 6a9e alrea3y state3C &e -in3 "01 t6emsel9es intrinsically morally in3e-ensi8leC no matter &6o %ossesses t6emC an3 &e are concerne3 a8out t6e &i3e array o- costs to any state o- 3e9elo%ment an3 3e%loyment. "e t6ere-ore re:ect t6e 3iscourse#s im%licit 3i9ision o- E/oo3F an3 E8a3CF Esa-eF an3 Eunsa-eF "01C (3e-ine3 as /oo3 or 8a3 3e%en3in/ on &6o %ossesses t6em). *ur concern is to un3erstan3 6o& some "01 are ren3ere3 in9isi8le (Eo ursF) an3 some 9isi8le (Et6eirsF)J some ren3ere3 mali/nant an3 ot6ers 8eni/n. .ereC &e :oin ot6ers in notin/ t6at t6e lan/ua/e in &6ic6 t6e case a/ainst E%roli-erationF is ma3e is et6no5racist an3 contem%tuous. 2enerallyC in "estern %roli-eration 3iscourse as a &6oleC a 3istinction is 3ra&n 8et&een Et6e RSel-#(seen as res%onsi8le) 9s t6e non5"estern nruly *t6er.F3( :he *S re/resents itsel6 as a rational actorD 0hile re/resenting the *nrul) 4ther as emotionalD un/re9ictableD irrationalD immatureD misbeha>ing. ot onl) 9oes this 9ra0 on an9 reconstruct an 4rientalist /ortra)al o6 thir9 0orl9 actors 3)J it 9oes so through the me9ium o6 gen9ere9 terminolog). >y 3ra&in/ t6e relations 8et&een %ossessors an3 non5%ossessors in /en3ere3 terms t6e %ru3entialC rationalC a39ance3C matureC restraine3C tec6nolo/ically5 an3 8ureaucratically5 com%etent (an3 t6us EmasculineF) Sel-C 9ersus t6e emotionalC irrationalC un%re3icta8leC uncontrolle3C immatureC %rimiti9eC un3isci%line3C tec6nolo/ically5incom%etent (an3 t6us E-eminineF) nruly *t6er t6e 3iscourse naturaliBes an3 le/itimates t6e Sel-/%ossessor states 6a9in/ &ea%ons &6ic6 t6e *t6er 3oes not. >y 3ra&in/ on an3 e9okin/ /en3ere3 ima/ery an3 resonancesC t6e 3iscourse naturaliBes t6e i3ea t6at E"eF / t6e S / t6e res%onsi8le -at6er must %rotectC must control an3 limit E6erCF t6e emotionalC out5o-5control stateC -or 6er o&n /oo3C as &ell as -or ours. :his ,estern /roli6eration 9iscourse has ha9 a 6unction in the 0i9er conteEt o6 *S national securit) /olitics. ,ith the en9 o6 the G.>il .m/ireF in the late 1$50sD until the attac's o6 Se/tember 11thD 2001D the *S a//eare9 to be 0ithout an enem) o6 gran9 enough /ro/ortions to ?usti6) maintaining its s/ra0ling militar); in9ustrial establishment. 46is 3i--iculty &as -orestalle3 8y t6e construction o- t6e cate/ory o- Erogue statesF states seen as uncontrolla8leC irres%onsi8leC irrationalC male9olentC an3 anta/onistic to t6e "est.3+ 46eir unruliness an9 antagonism 0as re/resente9 as intrinsic to their irrational natureI i6 it 0ere not in their GnatureD the *S 0oul9 ha>e nee9e9 to as' more seriousl) i6 actions on the /art o6 the ,est ha9 ha9 an) role in /ro9ucing that hostilit) an9 9isor9er. :he 9iscourse o6 ,8D /roli6eration has been one o6 the /rinci/al means o6 /ro9ucing these states as ma?or threats. 4o say t6is is neit6er to 8ack a&ay -rom our %osition o%%osin/ &ea%ons o- mass 3estructionC nor to assess t6e 3e/ree to &6ic6 "01 in t6e 6an3s o- E*t6erF states actually 3o t6reaten t6e SC t6e E*t6erF states# re/ional o%%onentsC or t6eir o&n %o%ulation. >ut it is an assessment o- t6e role o- "01 %roli-eration 3iscourse in naturaliBin/ an3 le/itimatin/ ot6er&ise53i--icult5to5make5a%%ear5rational %ro/rams an3 eD%en3itures suc6 as National 0issile 1e-ense. 39

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


21 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 7egemon)/8ilitarism/7umanitarianism
:he militar) /uts on a 6aca9e o6 /ossible liberation 6rom seEism 0hile 0aging 0ar on the 0omenD the en>ironmentD an9 culture. !hou9r) 5 (7BiBC %ro-essor at 0c2ill ni9ersityC 6tt%=//&&&./oo/le.com/searc6VI?7BiBWC6ou3ryXie?ut-5
+Xoe?ut-5+XaI?tXrls?or/.moBilla=en5 S=o--icialXclient?-ire-oD5a) ,A :he bur9en o6 0arD con6lictD >iolence an9 militarize9 ca/italism 6alls 9is/ro/ortionatel) on 0omen. :he im/acts o6 0omen can be seen not onl) in con6lict zones but through the /roli6eration o6 small arms an9 cree/ing militarization o6 communities an9 societ) at largeD lea9ing to more >iolence against 0omen in 9omestic an9 communit) conteEtsD ra/esD seEual >iolenceD 9is/lacement an9 the eEaltation o6 0arrior masculinities. "omen are more likely to 8ecome &ar re-u/ees. nsur%risin/ly t6enC it 6as also 8een &omen &6o 6a9e le3 resistance a/ainst militariBationC &ar an3 9iolenceC *S militar) bases an9 the accom/an)ing masculinization o6 broa9er societ) an9 social beha>iour. It is usually &omen &6o %ick u% t6e %ieces in communities ri%%e3 a%art 8y &arC 9iolence an3 state re%ression. Cynt6ia $nloe notes t6at social &orkers &6o a33ress issues o- 3omestic 9iolence Ea/ree t6at military ser9ice is %ro8a8ly more con3uci9e to 9iolence at 6ome t6an at any ot6er occu%ationF.!3 0ean&6ileC 0e are sub?ecte9 to constant claims that a /rimar) goal o6 the *S;le9 in>asion an9 occu/ation o6 <6ghanistan is to liberate <6ghani 0omen . Commentin/ on t6isC Sunera 46o8ani notesC Eone 8attle in t6e i3eolo/ical &ar &as to 8e &a/e3 on t6e terrain o- /en3er relationsC Y rall)ing 0estern /o/ulations aroun9 6antasies o6 sa>ing 8uslim 0omen 0oul9 be more e66ecti>e than rall)ing them aroun9 the o>ertl) im/erialist /olicies o6 securing *S control o>er oil an9 natural gas su//lies.F!! Just as /ur/orte9 humanitarian concerns are 0heele9 out as ?usti6ications 6or thinl);>eile9 im/erialist 0ars o>er resources+1D militar) contractors an9 0ar /ro6iteering cor/orations /ortra) themsel>es as inclusi>eD sociall) /rogressi>e an9 gen9er;sensiti>e . *n
t6eir cor%orate &e8sitesC t6ese cor%orations# core 8usiness is %ainte3 o9er &it6 a cosmetic 9eneer t6at coul3 cause us to -or/et t6at it is -or &ar an3 killin/ %eo%le. ;or eDam%leC ,enta/on contractors like Nort6ro% 2rumman 8oast o- t6eir E&ork-orce 3i9ersityF!( an3 s6o&case t6eir &omen eDecuti9es. 46e Cana3ian an3 S 3e-ence in3ustries 6a9e set u% or/aniBations like "omen in 1e-ence an3 Security ("i1S)!)C si/ne3 memoran3ums o- un3erstan3in/ &it6 Cana3a#s 1e%artment o- National 1e-enceC an3 are a--iliate3 &it6 t6e Cana3ian 7ssociation o- 1e-ence an3 Security In3ustries (C71SI)!+C an in3ustry5le3 association o- more t6an ''0 mem8er -irms in t6e 3e-ence an3 security in3ustries in Cana3a to E%romote t6e a39ancement o- &omen lea3ers in 3e-ence an3 security %ro-essions across Cana3aF. Rayt6eonC t6e maker o- E>unker >usterF 8om8sC 4oma6a&k an3 ,atriot missilesC lo88e3 at 7-/6anistan an3 IraI!9C causin/ many 3eat6s %roclaims= E1i9ersity at Rayt6eon is a8out inclusi9eness M %ro9i3in/ an atmos%6ere &6ere e9eryone -eels 9alue3 an3 em%o&ere3 to %er-orm at a %eak le9elC re/ar3less o- t6e many &ays %eo%le are 3i--erentF'0. Lir/inia58ase3 >ooB 7llen .amilton'1C one o- t6e 8i//est su%%liers o- tec6nolo/y an3 %ersonnel to S /o9ernment s%y a/encies like t6e CI7C NS7C 1e-ence Intelli/ence 7/ency (1I7)C as &ell as t6e S 1e%artment o- 1e-ence an3 1e%artment o- .omelan3 Security (-ormer CI7 3irector R. Aames "oolsey is no& a senior 9ice %resi3ent o- >ooB 7llen)C also 8oasts 6o& it is committe3 to 3i9ersity in t6e &ork-orce E8ecause &e 8elie9e t6at 3i9ersity o- 8ack/roun3s contri8utes to 3i--erent i3easC &6ic6 in turn 3ri9es 8etter results -or clients. 4o usC 3i9ersity means all t6e &ays in3i9i3uals 3i--er -rom one anot6erMraceC /en3erC et6nicityC %6ysical a8ilitiesC e3ucational 8ack/roun3C country o- ori/inC a/eC seDual orientationC skillsC incomeC marital statusC %arental statusC reli/ionC &ork eD%erienceC an3 military ser9iceF. 46en t6ere is 7e/is 1e-ence Ser9ices'2 &6ose em%loyees &ere cau/6t on 9i3eo ran3omly s6ootin/ automatic &ea%ons at ci9ilian cars in >a/63a3#s air%ort roa3'3C &6ic6 claims E*ur eIual5o%%ortunity %olicy em%6asiBes our aim to create a &ork en9ironment t6at is inclusi9e an3 non53iscriminatoryC &6ere all em%loyees are em%o&ere3 8y t6eir in3i9i3uality an3 encoura/e3 to use it in or3er to ac6ie9e successF. 2reen&as6in/ en9ironmentally 3estructi9e cor%orations is 3es%ica8le enou/6. Oet t6ere is somet6in/ %articularly o8scene a8out t6e &ays in &6ic6 t6ese cor%orations 6i3e 8e6in3 suc6 mission an3 9alues statements an3 commitments to E3i9ersityFC com%lementin/ t6e claims o- t6e militaries in 7-/6anistan to 8e li8eratin/ 7-/6ani &omen.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


22 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Democrac)
Status Huo 9emocrac) mas's structures o6 /atriarch). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 10'510() A0 <nal)ses o6 9emocratization are built on tra3itional 9e6initions o6 9emocrac) that are base9 on t6e le/acy o- "estern li8eral 3emocracyC a legac) that has been /roblematic 6or 0omen. ;eminist %olitical t6eorists
6a9e reeDamine3 t6e meanin/ o- 3emocracy an3 its /en3ere3 im%lications 8y /oin/ 8ack to t6e ori/ins o- "estern 3emocratic institutions. In 6er ree9aluation o- social contract t6eoryC Carole ,ateman 6as outline3 6o& t6e story o- the

social contract as articulate3 8y se9enteent65 an3 ei/6teent65century $uro%ean %olitical t6eorists has been treate9 as an account o6 the creation o6 a /ublic s/here o6 ci>il 6ree9om in 0hich onl) men 0ere en9o0e9 0ith the necessar) attributes 6or entering into contracts . Li8eral 3e-initions o- citiBens as nonseDe3 autonomous in3i9i3uals outsi3e any social conteDt a8stract -rom a "estern male mo3el. .>ol>ing notions o6 citizenshi/ in the ,est 0ere base9 on maleD /ro/ert);o0ning hea9s o6 househol9s@ thusD 9emocratic theor) an9 /ractice ha>e been built on the male;as;norm engage9 in narro0l) 9e6ine9 /olitical acti>ities.31 ,omenC ,ateman claimsC 0ere not /art) to the original contractJ rat6erC the) 0ere incor/orate3 into t6e %ri9ate s%6ere t6rou/6 t6e marria/e contract as 0i>es su8ser9ient to t6eir 6us8an3sC rat6er t6an as in3i9i3uals. 46e %ri9ate s%6ereC a site o- su8:ectionC is %art o- ci9il societyC 8ut se%arate -rom t6e
Eci9ilF s%6ereJ eac6 /ains meanin/ -rom t6e ot6er an3 eac6 is mutually 3e%en3ent on t6e ot6er.32 46is se%aration o- t6e %u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eres 6as 6a3 im%ortant rami-ications -or t6e construction an3 e9olution o- %olitical an3 economic institutions at all le9elsJ -eminists see t6em as intimately relate3C 6o&e9er. "6at /oes on in t6e %u8lic s%6ere o- %olitics an3 t6e economy cannot 8e un3erstoo3 as se%arate -rom t6e %ri9ate. .istoricallyC t6ere-oreC terms suc6 as citiBen an3 6ea3 o- 6ouse6ol3 &ere not neutral 8ut associate3 &it6 men. $9en in states &6ere &omen 6a9e ac6ie9e3 -ormal or near5-ormal eIualityC 6eminists ha>e claime9 that

this historical legac) still inhibits their /olitical an9 economic /artici/ation on an eHual basis 0ith men. 7s -eminists -rom t6e Sout6 6a9e %ointe3 outC &6at is E%u8licF in one society may 8e E%ri9ateF in anot6erJ it is trueC 6o&e9erC
t6at &omen#s acti9itiesC suc6 as re%ro3uction an3 c6il3 rearin/C ten3 to 8e 3e9alue3 in all societies. Ne9ert6elessC t6e e9olution o3emocratic %ractices an3 institutions an3 t6eir atten3ant notions o- in3i9i3ual ri/6ts 6a9e certainly 6a3 8ene-its -or &omenJ t6e conce%t o- ri/6ts an3 eIuality &ere im%ortant rationales -or t6e su--ra/e mo9ements o- t6e nineteent6 an3 early t&entiet6 centuries in t6e "est as &ell as -or mo9ements -or &omen#s li8eration an3 6uman ri/6ts in 9arious %arts o- t6e &orl3 to3ay. >utC as ,ateman#s analysis

su//estsC t6e li8eral tra3ition continues to %resent %articular %ro8lems -or &omenJ as s6e %oints outC as/iring to eHualit) assumes that in9i>i9uals can be se/arate9 6rom seEuall) 9i66erentiate9 bo9ies .33 Dee/ structuresD u/hel9 b) the /ublic/ /ri>ate 9i>i9eD ha>e continue9 to 'ee/ 0omen in /ositions o6 subor9inationC e>en a6ter the acHuisition o6 the >ote or ot6er le/al /ainsJ 3es%ite t6e -act t6at &omen 6a9e al&ays %artici%ate3 in t6e %u8lic s%6ere as &orkersC the) 9o not ha>e the same ci>il stan9ing as men in most societies. ;or eDam%leC in t&entiet65century &el-are la&s in t6e "estC men ha>e generall) been 9e6ine9 as brea90inners an9 0omen as 9e/en9entsJ like&iseC immi/ration la&s an3 rules /o9ernin/ re-u/ees 3e-ine &omen as 3e%en3ents &it6 ne/ati9e im%lications -or t6eir le/al status. In t6e nite3 StatesC t6e
conce%t o- -irstclass citiBen 6as -reIuently 8een tie3 to military ser9iceC a 3isa39anta/e -or &omen runnin/ -or %olitical o--ice.3! Stu3ies o- 3emocratic transitions in RussiaC $ast $uro%eC an3 Latin 7merica 3emonstrate some o- t6e %ro8lems associate3 &it6 t6e le/acy o- t6e "estern li8eral tra3ition.3'

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Democrac)
7istorical eEam/les /ro>e that 9emocrac) is ba9 6or teh 0omenz. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 10(510+) A0 46at 9emocratic transitions ma) actually be negati>e 6or 0omen &as most e9i3ent in t6e -ormer So9iet nion an3 some states in $ast $uro%e= gen9er relations associate3 &it6 t6e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3i9i3e t6ere became more /ronounce9. Aecause o6 the elimination o6 Huota s)stems in le/islatures in t6is re/ionC the number o6 0omen in institutional /olitics 0as shar/l) re9uce9 a-ter transitions to 3emocracyC &it6 t6e %ro%ortion o- &omen electe3 to re%resentati9e 8o3ies 3eclinin/ -rom an a9era/e o- 33 %ercent to 10 %ercent. 3( 46is 3ecline &as es%ecially si/ni-icant /i9en t6at le/islati9e 8o3ies 8e/an to %lay a real role in %olicymakin/. It is im%ortant to noteC
6o&e9erC t6at &omen#s re%resentation un3er Communist re/imes &as lar/ely &in3o& 3ressin/= &omen &ere eIually mar/inaliBe3 -rom real centers o- %o&er 8e-ore an3 a-ter 3emocratic transitions.3) In $ast $uro%e an3 RussiaC t6e 3ro% in %olitical %artici%ation o- &omen 3urin/ t6e transition &as accom%anie3 8y a loss o- economic status. 7%%lau3e3 8y li8eralsC t6e transition to mar'et

economies an3 structural a3:ustment associate9 0ith the o%enin/ to t6e global econom) too' 9is/ro/ortionate numbers o6 0omen out o6 the labor 6orce because o6 the nee9 to she9 labor to a9?ust to mar'et com/etitionJ as in ot6er cases o- structural a3:ustmentC t6e state sectorC &6ere &omen are o-ten em%loye3C s6rank 3ramatically. In t6e early 1990sC in all o- eastern Central $uro%e eDce%t .un/aryC &omen constitute3 '0 to )0
%ercent o- total unem%loye3J in %ost5So9iet RussiaC in 1992 t6ey constitute3 )0 %ercent.3+ "6ere &omen &ere &orkin/C t6ey ten3e3 to 8e con-ine3 to tra3itionalC lo&5%ayin/ E-emaleF occu%ations. Gi>en the 9iminishing 9eman9 6or labor an3 t6e erosion

o- state5%ro9i3e3 social ser9ices suc6 as 3ay care an3 6ealt6 careC 0omen 0ere reconstructe9 as 9e/en9ent 0i>esD mothersD consumersD an9 caregi>ersJ &it6 c6il35care an3 maternity lea9e 8ein/ 3ismantle3C 0omen 0ere cast as GunreliableF 0or'ers. n3er socialismC t6e -amily %laye3 t6e role o- an em8ryonic ci9il society re%resentin/ antistate -ree3omJ 6ollo0ing 9emocratizationD the 6amil) 0as reconstructe9D along lines consistent 0ith the liberal tra9itionD as male9ominate9D 6emale;9e/en9ent . 7t t6e same time as &omen &ere reassi/ne3 to t6e %ri9ate s%6ereC t6e %u8lic s%6ere &as 8ein/ re9alue3C t6us accentuatin/ t6e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3i9i3e. >ar8ara $in6orn 6as claime3 t6at these 9e>elo/ments 0ere a return to t6e nineteent65century li8eral 9ersion o- citizenshi/ base9 on /ro/ert) o0ning males (outline3 8y ,ateman)C 0hich rein6orce9 a /atriarchal conce/t o- roles. $in6orn su//ests t6at t6ese roles are %ro-oun3ly un3emocratic.39 In s6ortC &omen#s ri/6ts in $ast $uro%e an3 %ost5Communist Russia ero3e3J 0omen began to be constructe9 as /assi>e beings rat6er t6an mature %olitical su8:ects. In t6e 1990sC as is o-ten true in times oma:or %olitical c6an/eC t6ere &as also a sense t6at &omen#s ri/6ts &ere %eri%6eral an3 t6at &orkin/ to im%ro9e t6em &as a luDuryC /i9en t6e economic 3i--iculties o- transition. In a critiIue o- -eminist literature o- socialist transitionsC AaIui 4rue 6as Iuestione3 its em%6asis on &omen#s 9ictimiBationJ s6e claims t6at t6is literature runs t6e risk o- creatin/ a 9ictimiBe3 i3entity -or t6e &omen o- $ast $uro%e t6at is not unlike t6e cate/ory 46ir3 "orl3 &omenMone t6at %ostcolonial -eminists o8:ect to stron/ly. 4rue#s stu3y o- &omen in t6e CBec6 Re%u8lic su//ests t6at t6ey &ere 8ot6 &inners an3 losers in t6e transition. Ne9ert6elessC s6e %oints to t6e masculiniBation o- a /ro&in/ 6i/65%ai3 %ri9ate sectorC &it6 &omen 8ein/ 3is%ro%ortionately locate3 in lo&er5&a/e3 %u8lic5sector occu%ationsJ s6e conclu3es t6at &omen 6a9e /enerally 8een more 3isa39anta/e3 t6an men 8y structural c6an/es.!0

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Democrac)
Democrac) /resents an inherent gen9er bias. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 110) A0 ,hen /ro/onents o6 li8eral 9emocrac) an3 marketiBation s/ea' o- t6e s%rea3 o- 6uman ri/6ts 8ase3 on"estern notions o- in3i9i3ualismC 6eminists ha>e cautione9 that 8ot6 9e6initions o- 6uman ri/6ts an3 t6e kin3s o- 9iolations t6at /et attention -rom "estern states an3 t6eir 6uman5ri/6ts communities ma) be gen9er biase9. Since basic nee9s an9 0el6are /ro>ision so o6ten 6all to 0omenD an9 since 0omen are 3is%ro%ortionately economicall) 9isa9>antage9C the /re6erence b) ,estern liberal states 6or /olitical rights o>er economic rights ma) also /resent %articular /roblems 6or 0omen. In a33itionC since 6uman5 ri/6ts 9iolations are usually 3e-ine3 as 9iolations 8y o--icials o- t6e stateC 3omestic 9iolence 6as not 8een a %riority on t6e international 6uman5ri/6ts a/en3a. In or9er to un9erstan9 the role o6 gen9erMt6e e--ects o- 3emocratic transitions on &omen an3 t6eir acti9ities in t6ese transitionsM 0e nee9 a re9e6inition o6 9emocrac) that starts at the bottom. Generall) 0omen are better re/resente9 in local /olitics J o-ten t6ey are &orkin/ outsi3e re/ular %olitical c6annels. 2eor/ina"aylen 6as claime3 t6at an) anal)sis o6 9emocratization that 6ails to incor/orate a gen9ere9 /ers/ecti>eKignoring the actions o6 certain grou/sK0ill be 6la0e9.!' 46ere-oreC t6e liberal 9emocratic state must be reeEamine9 6or its gen9er biasesD as &ell as its class an3 racial 8iasesJ 9e6initions o6 re/resentation an9 citizenshi/ in the s/aces in 0hich /olitical li6e occur nee9 to be rethought. <rguing that /atriarchal structures are 3ee%ly embe99e9 in most ty%es o- %olitical re/imesC 3emocratic an3 ot6er&iseC certain internationalist 6eminists ha>e loo'e9 be)on9 the state to 8uil3 institutions an3 net&orks t6at are more likely t6an t6e state to 9iminish gen9er an9 other social hierarchies. 2i9en t6e 8arriers to -ormal %olitical o--ice t6at eDist -or &omen in most
statesC inclu3in/ 3emocraciesC &omen acti9ists -reIuently 8y%ass t6e state 8y &orkin/ eit6er at t6e /rassroots le9el or 8y :oinin/ -orces transnationally to &ork -or &omen#s ri/6ts at t6e /lo8al le9el.

Democrac) mas's male /ri>ilege. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 1215122) A0 "6ile li8eraliBation may allo& s%ace -or &omen#s or/aniBin/C t6e issue t6en 8ecomes= "6at kin3 o- state &ill 8est ser9e not only &omen#s interests 8ut %eace an3 securityC 8roa3ly 3e-ine3V 46e li8eral stateC &6ic6 is c6aracteriBe3 8y market 3emocracy rat6er t6an social 3emocracyC is clearly not t6e kin3 o- state t6at -eminists 6a9e in min3. &iberal 9emocrac) has not ins%ire3 -eminists &6o &ork outsi3e t6e li8eral tra3ition 8ecause o- 3ee% structures o- /en3er ineIualityJ t6ese 3ee% structuresC t6ey claimC 6a9e 'e/t 0omen uneHual e>en a6ter the) recei>e9 the >ote an9 other 6ormal rights. 7n im%ortant issue -or -eminist t6eoristsC t6ere-oreC is &6et6er ineIuality can 8e a33resse3 &it6in a li8eral53emocratic -rame&ork or &6et6er t6e mo3el is -un3amentally -la&e3C /i9en t6e structural %ro8lems o- t6e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3i9i3e.+3 7s su//este3 8y ,ateman#s analysisC certain -eminist %olitical t6eorists see a 3ee% /en3er 8ias in 3emocratic t6eory. ;or t6emC see'ing eHualit) in a man-s 0orl9 is /roblematic because it assumes a stan9ar9 o6 normalit) that is maleJ in t6e "estC this stan9ar9 is that o6 0hiteD /ri>ilege9 males.+! :he mo9el o6 the abstract in9i>i9ualC 8e6in3 &6ic6 t6is /en3ere3 re%resentation is 6i33enC is a /o0er6ul im/e9iment to the recognition o6 gen9er as a salient /olitical 6actor . 46e association o- citiBens6i% &it6 masculine c6aracteristics suc6 as rationality an3 autonomy is %ro8lematic -or &omen#s citiBens6i%J 0omen cannot be inclu9e9 in cate/ories associate3 0ith /ublics/here acti>ities that are themsel>es 9e6ine9 b) the eEclusion o6 6emale traits an9 i9entities.+' For 0omen to be eHual /olitical actorsD this must be recognize9.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


21 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Democrac)
Democrac) is /art o6 an eEce/tionalist mentalit) that /er/etuates 9ominati>e logics an9 shatter eHualit). Plum0oo9 2 (LalC 7ustralian Researc6 Council ;ello& at ni9ersity o- Sy3neyC $n9ironmental Culture= 46e
ecolo/ical crisis o- reasonC %.+15+2) ,A IneIualityC &6et6er insi3e t6e nation or out o- itC is a ma:or s%onsor o- ecolo/ical irrationality an3 remotenessC es%ecially &6ere it creates systematic o%%ortunities an3 moti9ations to s6i-t ecolo/ical ills onto ot6ers rat6er t6an to %re9ent t6eir /eneration in t6e -irst %lace. IneHualit) combines 0ith geogra/hical remoteness to generate eEcellent con9itions 6or e/istemic remotenessD creating ma?or barriers to 'no0le9ge an3 o--erin/ massi9e o%%ortunities -or re3istri8utin/ eco6arms onto ot6ers in &ays t6at elu3e t6e kno&le3/e an3 res%onsi8ility o- consumers an3 %ro3ucers .o/ &it6 concern -or ecolo/ical conseIuences. n3er con3itions &6ic6 allo& 8ot6 remoteness an3 rational e/oism to -louris6C suc6 actions e9en emer/e as man3atory -or t6e rational sel-5maDimiserC since the logic o6 the global mar'et treats the least /ri>ilege9 as the most eE/en9ableD 9e6ining them as as ha>ing Rthe least to loseS in terms o6 the lo0 >alue o6 their healthD Ian9 an9 assetsD an9D b) im/licationD o6 their li>es.S :his logic hel/s ensure that the least /ri>ilege9 are li'el) to 6eel the 6irst an9 0orst im/acts o6 en>ironmental 9egra9ationD as in the case o6 much global 9e6orestationD /ollutionD 0aste 9um/ing in /oor an9 coloure9 communities (suc6 as "arren County)C an9 en>ironmentall) hazar9ous 0or'ing an9 li>ing con9itions 6or the /oor. 7s it comes increasin/ly to 3ominate o9er ot6er s%6eresC t6e /lo8al market systematically 9iolates com%leD eIualityC ena8lin/ Zone /oo3 or one set o- /oo3s Gto 8eH 3ominant an3 3eterminati9e o- 9alue in all t6e s%6eres o- 3istri8utionNZNC -acilitatin/ t6e %ositi9e -ee38ack %atterns a33in/ ecolo/ical ills to social ills &6ic6 are t6e mark o- eco:ustice 9iolations. 46eoreticallyC it seemsC a 3emocracy &6ere all 6a9e in%ut into 3ecisions s6oul3 6a9e a lo& le9el o- remoteness an3 a maDimum o- ecolo/ical rationality. It s6oul3 6a9e a 6i/6 le9el o- correcti9eness 8ecause it s6oul3 maDimise t6e in-ormational 8ase rele9ant to en9ironmental 3e/ra3ation. It s6oul3 ena8le all a--ecte3 citiBens to 8e 6ear3 an3 to 6a9e t6eir issues a33resse3 8y res%onsi9e 3ecision5 makers. : >ut in actually5eDistin/ li8eral 3emocracyC it 3oesnNt seem to &ork Iuite like t6atC an3 it is commonl) obser>e9 that liberal 9emocracies are not /er6orming 0ell either in reme 9)ing ecological crises or in listening to 9isa9>antage9 citizens.RS Shallo0 6orms o6 9emocratic /olitics /ro>i9e onl) 0ea' 6orms o6 ecological rationalit)D not 0ell correlate9 0ith correcti>eness on ecological or social mattersD an9 their ineHualities allo0 /ri>ilege9 grou/s man) o//ortunities 6or remoteness. >ut -rom t6is o8ser9ation &e can 3ra& -e& conclusions a39erse to t6e ecolo/ical rationality o- t6e 3ee%er -orms o3emocracy t6at are 8etter %lace3 to ena8le systematic re3uctions in remoteness. I3enti-yin/ t6e structural -eatures t6at account -or t6ese rationality -ailures o- li8eral 3emocracy is more 3i--icult t6an notin/ t6e -ailures. 1ryBek (1992) ar/ues %ersuasi9ely t6at t6e %olitical an3 a3ministrati9e s/heres o6 liberal ca/italism are unable to res/on9 a9eHuatel) to the com/leEit) o6 the ecological /roblems generate9 b) its im/risoning ca/italist /ro9uction s)stems. :he interest grou/ inter/retation o6 liberal 9emocrac) is another 6eature 0hich is highl) /roblematic 6rom the /ers/ecti>e o6 ecological rationalit) . It is increasin/ly a%%arent t6at t6e -orm o- Zinterest /rou%N %olitics t6at -louris6es in li8eral 3emocracy is una8le to create sta8le measures -or t6e %rotection o- natureC or to reco/nise 8asic ecolo/ical %riority t6at ecolo/ical &ell58ein/ is not :ust anot6er interest /rou% concern 8ut ultimately a con3ition -or most ot6er interests. 46is -ailure is an as%ect o- its 3enial an3 ne/lect o- collecti9e li-e. :he conce/tion o6 9emocrac) an9 9ecision; ma'ing in terms o6 a central state me9iating a multi/licit) o6 com/eting (%ri9ate) interest grou/s ta'es egoismD ineHualit) an9 9omination 6or grante9D /ro>i9es /oorl) 6or collecti>e goo9sD an9 allo0s s)stematic re9istribution o6 ecological ills to 0ea'er grou/s. It %laces many key en9ironmental 9alues in a 3isem%o&ere3 %ri9ate realm 8eyon3 t6e reac6 o- %olitics.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


22 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( International Institutions


International norms are masculine. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 12!) A0
"orl35or3er an3 normati9e IR t6eorists 6a9e c6allen/e3 us to t6ink a8out t6e meanin/ o- 3emocracy 8eyon3 its narro& statist -orm. 46ey 6a9e ar/ue3 t6at a true E3emocratic %eaceF cannot 8e 8uilt on eDclusi9e -orms o- national 3emocracy 8ut must 8e conce%tualiBe3 in /lo8al terms. 1ra&in/ on -eminist literatures in 3emocratic t6eory an3 em%irical eDaminations o- t6e eD%eriences o-

states t6at 6a9e recently un3er/one 3emocratic transitionsC IR -eminists 6a9e reanalyBe3 3emocratiBation an3 eD%ose3 its /en3er 8iases. 46ey 6a9e also %ointe3 out t6at the norms an9 rules u/on 0hich ,estern 9emocrac) has been built an3 t6at 6a9e 8een carrie3 u% into international or/aniBations are gen9ere9. *ni>ersalist claims embo9ie9 in such international norms as human rights are base9 on male 9e6initions o6 rights. 7lt6ou/6 not normally inclu3e3 in con9entional IR a/en3asC 9emocratization at all le>elsD 6rom the local to the globalD has been central to IR -eminist analyses. In calling 6or a 6orm o6 9emocrac) that 9ismantles o//ressi>e social hierarchiesD 6eminists ha>e begun to buil9 mo9els o6 9emocrac) that rethin' the state an9 its international securit) /olicies.

International institutions /er/etuate /atriarch). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 1115112) A0 "omen#s lo& rate o- %artici%ation in t6e nite3 NationsC %articularly in states# 3i%lomatic missionsMa %attern t6at 6as 8een re%licate3 in many ot6er I2*sMsu//ests t6at &omen#s attem%ts to /ain le9era/e at t6is le9el 6asC in many casesC 8een less success-ul t6an at t6e national le9el. 7s 7nne Runyan 112 3emocratiBation &arnsC there is a 9anger o6 tra9ing gen9ere9 nationalism 6or gen9ere9 internationalism. !9 Since inter/o9ernmental or/aniBations re%resent t6e 9ie&s o- /o9ernments o- t6eir mem8er states rat6er t6an t6eir %o%ulationsC this lac' o6 trans/arenc) com/oun9s the un9erre/resentation o6 0omen-s >oicesD as 0ell as those o6 men 6rom eEclu9e9 or marginalize9 grou/s. 7s t6e *nite9 ations has begun to /le9ge to Gmainstream a gen9er /ers/ecti>e CF t6e Iuestion 8ecomes= ,hose /ers/ecti>e 0ill be re/resente9D 0hen grou/s 0ith the most resources are the most li'el) to gain accessT'0 International or/aniBations suc6 as t6e *nite9 ations ha>e /la)e9 an im/ortant role in /romulgating uni>ersal norms an3 stan3ar3s o- con3uct t6atC as 3iscusse3 earlierC 6a9e 8een seen 8y certain &orl35or3er sc6olars as in3icatin/ t6e 8e/innin/s o- a /lo8al society or an eDtension o- t6e 8oun3aries o- %olitical community 8eyon3 t6e nation5state.'1 "6ile -eminists also assume t6e %ossi8ility o- community 8eyon3 statist 8oun3ariesC the) Huestion the eEtent to 0hich these uni>ersalizing norms are base9 on male eE/eriences . >ot6 -eminist t6eorists an3 &omen or/aniBin/ t6rou/6 social mo9ements an3 non/o9ernmental or/aniBations (N2*s) 6a9e &orke3 6ar3 to 8rin/ t6ese /en3er 8iases to li/6t an3 to try to re-rame norms an3 rules in &ays t6at /et 8eyon3 t6em. *ne suc6 eDam%le 6as 8een t6e re-ormulation o- t6e meanin/ o- 6uman ri/6ts.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


23 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
otions o6 so>ereignt) an9 the state are inherentl) masculine. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. '!) A0 "6ile critical5security stu3ies 6as em%6asiBe3 t6e im%ortance o- i3entity -or un3erstan3in/ state 8e6a9iorC 6eminist theorizing is 3istincti9e inso-ar as it re>eals 6o& t6ese i3entities o-ten 3e%en3 on t6e mani/ulations o6 gen9er. 7n eDamination o- t6e 6istorical 3e9elo%ment o- state so>ereignt) an3 state i3entities as t6ey 6a9e e9ol9e3 o9er time 3oes in3ee3 suggest 9ee/l) gen9ere9 constructions that ha>e not inclu9e9 0omen on t6e same terms as men. $arly states in siDteent65 an3 se9enteent65century $uro%e &ere i3enti-ie3 &it6 t6e %erson o- t6e so9erei/n kin/. 7obbes-s 3e%iction o- t6e &e>iathanC a man in armor &earin/ a cro&n an3 carr)ing a s0or9C ser>es as a >isual re/resentation o6 t6is early5mo3ern -orm oso>ereign authorit). "it6 t6e a39ent o- re%u8lican -orms o- /o9ernment in t6e ei/6teent6 an3 nineteent6 centuriesC the i9entit) o6 the G/eo/leF remaine9 limite9I 0omen 0ere incor/orate9 slo0l) into the /olitical /rocess an3 it is still Iuestiona8le &6et6er t6ey 6a9e ac6ie9e3 a le/itimate 9oice in t6e construction o- -orei/n %olicy.(0 "e must conclu3eC t6ere-oreC t6at the historical construction o6 the stateD u/on 0hich the unitar);actor mo9el in international theor) is base9D re/resents a gen9ere9D masculine mo9el. In t6e "estC t6e ima/e o- a 6oreign /olic) ma'er has been strongl) associate9 0ith eliteC &6ite males an3 re%resentations o- hegemonic masculinit).

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


25 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Gen9ere9 &anguage


7e/man language /romotes male imager) at the eE/ense o6 0omen. S/en9er $1 (1aleC ;eminist sc6olarC 0an 0a3e Lan/ua/e)
:hrough the intro9uction o6 he/manD males 0ere able to ta'e another ste/ in ensuring that the thought o6 realit) o6 our societ) is that the males become 6oregroun9 0hile the 6emales become the blurre9 an9 o6ten in9eci/herable bac'groun9. 7e/man ma'es males linguisticall) >isible an9 6emales linguisticall) in>isible. It %romotes male ima/ery in e9ery3ay li-e at t6e eD%ense o- -emale ima/ery so t6at it seems reasona8le to assume t6e &orl3 is male until %ro9en ot6er&ise. It rein-orces t6e 8elie- o- t6e 3ominant /rou%C t6at t6eyC malesC are t6e uni9ersalC t6e centralC im%ortant cate/ory so t6at e9en t6ose &6o are not mem8er ot6e 3ominate /rou% learn to acce%t t6is reality. It %re3is%oses us to see more male in t6e &orl3 &e in6a8itC so t6at &e canC -or eDam%leC %ro:ect male ima/es on our %ast an3 allo& -emales to /o unnotice3J &e can construct our t6eories o- t6e %astC inclu3in/ e9olutionary onesC -ormulatin/ eD%lanations t6at are consistent only &it6 t6e male eD%erience. 7e/man also ma'es 0omen outsi9ersD an9 are not ?ust meta/horicall). :hrough the use o6 he/man 0omen cannot ta'e their eEistence 6or grante9@ the) must certainl) see' sel6 con6irmation so that the) are inclu9e9 in the human s/ecies .

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( ,ar on :error


:he 9iscourse o6 the ,ar on :error necessaril) /ortra)s 0omen as >ictimsD nee9ing heroic men to sa>e them Johnstone $ (Rac6aelC La& S o- 7kureyri Icelan3C C6ica/o5<ent Aournal o- International an3 Com%arati9e
La&C %. !!C &&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/;eministP2046eoryP20an3P202en3erP20 Stu3ies P207rc6i9e.%3-)I0 ;inallyC the 9iscourse o6 the G,ar on :errorF itsel- re>eale9 a %ercei9e3 nee9 6or the state to 9e6ine its masculinit) in the a6termath o6 attac'. :his reHuire9 /ainting men as heroes an9 0omen as >ictims. 211 C6inkin an3 C6arles&ort6 3escri8e3 t6e me3ia res%onses in t6e imme3iate a-termat6 in &6ic6 0omen 0ere 6eature9 as hea>enl) re0ar9s 6or terrorists or as >ictims o6 the attac'D %re-era8ly &i3o&s o- mur3ere3 menC rather than the 0omen 0ho t6emsel9es 0or'e9 9ail) in the t0in to0ers or in the rescue ser>ices.212 ,omen in the arme9 ser>ices an3 -ire-i/6tin/ teams 0ere cons/icuous b) their in>isibilit).213 ,omen in <6ghanistan are 9e/icte9 as >ictims o6 a brutal :alibanD reHuiring rescue b) heroic ",estern# men t6ou/6 not %olitical %artici%ation.21!
46e su--erin/ &omen en3ure un3er t6e air%o&er o- t6ose same "estern -orces an3 t6e 6ar3s6i% encountere3 as essential ser9ices are %ut 8eyon3 t6eir use are un-ortunate Ecollateral 3ama/eF M a sacri-ice -or t6eir /reater lon/5term /oo3.21' Susan ;alu3i#s 200) in9esti/ati9e retros%ect o- t6e me3ia in t6e a-termat6 o- 9/11 %ro9i3es t6orou/6 con-irmation o- t6e 7ustralians# early im%ressions.21( In suc6 timesC a 6eminist /ers/ecti>e o6 the state that see's 0omen-s em/o0erment an9 eHual /artici/ation in the /ublic s/here is unli'el) to 6in9 6a>or .

:he ,ar on :error has 9emote9 0omen to being the >ictims Pettman + (Aan Ain3yC 1irector o- "omen#s Stu3ies S 7N C >ro&n Aournal o- "orl3 7--airs 10(2)C
"inter/S%rin/ 200!C %. ++)I0
In an early res%onse to t6is crisisC 7nn 4ickner aske3C E"6at can a -eminist analysis a33 to our un3erstan3in/ o- 9/11 an3 its a-termat6VF20 S6e 3emonstrate3 t6at 6emi; nists 3o ha>e some 9ery im%ortant things to sa) regar9ing the gen9er o6 i9entit)D >io; lenceD an9 0arC an3 s%eci-ically 3e9elo%e3 t6ese insi/6ts in relation to $/11 an9 <6; ghanistan. Like&ise .ilary C6arles&ort6 an3 C6ristine C6inin21 8e/an t6eir com5 mentary &it6 t6e claim t6at Rconce/ts o6 seE an9 gen9er /ro>i9e a >aluable /ers/ecti>e on these 9e>astating actions#.22 >ot6 articles note3 t6e a%%arent 3isa%%earance o- &omen in t6e 9iolence an3 &6at -ollo&e3C as menKhi?ac'ersD rescuersD national securit) o66ic; ers C an3 me3ia commentatorsM6ille9 our screens an9 ne0s/a/ers.23 ESe/tember 11 an9 its re/ercussions ha>e a//eare9D thenD to be all about men attac'ingD sa>ing li>esD an9 res/on9ing through 6urther attac' CF &6ic6 seems normal.2! Su8stitute 19 &omen 6i:ackersC commentatorsC an3 lea3ersC an3 a 3i--erent scenario 3e9elo%s.2' So too 0omenD let alone -eministsC 0ere not seen as authorities ha>ing an)thing to a99 to the anal)sis. ;or eDam%leC accor3in/ to t6e 2uar3ian sur9ey o- almost '0 o%inion %ieces in t6e Ne& Oork 4imes in t6e -irst siD &eeks a-ter t6e attackC only t&o &ere 8y &omen.2( It is Iuite &ron/ 6o&e9er to su//est t6at /en3er 6a3 3isa%%eare3 or e9en t6at &omen &ere not %resent. ,omen

a//eare9 in 0a)s long embe99e9 in the gen9ere9 0ar stor). :he) a//eare9 alongsi9e men as >ictims an9 relati>es o6 >ictims o6 $/11.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%0 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( ,ar on :error


:he ,ar on :errorism 6orces states to ta'e res/onsibilit) 6or the /ri>ate actions o6 their citizensD 0hile still ignoring the >iolations o6 0omen-s human rights in the /ri>ate s/here Johnstone $ (Rac6aelC La& S o- 7kureyri Icelan3C C6ica/o5<ent Aournal o- International an3 Com%arati9e
La&C %. 2!52'C&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/;eministP2046eoryP20an3P202en3erP20 Stu3ies P207rc6i9e.%3-)I0 7n inter%retation o- the Securit) !ouncil-s resolutions &it6in t6e classical 9ie& o- state res%onsi8ility &oul3 in9icate that the 9egree o6 9iligence 9ue to /re>ent terrorism has been consi9erabl) eE/an9e9 C %articularly 8y Resolutions 13)3 an3 1'!0. :his in9icates a change in the /rimar) rules 0ithout /osing a challenge to the tra9itional >ie0 o6 state res/onsibilit) %er se. 7s suc6C it is com/arable to Cook#s a%%roac6 o- eE/an9ing /ositi>e obligations o6 states to /rotect in3i9i3ualsC %articularly 0omenD 6rom G/ri>ateF >iolations o6 human rights.11) Shoul9 the state 6ail to meet the stan9ar9s reHuire9 8y t6e resolutionsC the state 0ill be res/onsibleC not -or t6e terrorist attacks (or %ri9ate 6uman ri/6ts 9iolations) 8ut 6or the se/arate 9elict o6 its 6ailure to /rotect. EG4H6ese alle/e3 cases o- State res%onsi8ility -or t6e acts o- in3i9i3uals are really cases o- res%onsi8ility o- t6e State -or omissions 8y its or/ans= the State is res/onsible 6or ha>ing 6aile9 to ta'e a//ro/riate measures to /re>ent or /unish the in9i>i9ual-s act.F G<O state-s /assi>eness or in9i66erence to0ar9 terrorist agen9as &it6in its o&n territory mi/6t trigger its res/onsibilit)C %ossi8ly on the same scale as though it ha9 acti9ely /artici/ate9 in the /lanning.

:he ,ar on :error /ro>es that states shoul9 be hel9 res/onsible 6or /ri>ate >iolations o6 international la0 ( ho0e>er the) still turn a blin9 e)e to the /ri>ate abuse o6 0omen Johnstone $ (Rac6aelC La& S o- 7kureyri Icelan3C C6ica/o5<ent Aournal o- International an3 Com%arati9e
La&C %. 3(C&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/;eministP2046eoryP20an3P202en3erP20 Stu3ies P207rc6i9e.%3-)I0 :he *nite3 States# a3ministration in the imme3iate a6termath o6 $/11 share9 the Era3ical 6eministF /ositionC e9i3ence3 8y t6e -amous statement o- t6e %resi3ent on Se%tem8er 11 t6at E,e 0ill ma'e no 9istinction bet0een the terrorists 0ho committe9 these acts an9 those 0ho harbor them.F1'( 46e %resi3ent eD%an3e3 u%on t6is later t6e
same mont6C statin/= >y ai3in/ an3 a8ettin/ mur3erC t6e 4ali8an re/ime is committin/ mur3er . . . $9ery nationC in e9ery re/ionC no& 6as a 3ecision to make. $it6er you are &it6 usC or you are &it6 t6e terrorists. ;rom t6is 3ay -or&ar3C an) nation that continues to harbor or su//ort terrorism 0ill be regar9e9 b) the *nite9 States as a hostile regime .F1') In No9em8er 2001C 6e continue3= EI6 )ou harbor terroristsD )ou are terrorists . I- you train or arm a terroristC you are a terrorist. I- you -ee3 a terrorist or -un3 a terroristC you#re a terroristC an9 )ou 0ill be hel9 accountable b) the *nite9 States an9 our 6rien9s.F1'+ I- t6is eDam%le o- state %ractice an3 t6e &i3e o%inio iuris in its su%%ort is to 8e consi3ere3 as su--icient to constitute a ne& rule o- customary international la&C t6en t6e more ra3ical -eminists 6a9e &on a 8attleC al8eit in a manner t6ey mi/6t t6emsel9es -in3 3i--icult to su%%ort.1+! In s6ortC this ne0 rule hol9s that states are res%onsi8leC 9irectl) res/onsibleD 6or /ermitting /ri>ate >iolations o6 international la0 to occur. Go>ernments in such

circumstances shoul9 antici/ate the /ossibilit) o6 imme9iate re/ercussions against their o0n institutionsC not :ust a/ainst t6e %ri9ate actors &6o 3irectly cause3 t6e 6arm.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( I;&a0
International la0 banishes 0omen to the /ri>ate s/here 0here the) are be)on9 the reach o6 state res/onsibilit) Johnstone $ (Rac6aelC La& S o- 7kureyri Icelan3C C6ica/o5<ent Aournal o- International an3 Com%arati9e
La&C %. 1)C &&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/;eministP2046eoryP20an3P202en3erP20 Stu3ies P207rc6i9e.%3-)I0
C6arles&ort6 et al.C reco/niBe3 t6at t6e %recise 8oun3aries o- &6at constitutes %u8lic an3 %ri9ate 9ary 8et&een 3i--erent cultures.3' Nonet6elessC a common -eature &as t6at 0hene>er there 0as a /ri>ate s/hereD 0omen 0ere 6oun9 there.3( .o&e9erC in areas consi9ere9 /ublicD 0omen 0ere missingD in>isibleD or 6e0 in num8er.3) :his 9i>ision o6 /ublic an9 /ri>ate s/heresC emer/in/ -rom t6e "estern Li8eral tra3itionC 0as no0 entrenche9 in international la0.3+ Not only are t6e s%6eres se%arateC but the /ri>ate s/here an9 the 0omen 0ithin it are regar9e9 as less im/ortant.39 0oreo9erC Ga uni>ersal /attern o6 i9enti6)ing 0omenSs acti>ities as /ri>ateD an9 thus o6 lesser >alueD can be 9etecte9.F!0 46e classical %rinci%les o- state res%onsi8ility assume t6at only acts o- state /i9e rise to 6uman ri/6ts 9iolations. 7arms that occur in /ri>ate might be un0elcomeD but the) are not consi9ere9 matters o6 human rights or a -ortiori international la0.!1 C6arles&ort6 an3 C6inkin contest t6is assum%tion at t6e 6eart o- international la&. C6arles&ort6 ar/ues= Ei6 >iolence against 0omen is un9erstoo9C not :ust as a8errant 8e6a9iorC 8ut as

/art o6 the structure o6 the uni>ersal subor9ination o6 0omenD it can ne>er be consi9ere9 a /urel) G/ri>ateF issue.F'' C6inkin a33s= E"6y s6oul3 t6e state only 8e res%onsi8le -or t6e internationally &ron/-ul acts o- state or/ansV
46e state claims :uris3iction o9er t6e totality o- -unctions &it6in its territorial controlJ it mi/6t t6ere-ore 8e a%%ro%riate to assert its res%onsi8ility -or all &ron/-ul acts emanatin/ -rom itC or -rom nationals su8:ect to its :uris3iction.F'( 4o/et6erC t6ey ar/ue= E:here no reason 0h) t6e maintenance o- a legal an9 social s)stem in &6ic6 9iolence a/ainst &omen is en3emic an3 acce%te3

is

shoul9 not engage state res/onsibilit) 9irectl)D 0hether or not 0omen are treate9 9i66erentl) 6rom men in this res/ect.F') 1es%ite a39ances in 6uman ri/6ts la& &it6 res%ect to states# %ositi9e 3uties to %rotectC >iolations o6 the rights o6 0omen are still not ta'en as seriousl) as those o6 men.)! 0oreo9erC t6e %re-erence -or ci9il an3
%olitical ri/6ts re-lects men#s eD%eriences o- t6e nee3 -or %rotection a/ainst t6e state. C6arles&ort6 an3 C6inkin consi3er t6e ri/6t to li-eC lar/ely un3erstoo3 as reIuirin/ %rotection a/ainst state t6reatsC 8ut not a/ainst t6e risk o- 8ein/ concei9e3 -emale.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( I;&a0
International la0 9enies 0omen a sense o6 sel6 b) 6ailing to hol9 states res/onsible 6or >iolence against 0omen Johnstone $ (Rac6aelC La& S o- 7kureyri Icelan3C C6ica/o5<ent Aournal o- International an3 Com%arati9e
La&C %. !3C&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/;eministP2046eoryP20an3P202en3erP20 Stu3ies P207rc6i9e.%3-)I0
.an3 in 6an3 &it6 t6e li8eraliBation o- t6e market in t6e %ost5inter9ention economies comes t6e -urt6er rei-ication o- t6e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3ic6otomies lon/ criticiBe3 8y -eminists in "estern 3emocraciesC as 0omen "an9 >iolence against them# are consi9ere9 non;/olitical. "omen are e--ecti9ely eDclu3e3 -rom %ositions o- /o9ernance in 7-/6anistan an3 IraIC an3 similarly 6a9e 8een lar/ely eDclu3e3 in ne/otiations 8et&een com%etin/ -actions.20) 46e "male# sel6;9eclare9 lea9ers are /resume9 to s/ea' 6or all an9 0omen-s rights become a matter o6 relati>e cultural >alues.20+ :his is sel6;

9etermination o6 a highl) selecti>e Gsel6.F Uiolence against 0omen Hua 0omen is consi9ere9 a matter o6 9omestic la0C an3 0hen 9omestic /rocess 6ails to ta'e it seriousl)D no Huestions are raise9 8y t6e state#s allies about the legitimac) o6 the go>ernment or its so>ereign in>iolabilit).209 1es%ite c6an/es in t6e lan/ua/e o- state res%onsi8ilityC little has change9 6or 0omen since t6e Eli8erationF o- <u&ait -rom t6e o%%ressi9e IraIi in9a3er in
1991C a-ter &6ic6 <u&aiti &omen remaine3 3isen-ranc6ise3 -rom t6e electoral %rocess an3 -orei/n &omen -oun3 t6emsel9es tar/ets oseDual 9iolence 8y <u&aiti menC o-ten ostensi8ly un3er color o- state aut6ority.210

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Link I5La&
International la& continues t6e su8or3ination o- &omen 8ecause it 3oes not reIuire action in t6e -ace o- a8use !hin'in $$ (C6ristineC Int La& S o- Lon3onC 7 CritiIue o- t6e ,u8lic/,ri9ate 1imensionC $uro%ean Aournal oInternational La&C %. 392)I0 :he 6eminist critiHue also has /articular resonance in international la0. Aecause the state 9oes not incur res/onsibilit) 6or >iolations committe9 0ithin the /ri>ate sectorD it can ignore t6e continue3 subor9ination o6 0omen in t6at arena. 46usC 9omestic >iolence against 0omen can be 9esignate9 as a %ri9ate &ron/C an in3i9i3ual matter that is outsi9e international scrutin). 46e tra3ition o- >ie0ing seEual con9uct as /ri>ate allo0s seEual abuse b) /ublic o66icialsC suc6 as %rison o--icials or %olice o--icersC also to be rea9il) 9iscounte9 as not coming 0ithin their o66icial 9uties. Failure b) a state to in>estigate an9 /unish such matters is a continuation o6 the eEclusion o6 -amily//ri>ate li6e e9en -rom 3omestic le/al inter9ention an3 t6us -ar 6rom international accountabilit). SimilarlyC treatment o- 3omestic -orei/n mai3s &it6in -orei/n states can 8e -actore3 out -rom
international la&. 1i%lomatic %rotection o- aliens &as t6e 6istoric startin/ %oint -or t6e -ormulation o- %rinci%les o- state res%onsi8ility an3 t6e 8asis -or t6e 3i--erentiation 8et&een ultra 9ires acts o- o--icials -or &6ic6 t6ere is res%onsi8ility 8ecause o- t6eir a%%arent aut6orityC an3 t6e %ri9ate acts o- in3i9i3uals -or &6ic6 t6ere is no res%onsi8ility. 46e em%loyment o- -orei/n mai3s -alls &it6in 8ot6 ot6ese areas= t6eir 6ouse6ol3 &ork is %ri9ate an3 o-ten conceale3 -rom 3omestic le/al re/ulation an3 t6eir em%loymentC e9en 8y /o9ernment o--icialsC is not in t6at ca%acity. Oet t6eir em%loyment a8roa3 is o- ma:or economic si/ni-icance to many sen3in/ states an3 su%%orte3 8y recei9in/ states. 46eir 0i9es/rea9 abuse in many states is not /ri>ateD but s)stemicD it is u/hel9 b) go>ernment /olicies that 6ail to enIuire a8out t6eir treatment or to o66er /rotection against 'no0n abusesD an9

as such shoul9 engage state res/onsibilit).

International la0 ignores /ri>ate con9uctD thereb) mas'ing abuse in the /ri>ate s/here !hin'in $$ (C6ristineC Int La& S o- Lon3onC 7 CritiIue o- t6e ,u8lic/,ri9ate 1imensionC $uro%ean Aournal oInternational La&C %. 3+)53++)I0 :he International La& Commission#s (I&!# Dra6t <rticles on State Res/onsibilit) a3o%te3 on -irst rea3in/ in 199( are
currently 8ein/ re9ise3 in li/6t o- /o9ernment comments 8y t6e S%ecial Ra%%orteurC Aames Cra&-or3. 7lt6ou/6 t6eir -inal -orm remains unresol9e3C si/ni-icant %arts o- t6e 1ra-t 7rticles ha>e alrea3y been relie9 u/onC -or eDam%le 8y t6e International Court oAusticeC as customar) international la0. 46e S%ecial Ra%%orteur 6as em%6asiBe3 t6at the articles 3o not encom%ass %rimary rules o- international o8li/ationC 8ut 9escribe the secon3ary rules o6 state res/onsibilit) 6or the commission o6 an internationall) 0rong6ul act. Res%onsi8ility o- ot6er international actorsC suc6 as international /o9ernment or/aniBationsC an3 in3i9i3ual res%onsi8ility -or international crimes 3o no -orm %art o- t6is re-erence . :he conce/t o6 state

res/onsibilit) rests u/on 9istinguishing acts an9 omissions that can be attribute9 to the state 6rom those that cannotC -or it is aDiomatic t6at /ri>ate con9uct is not in %rinci%le attributable to the state. 7rticle ' sets out t6e /eneral %rinci%le o- attri8ution to t6e state o- t6e acts o- its or/ans. <ttribution 9oes not 9e/en9 u/on a 6unctional classi6ication o6 acti>ities but u/on the characterization o6 the actor as a state organD acting in that ca/acit). Nor is t6e %osition o- a %articular or/an &it6in t6e or/aniBational structure o- t6e state 3eterminati9e. I9enti6ication o6 a state organD an9 the res/onsibilities thereinD is establishe9 %rimarily in accor9ance 0ith international la0.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Link I5La&
46e uni9ersalism o- international la& %re9ents t6e %rotection o- &omen#s 6uman ri/6ts Isoto + "AibianD Int. &a0D * o6 Gu)anaD *ni>ersalism an9 Regionalism in International &a0D
/e3i.o8:ectis.net/e9entos51/ilsa8rasil200+/arti/os/36e6/isoto.%3-)I0 *ni>ersalism assumes that the 0orl9 is /o9erne3 an3 o/erates un9er a single s)stem that is a//licable to states an3 ot6er le/al %ersons. .o&e9erC alt6ou/6 international la& assumes t6at states are linke3 8y a common %ur%ose an3 3estinyC it
is su8mitte3 t6at t6e &orl3#s 3i9ersity is re-lecte3 in t6e 3i--erent i3eolo/iesC culturesC re/ionsC economic a39ancement an3 ot6er -actors t6at a--ect international relations. 46ere-oreC not0ithstan9ing uni>ersalismD 9i>ersit) is e>i9ent to an) obser>er . :he 9ebate on uni>ersalism an3 re/ionalism in international la0 /oses challenges an3 %ers%ecti9es to&ar3s international coo/eration an3 con-lict resolution. S%eci-icallyC in t6e 3e9elo%ment an3 a%%lica8ility -or a uni-orm stan3ar3 ointernational 6uman ri/6ts la& an3 international 6umanitarian la&C the uni>ersalit) o6 human rights has been an9 is still a sub?ect o6 intense 9ebate. :his o- course /oses challenges 6or the uni>ersal /romotion an9 /rotection o6 human rights stan9ar9sC in a 3i9erse &orl3. In some cases uni9ersalism is o-ten 9ie&e3 as a construct o- &estern 6e/emony an3 im%erialismC es/eciall) in res/ect to the /romotion an9 /rotection o6 the human rights o6 0omen . 46is %a%er seeks to 3iscuss 6o& uni>ersalism an3 re/ionalism /oses a challenge to international coo%eration in the %romotion an3 /rotection o6 0omen un9er the human rights cor/us. ,art II s6all 3eal &it6 t6e international la& 8asis -or uni9ersalism 8ase3 on t6e %ro9isions o- 3i--erent treaties as &ell as customary international la&. ,art III s6all 3iscuss 6uman ri/6ts la&C s%eci-ically analyBin/ t6e ri/6ts o- &omen in relation to uni9ersalism an3 re/ionalism. ,art IL s6all %lace t6e 3e8ate on uni9ersalism an3 re/ionalism in res%ect to international 6umanitarian la& in as -ar as it o--ers %rotection -or &omen in res%ect to /en3er crimes. ,art L conclu3es t6e %a%er.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( u'es
Discourses about nuclear 0ea/ons are in6use9 0ith 9ichotomies 0hich 6a>or the masculine o>er the 6eminine Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. '!()I0
"e &rite -rom t6e %ers%ecti9e o- a E6eminist

anti;militarismCF! &6ic6 Ere?ects 8ot6 the militar) an9 /olitical use o6 0ea/ons o6 mass 9estruction in 0ar6are or 6or 9eterrence . It is also 3ee%ly critical o6 the 9iscourses 0hich ha>e 6rame9 /ublic 9iscussion o6 0ea/ons o6 mass 9estruction.F' 1e9elo%in/ out o- a lon/ tra3ition o- -eminist in9ol9ement in %eace an3 anti5&ar mo9ementsC( t6is %osition is -eminist 8ecause it sees gen9er as /la)ing a 'e) role in &arC in t6e culture o- rea3iness an3 ent6usiasm -or &ar kno&n as militarismD an9 in the reliance on G0ea/ons o6 mass 9estructionF like 4ri3ent. "6at is /en3erV ;eminists no& o--er multi%le an3 sometimes con[ictin/ accounts o- t6is key conce%t.)
;ollo&in/ Carol Co6nC %er6a%s t6e most im%ortant &riter on /en3er an3 nuclear &ea%onsC &e &ant to em%6asise t6ree 3imensions 6ere.+ Firstl)D gen9er as a cate/ory hel/s us un9erstan9 the 0a)s in 0hich in3i9i3ual (an3 collecti9e) i9entit) is sociall) constructe9 aroun3 an3 through assum/tions about male/-emale seDual 3i--erenceC or the categories o6 masculinit) an9 6emininit). Secon9l)D gen9er is Ga 0a) o6 structuring relations o6 /o0erCF9 one 0hich most -eminists a/ree Esho0s constanc) in assigning greater >alue to t6at &6ic6 is associate3 &it6 masculinit) an9 lesser >alue to t6at associate3 &it6 6emininit) . . . t6e terms are not in3e%en3ent 8ut -orm a 6ierarc6ical (uneIual) relation.F10 :hir9l)C E/en3er also -unctions as a sym8olic system= our i9eas about gen9er /ermeate an9 sha/e our i9eas about many ot6er as%ects o- society 8eyon3 male -emale relationsMinclu3in/ %oliticsC 0ea/onsD an9 0ar6are.F11 46is means t6at 9iscourses about nuclear 0ea/onsC amon/st ot6er t6in/sC are in6use9 0ith a series o6 conce/tual 9ichotomies &6ic6 [o& -rom an3 un3er%in t6e %rimary si/ni\ers o- masculine/-eminineC 0ith the masculine si9e o6 the 9ichotom) 6a>oure9 o>er the 6eminine. "e &oul3 a33 t6at -eminist &ork 6as increasin/ly insiste3 on t6e com%leDity &it6 &6ic6 /en3er o%eratesC intersectin/ &it6 ot6er -orms o- %o&er an3 i3entity in conteDt5s%eci\c &ays. 46is means t6at &e s6oul3 not -all into t6e tra% o- t6inkin/ t6at t6ere is only one -orm o- masculinity an3 one o- -emininityMrat6er t6ere are multi%le 9ersions o- eac6C some o- &6ic6 are more 3ominantC or E6e/emonicCF t6an ot6ers at %articular %laces an3 times.12 7s a result D 0e shoul9 eE/ect a

/articular gen9ere9 9iscourse to construct an9 mobilise mar'ers an9 s)mbols o6 multi/le an9 e>en conVicting masculinities an9 6emininities.

uclear imager) is inherentl) masculine in its 9issociating us to the realit) o6 the horror o6 nuclear catastro/he !ohn 53 (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC KSeD an3 1eat6 in a &orl3 o- 1e-ense
IntellectualsKC 6tt%=//&&&.:stor.or//sta8le/%3-%lus/31)!209.%3-) ,A
Nuclear missiles are 8ase3 in Ksilos.K *n a 4ri3ent su8marineC &6ic6 carries t&enty5-our multi%le &ar6ea3 nuclear missilesC cre& mem8ers call t6e %art o- t6e su8marine &6ere t6e missiles are line3 u% in t6eir silos rea3y -or launc6in/ Kt6e C6ristmas tree -arm.K "6at coul3 8e more 8ucolic5-armsC silosC C6ristmas treesV

In the e9er5-rien3lyC e9en romantic 0orl9 o6 nuclear 0ea/onr)D ene;mies JeEchangeJ 0arhea9sI one missile Jta'es outJ anotherI 0ea/ons s)stems can Kmarr) u/JI Jcou/lingJ is sometimes use9 to re6er to the 0iring bet0een mechanisms o6 0arning an9 res/onseD or to the /s)cho;/olitical lin's bet0een strategic (intercontinental) an9 theater ($uro%ean5 8ase3) 0ea/ons. 46e %atterns in &6ic6 a 0IRLe3 missileNs nuclear &ar56ea3s lan3 is kno&n as a K-oot%rint.K21 46ese nuclear eD%losi9es are not 3ro%%e3J a K8usK K3eli9ersK t6em. In a33itionC nuclear

8om8s are not re-erre3 to as 8om8s or e9en &ar6ea3sJ t6ey are re-erre3 to as Kreentry 9e6iclesCK a term -ar more 8lan3 an3 8eni/nC &6ic6 is t6en s6ortene3 to KRLsCK a term not only totally a8stract an3 remo9e3 -rom t6e reality o- a 8om8 8ut also resonant &it6 t6e ima/e o- t6e recreational 9e6icles o- t6e i3eal -amily 9acation. :hese 9omestic images must be
more than sim%ly one more 6orm o6 9istancingC one more 0a) to remo>e onesel6 6rom the grisl) realit) behin9 the 0or9sJ or3inary a8straction is a3eIuate to t6at task. Somet6in/ elseC somet6in/ 9ery %eculiarC is /oin/ on 6ere. !alling the /attern in 0hich bombs 6all a J6oot/rintK almost seems a &ill-ul 9istorting /rocessD a /la)6ulD /er>erse re6usal o6 accountabilit);because to be accountable to realit) is to be unable to 9o this 0or'. :hese 0or9s ma) also ser>e to 9omesticateD to tame the 0il9 an9 uncontrollable 6orces o6 nuclear 9estruction. 46e meta%6ors minimiBeJ t6ey are a &ay to make %6enomena t6at are 8eyon3 &6at t6e min3 can encom%ass smaller an3 sa-erC an3 t6us the)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K are a 0a) o6 gaining master) o>er the unmasterable. 46e -ire58reat6in/ 3ra/on un3er t6e 8e3C t6e one &6o t6reatens to incinerate your -amilyC your to&nC your %lanetC 8ecomes a %et you can %at.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%3 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( u'es
:he 9iscourse o6 nuclear 0ea/ons is inherentl) /hallic an9 ties to masculinit) an9 seEual /otenc) Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. '!+)I0
*n t6e \rst %ointC -eminists 6a9e lon/ 6i/6li/6te3 t6at the

/olitical an9 militar) /o0er associate9 0ith nuclear 0ea/ons is lin'e9 meta/horicall) 0ith seEual /otenc) an9 masculinit). 46is linka/e is neit6er ar8itrary nor tri9ial= seEual meta/hors are a 0a) o6 mobilising gen9ere9 associations in or3er to create eEcitement aboutD su//ort 6or an9 i9entiWcation 0ith 8ot6 the 0ea/ons an9 the %olitical regime /ossessing them.1' 46us -eminist 6istories o- t6e 3e9elo%ment o- the nuclear arms race in t6e 3eca3es a6ter ,orl9 ,ar :0o 9emonstrate"s# t6e eDtent to &6ic6 it 0as a race to /ro>e masculine /ro0essC -uelle3 8y EmissileF en9yC1( 0ith the nuclear 0ea/ons o- t6e Col3 "ar su%er%o&ers E0heele9 out li'e monumental /hallusesF on /ara9e.1) Such imager) has /ro>e9 se9ucti>e to man) go>ernments across time an9 s/ace. 46us &6en In3ia eD%lo3e3 \9e
nuclear 3e9ices in 0ay 199+C .in3u nationalist lea3er >alas6a6e8 46akeray ar/ue3 t6at EG&He 6a9e to %ro9e t6at &e are not eunuc6sF an3 ,rime 0inister 7tal >e6ari La:%ayee &as %ortraye3 in a ne&s%a%er cartoon as %ro%%in/ u% 6is coalition &it6 a nuclear 8om8C ca%tione3 E0a3e &it6 Lia/ra.F1+ In3ee3C as In3ian no9elist 7run36ati Roy 6as commente3= Rea3in/ t6e %a%ersC it &as o-ten 6ar3 to tell &6en %eo%le &ere re-errin/ to Lia/ra (&6ic6 &as com%etin/ -or secon3 %lace on t6e -ront %a/es) an3 &6en t6ey &ere talkin/ a8out t6e 8om8ME"e 6a9e su%erior stren/t6 an3 %otency.F19 Similar language has /ermeate9 the nuclear 9iscourse o6 the militar) an9 9e6ence in9ustr). In 6er /roun358reakin/ stu3y o- the 9iscourse o6 <merican 9e6ence intellectuals 0ho 6ormulate9 nuclear 0ea/ons /olic) 3urin/ t6e Col3 "arC Co6n note3 t6at seEualise9 meta/horsD /hallic imager) an9 the /romise o6 seEual 9omination thri>e9 .20 &ectures 0ere 9ominate9 b) 9iscussion o6@ >ertical erector launchersC t6rust5to5&ei/6t ratiosC so-t lay 3o&nsC 9ee/ /enetrationD an9 the com/arati>e a9>antages o6 %rotracte3 9ersus s%asm attacksMor &6at one military a39iser to t6e National Security Council 6as calle3 Ereleasing 30 to 50 /ercent o6 our megatonnage in one orgasmic 0hum/.F21

SeEual imager) emasculates 9isarmament an9 9enies the 9ea9l) conseHuences o6 nuclear 9e/lo)ment Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. '!9)I0
Co6n su//ests t6at suc6 seEual imager) ser>es not only to un3erline t6e connections 8et&een masculine seDuality an3 nuclear &ea%ons 8ut also to minimise the seriousness o6 militarist en9ea>ours .22 It ma'es the nuclear arms race seem the stu66 o6 ? ocular loc'er;room ri>alr)D 9en)ing its 9ea9l) conseHuences. ,er6a%s most im%ortantlyC seDualise3 meta%6ors are one o- t6e reasons t6at talk o- nuclear 3isarmament is so rea3ily 3ismisse3= E I6 9isarmament is emasculationD ho0 coul9 an) real man e>en consi9er itTF Nonet6elessC our o9erall im%ression is t6at t6e mo8ilisation o- seDualise3C masculine lan/ua/e an3 ima/ery is si/ni\cantly more mute3 in t6e "6ite ,a%er t6an -eminist critics &oul3 %er6a%s eD%ect. It seems t6at t6ere is a 3eli8erate a9oi3ance 6ere o- t6e more o89iously masculine ar/uments an3 seDual meta%6orsC suc6 as t6ose a8out %otency an3 %enetration. ,er6a%s t6is is unsur%risin/ -rom a /o9ernment t6at claims to 6a9e 8een more o%en to -eminist ar/uments t6an its %re3ecessors.2( 7lt6ou/6 it may not 8ran3is6 more o9ertly %6allic ima/eryC it seems to us t6at the go>ernment

has not 6ull) relinHuishe9 the masculine;co9e9 /restige an9 status that is associate9 0ith the celebration o6 Wre/o0er. 7lt6ou/6 t6e "6ite ,a%er eD%licitly 3enies t6isC a/ain %er6a%s 3ue to an a&areness o- t6e -eminist critiIueC ar/uin/ t6at E&e maintain our nuclear -orces as a means o- 3eterrin/ acts o- a//ression an3 not -or reasons o- statusCF2) its ac'no0le9gement o6 the s/ecial treatment a66or9e9 to nuclear 0ea/ons states in9icates there is still /ri9e in belonging to the club@ G:he P: recognises the *K-s status "along 0ith that o6 the *SD FranceD Russia an9 !hina# as a nuclear 0ea/on state.F

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%5 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Link Nukes
46e tec6nostrate/ic 3iscourse o- nuclear &ea%ons eDclu3es all t6at is -eminine Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. ''1)I0 Such blan9 9escri/tors as Gstoc'/ilesF an9 G9eterrent s)stemF bring us to t6e secon3 stran3 o- t6e -eminist critiIue o- t6e &ay in &6ic6 states talk a8out nuclear &ea%ons tec6nolo/y= the ten9enc) to use highl) GabstractD eu/hemistic an9 acron)m;ri99en language.F31 46is %oint &as 3e9elo%e3 8y Co6n in 6er &ork on S 3e-ence intellectualsC in &6ic6 s6e i3enti\e3 the 9e/lo)ment o6 terms such as Gcollateral 9amageDF G9amage limitation 0ea/onF an9 Gclean bombsF as %art o- a 3iscourse s6e la8elle3 Etechnostrategic.F32 Suc6 a 3iscourse lea>es out Gthe emotionalD the concreteC t6e %articularC human bo9ies an9 their >ulnerabilit)D human li>es an9 their sub?ecti>it)Kall o6 0hich are mar'e9 NasO 6eminine.F33 For a member o6 the 9e6ence communit) to s/ea' o6 such things 0oul9 mean the) ris' being 9iscre9ite9 an9 9isem/o0ere9 in the male; 9ominate9 0orl9 in 0hich the) o/erate. Con9erselyC ignoring such things hel/s 9e6ence intellectuals insulate themsel>es 6rom the realities an9 conseHuences o6 their 0or'. Interestin/lyC Co6n ar/ues t6at it is notC
ultimatelyC tec6nostrate/ic lan/ua/e t6at is mo8ilise3 to :usti-y nuclear &ea%ons an3 3ecisions a8out t6eir 3e%loyment an3 use. Rat6erC 3e-ence intellectuals an3 ot6ers rely -or t6is task on Emuc6 more %rimiti9e am8i/uous an3 contra3ictory aDiomsFM8y insistin/C -or eDam%leC on t6e im%ortance o- Een6ancin/ our 3eterrenceF an3 E%rotectin/ our 9ital interests.F39 7s Co6n %oints outC!0 suc6 aDioms (assertions o6 6act or /rinci/le that are ta'en as sel6;e>i9entC not reIuirin/ e9i3ence or eD%lanation)C 6ail to /ro>i9e groun9s 6or 9iscrimination bet0een 9i66erent 9e6ence s)stemsI moreo9er the) remo>e the nee9 6or eE/licit ?ustiWcation o6 the nee9 6or nuclear 0ea/ons in the 6irst /lace. 7 reliance on aDioms is %articularly e9i3ent in t6e "6ite ,a%er.!1 46ey inclu3e t6e -ollo&in/= E;or '0 years our in3e%en3ent nuclear 3eterrent 6as %ro9i3e3 t6e ultimate assurance o- our national securityFJ E"e 8elie9e t6at an in3e%en3ent >ritis6 nuclear 3eterrent is an essential %art o- our insurance a/ainst t6e uncertainties an3 risks o- t6e -utureF 7s Co6n %oints outC suc6 aEioms o/erate in Ga realm 0here gen9er is ?ust belo0 the sur6ace.F!! "6at s6e means 8y t6is is t6at t6e aDioms /ain t6eir cre9ence an9 Gemotional >alencesF because the) mobilise un9erl)ing assum/tions about the state an3 a8out security 0hich are su66use9 0ith /en3ere3C an3 s%eci\cally masculine imager)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


%$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( u'es
<bstract 9e/ictions o6 nuclear 0ar are inherentl) masculine in their use as ?usti6ication 6or the eEistence o6 nuclear 0ea/ons an9 securit) measures ( 6eminist-s 6ocus on in9i>i9ual e/istemologies is the onl) 0a) to brea' this c)cle !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A Se9eral anti5&ar -eminists ha>e 6ocuse9 less on the 0ea/ons themsel>esD an9 more on the 9iscourse through 0hich the 0ea/ons "an9 their use# are t6eoriBe3 an3 legitimate9. 46ey 6a9e &ritten a8out 8ot6 t6e seDual an3 3omestic meta%6ors t6at turn t6e min3#s eye to&ar3 t6e %leasant an3 -amiliarC rat6er t6an to&ar3 ima/es o- in3escri8a8le 3e9astation. :he) ha>e i9enti6ie9 in nuclear 9iscourse techniHues o6 9enial an9 conce/tual 6ragmentation. 46ey 6a9e em%6asiBe3 t6e &ays t6at the abstraction an9 eu/hemism o6 nuclear 9iscourse /rotect nuclear /lanners an9 /oliticians 6rom the grisl) realities behin9 their 0or9s. S%eakin/ /enerallyC anti&ar -eminists in9ite &omen an3 men to atten3 to t6e i3entitiesC emotions an3 3iscourses t6at allo& us to acce%t t6e %ossi8le use o- nuclear &ea%ons. 23 ,er6a%s t6e most /eneral -eminist concern is t6e &illin/ness o- intellectuals to talk5asusual a8out nuclear &ea%ons (or a8out any atrocity). <n9 this brings us bac' to the issue o6 the 6raming o- Uuestion 4&o. :he Huestion as it is /ose9 seems in some 0a)s similar to the abstractD 9istancing thin'ing that 0e ha>e criticize9 ( but in 0hich 0e also /artici/ate. 46ere is no mention o- t6e 6orrorC let alone a %ause to rest &it6 it. ,e mo>eC or are mo9e3C Iuickly to an abstract moral tone@ Gan) circumstancesF Gmight be morall) /ermissible....F an3 t6en to com%arisons. 78stract lan/ua/e an3 a %enc6ant -or 3istinctions are ty%ical o- %6iloso%6yC intrinsically uno8:ectiona8leC o-ten a %leasure . It is continuous abstraction 0hile s/ea'ing o6 actual or imagine9 horror that 9isturbs us. <bstract 9iscussion o6 0ar6are is both the tool an9 the /ri>ilege o6 those 0ho imagine themsel>es as the (%otential) users o6 0ea/ons. :he >ictimsC i- t6ey can s%eak at allC s/ea' Huite 9i66erentl)= 7n account o- a nuclear 8last#s e--ects 8y a S 3e-ense intellectual= GOou 6a9e to 6a9e &ays to maintain communications in aH nuclear en9ironmentC a situation 8oun3 to inclu3e $0, 8lackoutC 8rute -orce 3ama/e to systemsC a 6ea9y :ammin/ en9ironmentC an3 so on.2! <n account b) a 7iroshima sur>i>or@ .>er)thing &as 8lackC 6a3 9anis6e3 into t6e 8lack 3ustC 0as 9estro)e9. 4nl) the 6lames that 0ere beginning to lic' their 0a) u/ ha9 an) color. ;rom t6e 3ust t6at &as like a -o/C -i/ures 8e/an to loom u%C 8lackC 6airlessC -aceless. 46ey screame3 &it6 9oices t6at &ere no lon/er 6uman. :heir screams 9ro0ne9 out the groans rising e>er)0here 6rom the rubbleD groans that seeme9 to rise 6rom the >er) earth itsel6.2' It s6oul3 8ecome a%%arent t6enC t6at our concern a8out a8stract lan/ua/e is not only rele9ant to t6e framing o- Uuestion 4&oC 8ut to its content t6e :usti-ia8ility o- nuclear &ea%ons# use as &ell. It is easier to contem/late an9 G?usti6)F the use o6 nuclear 0ea/ons in the abstract language o6 9e6ense intellectuals than in the 9escri/ti>eD emotionall) resonant language o6 the >ictimI 6rom the /ers/ecti>e o6 the user rather than the >ictim. 7nti5 &ar -eminists note t6at 3etaile3C -ocal attention to t6e 6uman im%act o- &ea%ons# use is not only consi3ere3 out o- 8oun3s in securit) /ro6essionals- 9iscourseJ it is also delegitimated 8y its association &it6 t6e E-eminineCF &it6 insu--icient masculinityC as is e9i3ent in t6is eDcer%t o- an inter9ie& &it6 a %6ysicist= ESe9eral collea/ues an3 I 0ere 0or'ing on mo9eling counter6orce nuclear attac'sD tr)ing to get realistic estimates o6 the number o6 imme9iate 6atalities that 0oul9 result 6rom 9i66erent 9e/lo)ments. <t one /ointC &e re5 mo3ele3 a %articular attackC usin/ sli/6tly 3i--erent assum%tionsC an3 -oun3 t6at instea3 o- t6ere 8ein/ 3( million imme3iate -atalitiesC t6ere &oul3 only 8e 30 million. <n9 e>er)bo9) 0as sittin/ aroun3 no33in/C sa)ingD P4h )ehD that-s greatC only 30 millionC# &6en all o- a su33enC I 6ear3 &6at &e &ere sayin/. 7n3 I 8lurte3 outC R"aitC I#9e :ust 6ear3 6o& &e#re talkin/ 55 *nly 30 million] 4nl) %0 million human beings 'ille9 instantl)V# Silence -ell u%on t6e room. No8o3y sai3 a &or3. 46ey 3i3n#t e9en look at me. It &as a&-ul. I -elt like a &oman.F 7-ter tellin/ t6is story to one o- t6e aut6orsC t6e %6ysicist a33e3 t6at 6e &as care-ul to ne9er 8lurt out anyt6in/ in3icatin/ t6at 6e &as t6inkin/ a8out t6e 9ictims a/ain.2( ;ear o- -eelin/ like a &oman (or 8ein/ seen as unmanly) silently &orks to maintain t6e 8oun3aries o- a 3istance3C a8stract 3iscourseC an3 to sustain t6e tone o- Uuestion 4&o a tone &6ic6 in9ites us to t6ink a8stractlyC Eo8:ecti9elyF a8out "01 useC 0ithout /ausing 0ith human /articularitiesD /assions an9 su66ering.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+0 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
:he ontolog) o6 the State as a unitar) actor is hea>il) gen9ere9D an9 eEclu9es 6emininit) 6rom the actions o6 the State Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. ''))I0
In t6e 3ominant Realist 9ie&C u%6el3 8y 8ot6 mainstream aca3emics an3 t6e ma:ority o- %olicy5makersC states are Gunitar) actors 0hose internal characteristicsC 8eyon3 an assessment o- t6eir relati9e ca%a8ilitiesD are not seen as necessar) 6or un9erstan9ing their >ulnerabilities or securit);enhancing beha>iour .F)0 46is assum%tion t6at states act as co6erent units 3ra&s its stren/t6 -rom t6eir treatment as Enotional %ersonsF in early mo3ern :uris%ru3ence.)1 Relate3lyC the state is un9erstoo9 to be in9e/en9entD signiWe9 b) the status o6 so>ereignt) C &6ic6 entails a claim not only to aut6ority &it6in a territory 8ut to in3e%en3ence -romC an3 le/al eIuality toC ot6er suc6 aut6orities. Realists 9o not 9istinguish bet0een the legal status o6 so>ereignt) an9 actual state /racticeJ t6ey assume t6at states are as in3e%en3ent -rom one anot6er as t6ey claim to 8e. 0oreo9erC like a %ersonC t6e state must 8e a8le to actMan3 act in %articular &ays . :he 6act o6 international anarch) (or lack o- o9erarc6in/ /o9ernment# is inter/rete9 b) realists as bringing 0ith it a Gsel6;hel/F s)stem in 0hich states cannot rely on ot6ers an3 must see' to 9e6en9 themsel>es or /erish. ;inallyC as 7lan Aames makes clearC t6e state -or Realists is a -un3amentally rational actor= 46e state is sai3 to 8e6a9e rationally 8ecause it is %icture3 as 8en3in/ its e--orts in a consistent an3 calculate3 &ay to&ar3s a clearly5esta8lis6e3 /oal. 7n3 it can 8e so 3e%icte3 8ecause it is a sin/le unit. :he

analog) is 0ith the sober an9 mature man 0ho gi>es care6ul thought to the achie>ement o6 his /ur/oses.)2 7s t6is Iuote in3icatesC the Realist state is a Gmanl) state.F)3 "e can see here the s)stematic mobilising o6 gen9ere9 9ichotomies such as acti>e//assi>eD in9e/en9ent/"inter#9e/en9entD an9 rational/irrationalD an9 the assum/tion that the state Wts 0ith the masculine si9e o6 the 9ichotomies.
Nee3less to sayC t6e mo3el o- rationality t6at Aames 3escri8es 6as 8een critiIue3 8y countless -eminist %6iloso%6ers. ,ro%onents o- t6is mo3el are accuse3 o- ne/lectin/ social conteDtC 8ot6 in terms o- t6e 3omestic la8our an3 relations6i%s t6at make t6e %rocesses orational 3ecision5makin/ %ossi8leC an3 in terms o- t6e conseIuences o- t6e rational 3ecisions ma3e. In a33itionC /ro/onents o6

this mo9el o6 rationalit) are criticise9 6or e>acuating emotional an9 ethical 9imensions o6 thoughtD historicall) gen9ere9 6eminineD as 6i/6li/6te3 in our 3iscussion a8o9e a8out t6e limitations o- tec6nostrate/ic 3iscourse. I6 Realism-s e/istemolog) (its un3erlyin/ conce%tion o- kno&le3/e) is gen9ere9D its ontolog) (its un3erlyin/ conce%tion a8out t6e sel- an3 a/ency) is eHuall) so. ;eminists &oul3 ar/ue t6at Aames#s analo/y com%arin/ t6e state to a man is not acci3ental 8ut intrinsic to 6o& t6e state is un3erstoo3= this is Gan eEclusionar) masculine mo9el o6 agenc) 9eri>e9 6rom a conteEt o6 uneHual gen9er relationsD 0here %rimarily 0omen-s c6il3 rearin/ an3 care5/i9in/ 0or' su//orts the 9e>elo/ment o6 autonomous male sel>es.F)' In or3er to a%%ear unitaryC acti9e an3 in3e%en3entC t6enC t6ese sel9es must
mask t6eir internal -racturesC t6e constraints an3 ten3encies to inertia t6at t6ey mi/6t -aceC an3 t6eir relations o- (inter)3e%en3ency on internal an3 eDternal ot6ers.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( International !on6lict


:he a66-s classi6ication o6 a con6lict as GinternationalF eEten9s the /ortra)al o6 0omen as /o0erless an9 >ictimize9 Isoto 5 (>i8ianC Int. La&C o- 2uyanaC ni9ersalism an3 Re/ionalism in International La&C
/e3i.o8:ectis.net/e9entos51/ilsa8rasil200+/arti/os/36e6/isoto.%3-)I0 46ere is consi3era8le em%irical e9i3ence that 0omen are a66ecte9 b) arme9 con6lict in 0a)s that men are not.'1 7ccor3in/ to t6e .uman Ri/6ts "atc6C >iolence against 0omen has been 9escribe9 as Gamong the most serious an9 /er>asi>e human rights abuses that the international communit) no0 con6ronts.F'2 2lo8allyC 0omen 6orm onl) 2 /ercent o6 regular arm) /ersonnelD but as ci>iliansD the) su66er 9is/ro/ortionatel) 6rom con6lict.'3 1urin/ arme3 con-lictC t6ey are a83ucte3 to 8ecome t6e &i9es o- t6e -i/6ters.'! Ra/e an9 other 6orms o6 seEual >iolence ha>e been un9erstoo9 as one o6 the s/oils o6 the >ictorD an9 ha>e been acce/te9 as natural conseHuences o6 0ar.'' 0ass ra%e an3 ot6er or/aniBe3 -orms o- seDual 9iolence an3 6umiliation 6a9e 8een -reIuent an3 o-ten
use3 as instruments o- -earC s6ameC an3 et6nic cleansin/. It#s im%ortant to note t6at I.L makes a 3istinction 8et&een an international arme3 con-lict t6at %oses a t6reat to international %eace an3 security an3 an internal con-lict. 46is 9istinction bet0een international con6licts t6ere-ore intro9uces the notion o6 uni>ersalism >s. regionalism in arme3 con-lict. :he

classi6ication o6 international con6lict as a threat to international /eace an9 securit) there6ore 0arranting the use o6 6orce as %ro9i3e3 -or un3er C6a%ter LII o- t6e N C6arter (uni9ersal con-lictV) as o%%ose3 to an internal
con-lict t6at is limite3 to a %articular area an3 3oes not %ose a t6reat to international %eace an3 security. It -ollo&s t6at 8etter %rotection is o--ere3 to %ersons in international con-licts as o%%ose3 to internal con-lict. 7rticle 2) o- the Fourth Gene>a !on>ention

/laces states un9er an obligation to /rotect 0omen in international arme9 con6lict Gagainst an) attac' on their honor C in %articular a/ainst ra%e C en-orce3 %rostitution C or any ot6er -orm o- in3ecent assault.F'( :his article is not /en3er sensiti9e 8ecause it rein6orces the notion o6 0omen as men-s /ro/ert)D rather than because the) constitute >iolence. ;eminists 6a9e criticiBe3 t6e use o- t6e &or3 %rotection as o%%ose3 to t6e %ro6i8ition.')

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( :hir9 ,orl9 ,omen


:he a66-s /ortra)al o6 8i99le .astern 0omen as >ictims in nee9 o6 ,estern sa>ior 6urthers their sub?ugation Pettman + (Aan Ain3yC 1irector o- "omen#s Stu3ies S 7N C >ro&n Aournal o- "orl3 7--airs 10(2)C
"inter/S%rin/ 200!C %. +9)I0 Uuite Iuickly <6ghan 0omen also a//eare9 as >ictims o6 the 9ea9l) :aliban regime . :he) 6igure9 in a -amiliar /uiseC as s)mbols o6 9i66erenceD o6 4therness C as 8or3er /uar3s o- t6e 8oun3aries 8et&een s an3 46emC mar'ing their culture/reli/ionC lac' o6 ci>ilizationD barbarit)D an9 unre6orme9 religion.2) :he) 0ere utilize9 in the eIually -amiliar rescue romanceD an inter; national triangle@ our men setting out to rescue their 0omenD 6rom their men. :he m)th o6 /rotection 6oists u/on men res/onsibilities o6 sol9iering an9 on 0omen the 6unc; tion o6 being those 6or 0hom men must 6ightD un9erlining men as agents an9 0omen as /assi>e /a0ns in international /oliticsC re/ar3less o- &6at in3i9i3ual men an3 &omen are 3oin/. :hese gen9ere9 ci>ic i9entities also legitimize the militar) solution as a humanitarianD in9ee9 /rogressi>e inter>ention. 7s many -eministsC 7-/6ani an3 internationalC %ointe3 outC t6is &as too easy a 3isco9ery o- outra/e an3 too su33en a con9ersion to t6e ri/6ts o- 7-/6an &omen as Eri/6ts o- con9enience.F2+ In a 3isconcertin/ t&istC the /light o6 <6ghan 0omen 0as highlighte9 a-ter 9/11 8y Laura >us6 an3 C6erie >lairC &i9es o- t6e %rimary &ar lea35 ersD as i- it &as a G0omen-s issueF or auEiliar) as/ect rather than a human rights or human securit) issue . "6y not 8e-oreV "6y not no&V "6y not in ot6er states 6ostile to &omen#s ri/6tsC -or eDam%le in Sau3i 7ra8iaV29 EG:Ohe 0orr) about <6ghan 0omen has become a battle cr) o6 the ,est onl) a6ter $/11. It ne>er /re>ente9 the *nite9 States in the /ast 6rom su//orting the :aliban a/ainst t6e So9iets or -or t6em to su%%ort no& t6e Nort6ern 7lliance -orces t6at 6a9e 8een
similar in t6eir a%%roac6 to &omen#s ri/6ts. Si/ni-icantlyC in t6e "estern 3iscus5 sion on t6e %ost54ali8an /o9ernment in 7-/6anistan t6ere is constant mention o- t6e "est insistin/ on multi5et6nic %artici%ation in t6is /o9ernment as a %recon3ition -or esta8lis6in/ 3emocratic rule in 7-/6anistan. .o&e9erC t6ere is 9irtually ne9er any men5 tion let alone insistence t6at t6e &omen o- 7-/6anistan &oul3 constitute %art o- t6is %olitical %rocess.F30

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( IR
:he a66-s >ersion o6 IR uses 0omen to legitimize masculine actions o6 9omination an9 >iolence Pettman + (Aan Ain3yC 1irector o- "omen#s Stu3ies S 7N C >ro&n Aournal o- "orl3 7--airs 10(2)C
"inter/S%rin/ 200!C %. 90)I0
;eminists in IR routinely ask Iuestions t6at are not usually aske3 in t6e 3isci5 %line. 46ey also attem%t to listen to 9oices eDclu3e3 -rom IR#s e9i3ence an3 resources. In so 3oin/C -eminist res%onses 8rou/6t anot6er %o&er-ul 3imension lackin/ in muc6 mainstream IRC an3 in &estern rea35 in/s o- 9/11C 8y internationaliBin/ t6e account.3+ 7s a 3isci%lineC IR has long been *.S.;9ominate9D an9 there6ore sha/e9 b) *.S. strategic an9 global interests an9 attention .39 IR -eminists o-ten 3ra& on net&orks an3 a--ilia5 tions &it6 ot6er international -emi5 nistsC an3 %ay attention to &omen#s 9oices in transnational -orums an3 circuitsC reco/5 niBin/ t6at t6ese are al&ays %artialC an3 situate3C inclu3in/ -or many o- usC only com5 municatin/ in $n/lis6. 46ese links 6a9e &i3ene3 su8stantially t6rou/6 t6e emer/ence o- e5mail an3 t6e Internet as key tools in transnational -eminist an3 &omen#s or/aniB5 in/.

<l0a)s ac'no0le9ging the horror an9 loss o6 $/11D these 0ere /lace9 alongsi9e other 9rea96ul an9 >iolent losses to other /eo/le in other /laces. 46ese res%onses also reclaime3 t6e international i3entity o- 9/11C re:ectin/ t6e a%%ro%riation o- t6e tra/e3y as only E7mericanCF t6at i/nore3 t6e many ot6er nationalities amon/ t6e 9ictims. Suc6 mo>esD meant to com/licateD internationalizeD an9 gen9er the accountD re; late to long;hel9 6eminist anEieties about the Gunitar) masculine actorF /roblem in IR that Gturns a com/leE state an9 set o6 6orces into a singular male o//onent.F!0 :his /ersoni6ication o6 enem) states ma'es their 9emonization easier. It also 6acilitates <merica-s translation into >ictim/re9eemer C re%ro3ucin/ 8oun3e3 state i3entities t6at su%%resse3 connections across an3 3i9isions &it6in t6e 3i--erent %layer states. Such constructions unleashe9 com/etiti>e masculinities into action@ hence the Phar9 mascu; linit)- /ri>ilege9 in the 9ominant national/alliance mo9e.!1 ;eminists resiste3 t6e &ays t6at $/11 an9 its a6termath %ri9ile/e3 t6e military solution an3 9e/lo)e9 P0omenin the 0ar stor) as a metho9 o6 legitimization. ;eminists %ointe3 to the use o6 0omen in the culture 0ars t6at lurke3 &it6in t6e &ar talkC an3 shore9 u/ the binar) :hem >s. *s )et again.!2 46ey also resiste3 t6e e--ect omasculiniBe3 res%onses in remo9in/ &omen as a/ents o- kno&le3/e. 46is in turn %rom%te3 t6e constant reassertion Rnot in our nameC# lest &omen#s %li/6t/3an/er 8ecame /roun3s -or masculiniBe3 action yet a/ain.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


++ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in'/Im/act ( ational Securit)


:he ?usti6ications o6 rhetoric an9 e>en action on national securit) are necessaril) an9 em/iricall) rationalistic an9 masculine ( the conseHuence o6 this is a 9isa>o0al o6 all things 6eminineD culminating in militar) a9>enturism an9 0ar. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. '15'3) A0 1onna .ara&ay claims t6at all scienti6ic theories are embe99e9 in %articular kin3s o- storiesC or &6at s6e terms E6ictions o6 science.F'' IR 6eministsC like some ot6er critical t6eoristsC %articularly t6ose concerne3 &it6 /enealo/yC 6a9e eEamine9 t6e stories on 0hich realism an3 neorealism base their /rescri/tions 6or states- national;securit) 8e6a9iorC lookin/ -or e9i3ence o- /en3er 8ias. Feminist reanal)sis o- t6e so5calle3 Ecreation myt6sF o- international relationsC on &6ic6 realist assum%tions a8out states# 8e6a9ior are 8uiltC re>eals stories built on male re/resentations o6 ho0 in9i>i9uals 6unction in societ) . :he /arable o6 man-s amoralD sel6;intereste9 beha>ior in t6e state o- natureC ma3e necessary 8y t6e lack o- restraint on t6e 8e6a9ior o- ot6ersC is ta'en b) realists to be a uni>ersal mo9el 6or eE/laining states- beha>ior in t6e international system. >utC as Re8ecca 2rant assertsC this is a maleD rather than a uni>ersalD mo9el@ 0ere li6e to go on in the state o6 nature 6or more than one generationD ot6er acti>ities such as c6il38irt6 an3 chil9 rearingD ty%ically associate9 0ith 0omenD must also ha>e ta'en /lace. 2rant also claims t6at Rousseau-s stag huntC &6ic6 realists 6a9e use3 to eD%lain t6e security 3ilemmaC ignores the 9ee/er social relations in 0hich the acti>ities o6 the hunters are embe99e9. ,hen 0omen are absent 6rom t6ese -oun3ational m)thsC a source o6 gen9er bias is create9 that eEten9s into international;relations theor).'( ;eminists are also Iuestionin/ t6e use o- more scienti-ically 8ase3 rational5c6oice t6eoryC 8ase3 on t6e instrumentally
rational 8e6a9ior o- in3i9i3uals in t6e market%lace t6at neorealists 6a9e use3 to eD%lain states# security5seekin/ 8e6a9ior. 7ccor3in/ to t6is mo3elC states are un%ro8lematically assume3 to 8e instrumental %ro-it maDimiBers %ursuin/ %o&er an3 autonomy in an anarc6ic international system. "6ere international coo%eration eDistsC it is eD%laine3 not in terms o- community 8utC rat6erC in terms oenli/6tene3 sel-5interest. ;eminists su//est t6at rational5c6oice t6eory is 8ase3 on a %artial re%resentation o- 6uman 8e6a9ior t6atC since &omen in t6e "est 6a9e 6istorically 8een con-ine3 to re%ro3ucti9e acti9itiesC 6as 8een more ty%ical o- certain men.') C6aracteristics suc6 as sel-56el%C autonomyC an3 %o&er maDimiBin/ t6at are %rescri8e3 8y realists as security5en6ancin/ 8e6a9ior are 9ery similar to t6e 6e/emonicC masculine5/en3ere3 c6aracteristics 3escri8e3 in c6a%ter 1. 46e instrumentally com%etiti9e 8e6a9ior o- statesC &6ic6 results in %o&er 8alancin/C is similar to eIuili8rium t6eoryC or t6e market 8e6a9ior o- rational5economic man. 46ere-oreC it ten3s to %ri9ile/e certain ty%es o- 8e6a9iors o9er ot6ers. "6ile states 3o in3ee3 8e6a9e in t6ese &aysC t6ese mo3els o--er us only a %artial un3erstan3in/ ot6eir 8e6a9ior. 7s ot6er IR sc6olarsC tooC 6a9e %ointe3 outC states en/a/e in coo%erati9e as &ell as con-lictual 8e6a9iorJ %ri9ile/in/ t6ese masculinist mo3els ten3s to 3ele/itimate ot6er &ays o- 8e6a9in/ an3 make t6em a%%ear less Erealistic.F 1oes t6e -act t6at states-

national;securit) /olicies are o-ten legitimate9 b) a//ealing to masculine characteristicsC such as /o0er an3 sel-56el%C mean t6at certain ty%es o- -orei/n5%olicy 8e6a9iorsMstan3in/ tallC rat6er t6an &im%in/ outM are seen as more le/itimate t6an ot6ersV Coul3 it 8e t6at men &6oC in the role o6 9e6ense eE/ertsD must em/lo) tough GmasculineF language an9 su//ress an) G6eminize9F thoughts 0hen constructing strategic o/tionsD come to re/ar3 more coo%erati9e c6oices as unt6inka8le an3 co o%erati9e 8e6a9ior as unlikelyV'+ Carol Co6n claims t6at the language 0e use sha/es the 0a) 0e >ie0 the 0orl9 an9 thus ho0 0e act on it. .er anal)sis o6 the language o6 *.S. securit) eE/ertsC &6ose i3eas 6a9e 8een im%ortant -or mainstream security stu3iesC suggests that this masculine;gen9ere9 9iscourse is the onl) /ermissible 0a) o6 s/ea'ing about national securit) i6 one is to be ta'en seriousl) b) the strategic communit) . 46is rationalD 9isembo9ie9 language /reclu9es 9iscussion o6 t6e 3eat6 an3 3estruction o- 0arC issues that can be s/o'en o6 onl) in emotional terms stereoty%ically associate9 0ith 0omen. In ot6er &or3sC t6e limits on 0hat can be sai9 0ith the language o6 strategic 9iscourse constrains our abilit) to thin' 6ull) an9 0ell about national securit). In t6eir analysis o- *.S. /olic) on bombing In9ochina 9uring the Uietnam,arC Aenni-er 0illiken an3 1a9i3 Syl9an eDamine t6e 3iscourse o- .S. %olicymakers. 46ey claim it 0as gen9ere9.'9 "6en %olicymakers s%oke or &rote a8out Sout6 LietnamD it 0as /ortra)e9 as 0ea' an9 6eminize9D its /o/ulation as h)sterical an9 chil9li'eJ t6e Nort6 LietnameseC on t6e ot6er 6an3C &ere c6aracteriBe3 as 8rutal -anaticsMas mani-estin/ a %er9erte3 -orm o- masculinity. 46e aut6ors claim t6at 8om8in/ %olicyC res%on3in/ to t6ese /en3ere3 %ortrayalsC &as 3i--erent in eac6 case. "6ile not 3enyin/ t6e reality o- &6at %olicymakers 3oC 0illiken an3 Syl9anC like Co6nC claim t6at 0or9s ha>e /o0er an9D there6oreD conseHuencesI the 0a) in 0hich /olic)ma'ers an9 scholars construct realit) has an e66ect on ho0 the) act u/on an9 eE/lain that realit). 2en3er53i--erentiate3 ima/es are o-ten use3 in -orei/n %olicy to le/itimate certain o%tions an3 3iscre3it ot6ers. 46ere-oreC "alt#s as%iration -or se%aratin/ t6e E%oliticalF -rom t6e Escienti-icF is Iuestiona8le. In ot6er &or3sC theories cannot be se/arate9 6rom /olitical /ractice.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in'/Im/act ( 8ilitar) <ction


:he containment o6 con6lict;/rone an9 anarchic scenarios is moti>ate9 b) masculine 6ear o6 the 6eminine ( this lea9s to the o//ression o6 0omen. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. ''5')) A0
Since its 8irt6 in early mo3ern $uro%eC t6e "estern state system 6as constructe3 its encounters &it6 Eunci9iliBe3F or 3an/erous ot6ers in &ays t6at 6a9e :usti-ie3 eD%ansionC conIuestC an3 a state o- military %re%are3ness. Suc6 r6etoric is 8ein/ 3e%loye3 to3ay &it6 res%ect to 3an/ers in t6e Sout6. "6ile I &oul3 not 3eny t6e 9ery real %ro8lem o- con-lict in t6e Sout6C suc6 con6licts ta'e on /articular

i9entities that ren9er them intractable an9 o6ten incom/rehensible . Ne&ly articulate3 Nort6/Sout6 8oun3aries 8et&een mature an3 immature anarc6ies rein-orce t6ese 3istinctions. <narch)C or t6e state onatureC is not only a meta%6or -or t6e &ay in &6ic6 %eo%le or states can 8e eD%ecte3 to 8e6a9e in t6e a8sence o- /o9ernmentJ it also 9e/icts an untame9 natural en>ironment in nee9 o6 ci>ilization 0hose 0i9e an9 chaotic s/aces are o6ten 9escribe9 as 6emale. Such language 0as -reIuently use9 3urin/ t6e ei/6teent6 an3 nineteent6 centuries to legitimate colonial rule o9er %eo%les &6o &ere 3eeme3 inca%a8le o- /o9ernin/ t6emsel9es.(3 It is not onl) threats 6rom outsi9e against 0hich nationalist i9eologies are create9. :he threats that states /ose to their o0n citizensC issues o- im%ortance on t6e ne& security a/en3aC are o6ten eEacerbate9 b) the mani/ulation o6 nationalist i9eologies t6at %its rulin/ /rou%s a/ainst Eoutsi3ersF &it6in t6eir o&n territory. ;reIuentlyC the reassertion o6 cultural or reli/ious i9entitiesC in t6e name onational unityC ma) ta'e the 6orm o6 re/ressi>e measures against 0omen. Nira Ou9al51a9is su//ests t6at t6e
3e-inin/ o- &omen as t6e 8earers o- cultureMa %ractice t6at o-ten accom%anies t6ese mo9ementsM rein-orces &omen#s ineIuality. "6en /en3er relations come to 8e seen as t6e EessenceF o- cultureC &omen &6o stray outsi3e t6e 3e-inition o- E/oo3 &omenF can 8e %unis6e3 -or 8rin/in/ s6ame to t6eir -amiliesJ 8esi3es soli3i-yin/ et6nic i3entitiesC t6is can 8e use3 as a &ay o- le/itimiBin/ t6e control an3 o%%ression o- &omen.(! Suc6 8e6a9ior is illustrate3 in t6e &ay &omen 6a9e 8een re/ulate3 8y t6e 4ali8an in 7-/6anistan.

ational i9entities are o6ten use9 b) 9omestic elites to /romote state or grou/ interests an9 hi9e race an9 class 9i>isions. 1e-inin/ moments in collecti9e 6istorical memories are -reIuently &ars o- national li8erationC /reat 9ictories
in 8attles a/ainst eDternal enemiesC or t6e /lories o- -ormer im%erialist eD%ansion. ;la/s an3 national ant6ems are o-ten associate3 &it6 &ar. Sc6olars &6o stu3y nationalism 6a9e em%6asiBe3 t6e im%ortance o- &ar-are -or t6e creation o- a sense o- national community. Not only 3oes &ar mo8iliBe t6e national consciousnessC it also %ro9i3es t6e myt6s an3 memories t6at create a sense o- national i3entityC an i3entity -or &6ic6 %eo%le 6a9e 8een &illin/ to 3ie an3 kill.(' 7s Aean $ls6tain assertsC societies areC in some senseC t6e Esum totalF ot6eir &ar stories.(("ar stories are o-ten use3 to /ain a society#s su%%ort -or a &arJ -reIuently C these stories rel) on the /ortra)al o6 a certain 'in9 o6 masculinit) associate9 0ith heroism an9 strength . 46ese %ortrayals can 8e racialiBe3 as &ell as /en3ere3J as Susan Ae--or3s notesC all t6e 6eroes in .olly&oo3#s 19+0s Lietnam "ar an3 action5a39enture -ilms &ere &6ite men.() Rarely 3o &ar stories inclu3e stories a8out &omen.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

===Im/acts===

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+3 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ( ,ar
8asculine a//roaches to 6oreign /olic) to lea9 narro0;min9e9 solutions an9 0ar. :ic'ner % (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC %!e &rown 'ournal of World ffairsC 10(2)C
%. '!) A0 So to /et 8ack to your IuestionC yesC I 3o t6ink t6at the 0ar in IraH is a masculine a//roach. :he em/hasis on a strong militar) res/onse closes o66 other more conciliator) o/tions . 46is is not t6e same t6in/ as sayin/ t6at men al&ays -a9or t6e use o- -orce &6ile &omen al&ays -a9or more %eace-ul res%onses. ,omen su//orte9 this 0arD tooD although there 0as a si/ni-icant gen9er ga/ on t6e issueC at least until t6e &ar starte3. "6at I am sayin/ t6at 0e are all socialize9 into regar9ing masculine norms as the correct 0a) to o/erateK/articularl) in matters o6 6oreign /olic). :his has the negati>e e66ect o6 shutting o66 other o/tions. 7n3 t6e 6raming o- the 0ar on terrorism as goo9 >ersus e>il re6lects t6e kin3 o9ichotomous thin'ing t6at 6eminists 6in9 3ee%ly /roblematicC as I 6a9e illustrate3 &it6 my 3e-inition o/en3er. ;eminists 6a9e &ritten a /reat 3eal a8out t6e 3an/ers o- eit6er/or cate/oriBations an3 t6e tolerance -or am8i/uityC 8ot6 o- &6ic6 coul3 8e use-ul 6ere.

:he hegemonic masculinit) /er/etuate9 b) the a66 ?usti6ies militar) a9>enturismD turning the case. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. !9) A0 Claimin/ t6at t6e security5seekin/ 8e6a9ior o- states is 3escri8e3 in /en3ere3 termsC 6eminists ha>e /ointe9 to the masculinit) o6 strategic 9iscourse an9 ho0 this ma) im/act on un9erstan9ing o6 an9 /rescri/tions 6or securit)J it ma) also 6el% to eE/lain 0h) 0omen-s >oices ha>e so o-ten been seen as inauthentic in matters o- national securit). ;eminists 6a9e eDamine3 6o& states legitimate their securit); see'ing beha>ior through a//eals to t)/es o6 GhegemonicF masculinit). 46ey are also in9esti/atin/ t6e eDtent to &6ic6 state an3 national i3entitiesC &6ic6 can lea3 to con-lictC are 8ase3 on /en3ere3 constructions. :he >alorization o6 0ar through its i9enti6ication 0ith a heroic 'in9 o6 masculinit) 9e/en9s on a 6eminize9D 9e>alue9 notion o6 /eace seen as unattainable an9 unrealistic . Since -eminists 8elie9e t6at /en3er is a 9aria8le social constructionC t6ey claim t6at t6ere is not6in/ ine9ita8le a8out t6ese /en3ere3 3istinctionsJ t6usC t6eir analyses o-ten inclu3e t6e emanci%atory /oal o- %ostulatin/ a 3i--erent 3e-inition osecurity less 3e%en3ent on 8inary an3 uneIual /en3er 6ierarc6ies.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+5 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ( &aun9r) &ist


8asculine conce/tions o6 international relations cause the 0orst 6orm o6 >iolence inclu9ing eE/loitationD en>ironmental 9estructionD an9 militarism that results in en9less >iolence Xale0s'i $5 (0arysia ^ale&skiC Rea3er in t6e Centre -or "omen#s Stu3iesC an3 Aane ,ar%artC %ro-essor o2en3er Stu3ies at ni9ersity o- 1al6ousieC 9+ G46e N0anN Uuestion in International RelationsC "est9ie& ,ressC >oul3erC %+(H) "6ereas &e t6ink it im%ortant to a9oi3 &6at .alli3ay calls K%reci%itate totaliBationCK 9 0e also thin' it 0orth0hile to recognize the >er) real connections bet0een the 9omination o6 masculine /ara9igms in intellectual 9ebateD on t6e one 6an3C an9 /ersonal insecurit) in t6e late t&entiet6 centuryC the 9e>elo/ment o6 in9ustrial ca/italismD an9 ecological 9estruction C on t6e ot6er. 46e reco/nition o- t6ese connections is not6in/ ne&J 8ot6 ,eterson an3 4ickner un%acka/e IR in t6is &ay ( ,eterson 1992C 32J 4ickner 1992). .o&e9erC the relation bet0een these connections an9 the 9is/ute bet0een realist an9 liberal 6orms o6 masculinit) must also be recognize9 (see C6a%ter 1). 46e s6i-t -rom 6ierarc6ical to s%atial &orl3 or3ers t6at occurre3 a-ter t6e 0i33le 7/es create3 an international realm in &6ic6 t6e 6y%ermasculinity o- t6e &arrior 3e9elo%e3 an3 -inally -louris6e3 as realist 6y%ermasculinity &it6in t6e 3isci%line o- international relations. 46e intellectual res%onse to conser9atism -rom t6e $nli/6tenment %ro3uce3 a conce%tion o- reason t6at lai3 t6e -oun3ations o- t6e Krational manK ot6e -ollo&in/ centuries o- ca%italist 3e9elo%ment. ;inallyC t6e li8eral conce%tion o- %ro/ress as t6e natural out/ro&t6 o- increasin/ rationality %ro3uce3 t6e critical li8eral conce%tion o- t6e /ra3ual mastery o- man o9er nature. 46e conseIuences are rea3ily itemiBa8le= (1) realist h)/ermasculinit) is res/onsible 6or the emer/ence an3 e9entual militarization o6 the state s)stem 0ith its imager) o6 /rotector//rotecte9D insi9e/outsi9eD an9 or9er/anarch);;a situation in 0hich securit) 6or the 6e0 is bought at the cost o6 insecurit) o6 the man) ( Luck6am 19+3)J (2) liberal masculinit)Ss notions o6 com/etitionD in9i>i9ualit)D an9 rational economic man has meant /ros/erit) 6or the 6e0 an9 eE/loitation o6 the man) ( "allerstein 19)!J 7min 19)!)J (3) liberal conce/tions o6 /rogress ha>e 6ostere9 a s/lit bet0een man an9 nature 0here nature is to be 9ominate9 an9 is conseHuentl) res/onsible 6or the 0i9es/rea9 9egra9ation o6 the global en>ironment ( Cros8y 19+()J (!) 8ot6 liberal an9 realist conce/tions o6 masculinit) ha>e been res/onsible 6or the 6ostering o6 the belie6 in the 9isco>er) o6 /re9ictable regularities through 0hich JscienceJ can re>eal eternal truths about JmanJ an9 Jnature.J :his has allo0e9 "hu#manit) to ignore the m)ria9 0arning signs o6 imminent catastro/he ( ,eterson 1992J 4ickner 1992).

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


+$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ( ,orl9 Politics


Feminist theories are 'e) to inter/ret 0orl9 /olitics Keohane 5$ (Ro8ertC Aournal o- International Stu3ies Lol. 1+C No . 2 C %. 2!')I0
;eminist stan3%oint t6eories ar/ue t6at &omenNs eD%eriences at t6e mar/ins o- %olitical li-e 6a9e /i9en t6em %ers%ecti9es on social issues t6at %ro9i3e 9ali3 insi/6ts into &orl3 %olitics. ;rom 6er 9anta/e5%oint at t6e %eri%6eryC t6e -eminist t6eorist o--ers a critiIue ot6eories constructe3 8y men &6o %ut t6emsel9es in t6e %osition o- %olicy5makers (orC as in .ans 0or/ent6auC look N o 9 e r 6i s s6oul 3er N ) . Inst ea3C 6eminists criticall) eEamine international relations 6rom t he s t a n 9 / o i n t o 6 /eo/le 0ho ha>e been s)stematicall) eEclu9e9 6rom /o0er. :he 6eminist s t a n 9 / o i n t conce%tion as I use it 9oes n o t im/l) that 6eminist /ers/ecti>es are necessaril) s u / e r i o r in a n a8s ol ut e sense t o t r a 3i t i ona l 9ie&s 5 onl ) t h a t t he) c o n t a i n crucial insights i nt o t he com/l eE realities o 6 0or l 9 /olitics.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


10 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ; &iberalism
&iberalism allo0s 6or a /atriarchal macroeconomic s)stem 0hich 9is/ro/ortionatel) hurts 0omen an9 /re>ents gen9er eHualit) Ruiz 3 (4riciaC La& S "as6C *ct. 1' 200)C 6onors.csustan.e3u/:ournals/Soun3in/s/RuiB.%3-)I0
Feminist critiHues o6 liberalism a99ress the economic ineHualities inherent to 6ree tra9eD 0hich 9is/ro/ortionatel) a66ect 0omen. AacIui 4rue ar/ues t6at Emale;centere9 macroeconomic in9icatorsD such as the Gross ational Pro9uctF un9er>alue the 0or' o6 0omen.1+ 4rue also re%orts t6at Eon a &orl3 scaleC 0omen are a 9isa9>antage9 grou/= t6ey o&n one %er cent o- t6e &orl3#s %ro%erty an9 resourcesC /er6orm siEt) /er cent o6 the labourC Gan3H are t6e ma:ority o- re-u/eesC illiterate an3 %oor %ersons.F (I8i3) 46is su//ests t6at the ca/italist structure is a /atriarchal oneD e66ecti>el) marginalizing the /artici/ation an9 contributions o6 0omen in the econom)C since muc6 o- t6eir &ork is re-lecte3 in un%ai3 ille/al or 3omestic settin/s t6at are not inclu3e3 in economic assessments. In3ee3D liberalist institutions suc6 as t6e "4* an3 multinational cor%orations ha>e ten3e3 to create -ree tra3e a/reements t6at &eaken state %rotections on la8or ri/6ts19 an3 %u8lic social -un3sC &6ic6 6as ser>e9 to negati>el) a66ect the large /ro/ortion o6 0omen in the labor 6orce. :his in turn camou-la/es issues o6 6emale eE/loitationD such as t6e /en3ere3 3i9ision o- la8or an3 the increase in seE tra66ic'ing 0orl90i9e. ;eminists also c6allen/e li8eralism#s
claim t6at international institutions %ro9i3e -or &ays in &6ic6 &omen can 8e 8ecome more %olitically an3 socially ackno&le3/e3 an3 em%o&ere3. Since the lea9ers an9 the /rocesses o6 6ormal international organizations come 6rom /atriarchal s)stemsD their 0or' can 'ee/ 0omen at a 9isa9>antage. .ilary C6arles&ort6 critiIues some o- t6e recent -ormal international con-erencesC suc6 as t6e >ei:in/ 1eclaration an3 7/en3a 21 in Rio. S6e notes t6at t6e &or3in/ in t6e 3ocuments s6o&s t6at 0hile some consensus 0as achie>e9 in /rogressing issues critical to 0omenD not enough 0as achie>e9 to arri>e at t6e real changes %ro%ose3 8y -eminists. C6arles&ort6 outlines some o- t6e 3isa%%ointin/ resultsC suc6 as the lac' o6 agreement on the 9e6inition o6 gen9erD an9 inabilit) to secure benchmar's 6or measuring /rogress.20 Suc6 critiIues un3erscore t6e c6allen/es o- -eminist t6eoryC 8ecause t6ey

in9icate that highl) /ublicize9 an9 0i9el) su//orte9 liberalist 0omen-s mo>ements 9o not necessaril) eHuate 0ith t6e /oal o- ac6ie9in/ real gen9er eHualit).

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act 7el/er ( Patriarch) Root !ause o6 ,ar


"ar is t6e %ro3uct o- /en3ere3 un3erstan3in/s o- li-e in &6ic6 t6e masculine 3ominates t6e -eminine it can 8e remo9e3 only &6en t6ese un3erstan3in/s c6an/e ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. 'C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0 :he gen9er critiHue o6 0ar %ro9i3es a /eneraliBe3 account o- &ars an3 t6e &ay t6ey are -ou/6t. 46e
/en3er critiIue tells us &6y &e 6a9e &ars at all. "6ile it is su//esti9e &it6 res%ect to t6e -reIuencyC c6aracterC an3 sco%e o- &arC it 3oes not try to account -or t6e timin/ an3 location o- s%eci-ic &ars. It tells us 0h) 0ar is >ie0e9 0i9el) as an acce/table /ractice or 0a) to resol>e human 9i66erences (alt6ou/6 t6is acce%tance in9aria8ly is accom%anie3 &it6 o8li/atory %rotestations o- reluctance). 46e /en3er critiIue o- &arC -or eDam%leC cannot account -or t6e timin/ an3 location o- t6e 1991 2ul- "arC alt6ou/6 it can %ro9i3e an eD%lanation o- t6e &arrin/ %rocli9ities o- mo3ern "estern statesC es%ecially t6e inconsistency 8et&een t6e %eace-ul r6etoric o- t6e S an3 its incessant &arrin/ %ractices. It can account -or t6e s%ectre o- &ar in t6e a-termat6 o- LietnamC &it6 t6e en3 o- t6e Col3 "arC an3 &it6 t6e election o- 2eor/e >us6. It is less a8le to account -or t6e a%%earance o- &ar in t6e 0i33le $ast in Aanuary o- 1991. 46e o%enin/ intellectual orientation o- t6e /en3er critiIue o- &ar rests u%on a constructi9ist 9ie& o- 6uman un3erstan3in/ an3 %racticeC t6at isC a 9ie& t6at anc6ors %racticesC inclu3in/ &arC &it6in 6umankin3Ns sel-5ma3e 6istorico5cultural matriD. 46is 9ie& is contraste3 starkly &it6 t6ose t6at /roun3 6uman %ractices %syc6olo/ically or 8iolo/ically or /enetically. ,ar is not 9ie&e3 as a natural /ractice as i6 9eli>ere9 b) the Go9sI it arises out o6 human;create9 un9erstan9ings an9 0a)s;o6; li>ing t6at 6a9e e9ol9e3 o9er t6e millennia. 0ore s%eci-icallyC t6e assum%tion t6at men (t6e nearly eDclusi9e makers an3 3oers o- &ar) are 8iolo/ically 6ar35&ire3 -or a//ression an3 9iolence is resiste3C as is t6e relate3 notion t6at &omen are naturally %assi9e an3 non59iolent. :he eE/lanation 6or 0ar 0ill not be 6oun9 in testosterone le>els. It is not t6e essential or 8io5social male t6at makes &ar.

,ar is the /ro9uct o6 the gen9ere9 un9erstan9ings o6 li6eKun9erstan9ings o6 the celebrate9 masculine an9 the subor9inate9 6eminineKthat ha>e been 6ashione9 o>er 9ast tracts o- cultural time. 7n3 since 0ar arises 6rom human;create9 un9erstan9ings an9 /ractices it can be remo>e9 0hen these un9erstan9ings change. ,ar is not insu/erable. In3ee3C t6e rootin/ o- &ar in 6uman create3 %6enomena is reco/niBe3 as
a res%onse to t6e %olitical inca%acitation associate3 &it6 8iolo/ically 3eterminist ar/uments= K7ttem%ts o- /enetic 3eterminists to s6o& a 8iolo/ical 8asis -or in3i9i3ual a//ression an3 to link t6is to social a//ressionC are not only unscienti-icC 8ut t6ey su%%ort t6e i3ea t6at &ars o- conIuest 8et&een nations are ine9ita8le.K+

Patriarch) is the root cause o6 0arD 0hich in turn recreates /atriarch) ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. )C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0 :he /ractices o6 0ar emerge 0ithin gen9ere9 un9erstan9ings that in6lect all s/heres o6 social li6e.
7s &e create3 KmanK an3 K&omanK &e simultaneously create3 &ar. Contem%orary &ar-areC in com%lementary termsC emer/es &it6in t6e inner5 most sanctums o- /en3ere3 li-e. Gen9er constructs are constituti>e o6 0arI the) 9ri>e it an9 imbue it 0ith meaning an9 sense. "ar s6oul3 not 8e un3erstoo3 as sim%ly 3eri9ati9e o- t6e masculine et6osC alt6ou/6 it numerous -acets accor3 &it6 t6e narrati9es an3 lore o- masculinity. :he 6acult) o6 0ar is our un9erstan9ing o6 man an9 0omen C omanliness an3 &omanlinessC an9 /articularl) o6 the subor9ination o6 the 6eminine to the masculine . It is t6e t&innin/ o- t6e masculine an3 t6e -eminine t6at nouris6es t6e &ar et6ic. 46is can 8e illustrate3 8y eDaminin/ t6e in-usion o- t6e lan/ua/e o- &ar &it6 6eteroseDual ima/ery ty%ically o- %atriarc6yC t6at isC &it6 i3eas o- t6e %ro&ess5la3en male seDual su8:ect conIuerin/ t6e ser9ile -emale seDual o8:ect. Aoth seE an9 0ar are constitute9 through un9erstan9ings o6 male

9omination an9 6emale subor9ination. :he language is boun9 to be mutuall) rein6orcing an9 easil) interchangeable. "ar is a meta%6or -or seD an3 seD is a meta%6or -or &ar. 7 recent stu3y o- nicknames -or t6e %enis re9eale3 t6at
men &ere muc6 more incline3 to meta%6oriBe t6e %enis &it6 re-erence to myt6ic or le/en3ary c6aracters (suc6 as t6e .ulkC Cyclo%sC 2en/6is <6anC 46e Lone Ran/erC an3 0ac t6e <ni-e)C to aut6ority -i/ures an3 sym8ols (suc6 as Carnal <in/C 6ammer o- t6e /o3sC your 0a:estyC Ro3 o- Lor3s6i%C an3 t6e %ersua3er)C to a//ressi9e tools (suc6 as scre&3ri9erC 3rillC :ack6ammerC c6iselC 6e3/etrimmerC an3 -uBB8uster)C to ra9enin/ 8easts (suc6 as 8east o- 8ur3enC <in/ <on/C 46e 1ra/onC %yt6onC co8raC an3 anacon3a)C an3 to &ea%onry (suc6 as lo9e %istolC %assion ri-leC %ink tor%e3oC meat s%earC stealt6 8om8erC 3estroyerC an3 %ur%le 6elmete3 lo9e &arrior).11 :he

intuiti>e collocation o6 seEualit) 0ith 9ominationD conHueringD 9estructionD an9 es/eciall) instruments o6 0ar is con6irme9 8y t6is stu3y. Aoth seE an9 0arC 6o&e9erC are mani6estations o6 the gen9ere9 notions o6 /o0er;o>erD submissionD ineHualit)D in?ur)D contaminationD an9 9estruction. Aoth /ractices are integral eE/ressions o6 /atriarchal culture an9 /roEimate to its re/ro9uction. It is 6ar3ly sur%risin/ t6at the language o6 seEualit) an9 0ar is seamless.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im%act .el%er ,atriarc6y Root Cause o- "ar


Patriarch) is the root cause o6 0ar ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. )C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0 *n t6e ot6er si3e o- t6e &ar le3/er is t6e -li/6t -rom t6e -eminine. ,ar is /remise9 u/on the un9erstan9ing that the 6eminine is the enem) o6 the 0arring essence. It is im%erati9e to em%6asiBe t6at &ar is not ne/lect-ul &it6 res%ect to &omanC or t6at it is merely non5inclusi9eC 6esitantC or reluctant. Rat6erC 0ar is aEiomaticall) boun9 u/ 0ith the 6ear o6 the 6eminine. 46e i3eolo/y o- 0ar in>ol>es the /resu//osition that 0omanliness is antithetical to 0arC t6at it &ill un3ermine t6e &arrin/ et6ic. ,ar6are /resu//oses that 0oman is the enem) o6 manSs cro0ning /ractice . It
i3enti-ies t6e -eminine as t6e castratin/ enemy o- t6e manly/&ar sc6eme. 7ny su//estion o- /ra9itation to&ar3s t6e -eminine is eIuate3 &it6 t6e 3ecay o- masculine resol9e. 46e -li/6t -rom t6e -eminine entails t6e simultaneous 3enial an3 a%%ro%riation o- t6e t6in/s &omen 3o. &abels such as heroismD bra>er)D an9 sacri6iceD 6or eEam/leD are reser>e9 6or 0arI the atten9ant /ain an9 loss o6 li6e in chil9birth is sociall) re/resse9 .1' 46ere is no eIui9alent e--ort to commemorate or cele8rate t6e 8rin/in/ -ort6 o- li-e. In -actC c6il38irt6 6as 8een e%i3emiolo/iBe3 o9er t6e last centuryC &6ile /estation an3 8irt6 ima/ery 6as 8een a%%ro%riate3 8y &ea%ons 3esi/ners. >irt6in/ 3oes not 6a9e t6e recollecti9e eIui9alent o- &ar. 7t 8estC t6e &om8 is enliste3 to -urt6er t6e &ar %ro:ectC t6at isC to insure -uture sol3ierin/ /enerations. ,omanliness is 9omesticate9D in a senseD to ensure that it 9oes not un9ermine 0ar. 8enSs 'illing is acclaime9 ty%ically in terms o6 its J/rotecti>eJ 6unctionC t6at isC as %rotectors o- t6e 6ome an3 t6e 6eart6.1( 0en are castC in t6e en3C as t6e most im%ortant caretakers.

Patriarch) is the root cause o6 0ar ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. 9C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0 46ese moti-s s6a3e into outri/6t loat6in/. ,ar may 8e 6ell in3ee3J 8ut it is 9ri>en b) an i9eolog) o6 hatre9. 8isog)n) is the theor)I 0ar is the /ractice. 0yt6s surroun3in/ &oman as t6e enemy o- man (an3 t6e t6in/s men 3o) lay at t6e 6eart o&ar5t6ou/6t. 0o3ern &ar is connotati9ely inse%ara8le -rom t6e 3e6umaniBin/ re%resentations o- &oman. :he 9ri>e Jto 0arJ is recesse9 0ithin the m)th o6 0oman as manSs 0orst enem). 0o3ern &ar-are is a relentlessly ,an3oran a--air. Its
a8un3ant coital ima/ery is or/anically ins%ire3 8y its myso/ynistic cra3le. Common %arlance routinely asserts t6at an enemy t6at 6as 8een consi/ne3 to i/nominious 3e-eat is an enemy t6at 6as 8een Kt6orou/6ly -ucke3K (&6ic6 resonates culturally as 8ein/ re3uce3 to a &oman). It 6as 8een o8ser9e3 t6at the construction o6 a sol9ier reHuires the 'illing o6 the 0oman 0ithin .1) 46e trainin/ o- t6e sol3ier is re%lete &it6 a litany o- 3isci%linin/ e%it6ets re/ar3in/ t6e -eminine. 46e trans-ormation -rom 8oy5recruit into man5sol3ier reIuires t6e eDtir%ation o- any -eminine traits an3 i3entitiesJ it 3eman3s t6e 9anIuis6in/ o- any lurkin/ &omanliness. ,ar is 6emici9al. 46is -ores6a3o&sC moreo9erC t6e 9i/ilance &it6 res%ect to t6e su89ersi9e -eminine 8ein/ loomin/ &it6in t6e &arrin/ -a8ric. Sol3ier an3 %olicymakers /uar3 a/ainst t6e association o- t6eir actions or i3eas &it6 -eminine traits. Re/ar3less o- its %articular mani-estation or 3e-inition o- a %racticeC ritualC or /oal linke3 to militaries an3 to 8attleC the i9eolog) o6 0ar reHuires a strictD unrelenting o>ercoming o6 an)thing un9erstoo9 as 0omanl). Its 3iscourse o- i3entity an3 ac6ie9ementD in other

0or9sD re/u9iates an9 9isa>o0s the 6eminine as much as it is embraces the masculine. :his m)sog)nistic re6leE un9ergir9s the re/resentation o6 o//onents (on t6e &ar -ront an3 t6e K6omeK -ront) as &omen.
46ose o%%osin/ &ar routinely are 3ismisse3 in -eminine termsC as 8ein/ too emotionalC too sentimentalC as lackin/ in -irmness an3 3eterminationC as na_9eC unt6ou/6t-ulC &eakC con-use3C an3C in t6e 8ran3in/ cou% 3e /r`ceC as unmanly (it is commonly sus%ecte3 t6at %eace-ul %eo%le or 3o9esC a-ter allC 3onNt K6a9e 8allsK). 46ere is a common an3 essential association 8et&een &omen an3 %eaceC an association t6at 6as %ermeate3 a s6are o- social acti9ism an3 sc6olarly researc6. 0ilitary enemiesC moreo9erC ty%ically are re%resente3 as &oman. 0ilitary tar/etsC es%ecially t6e /roun3 or eart6 itsel-C also are connotati9ely -eminiBe3 in &ar5t6ink. :he /ractice o6 0ar

sur6aces 0ithin gen9ere9 un9erstan9ings an9 i9entities. ,ar embo9ies the rehearsal o6 /atriarchal consciousness. Numerous lea3ers (mainly male 8ut occasionally -emale) o9ertly 3ra& u%on /en3ere3 un3erstan3in/s -or %olicy
/ui3ance. It is t6is sense o- &ar 8ein/ constitute3 an3 in-lecte3 t6rou/6 /en3er t6at in-orms t6e claim t6at %atriarc6y lies at t6e root o&ar. ,ithout gen9er it is unli'el) that 0ar 0oul9 arise as such a 6reHuent alternati>e in human li6eD

an9 that entire societies coul9 be so eEtensi>el) militarize9 regar9less o6 the costs an9 tra9e;o66s in>ol>e9.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act 7el/er ( Patriarch) Root !ause o6 ,ar


,ar 0oul9 not eEist 0ithout /atriarch) ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. 19C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0
"6en contem%late3 -rom t6e %ers%ecti9e o- /en3er t6e %ractice o- &ar a%%ears some&6at %ara3oDical. It is 8oun3 u% &it6 notions omasculinity an3 -emininity. In3ee3C it is 9i66icult to imagine ho0 0ar 0oul9 be un9erstoo9 as an)thing other than hi9eousD 9estructi>eD an9 terribl) harm6ul in the absence o6 gen9er 9iscourse. ,hen abstracte9 6rom the conteEt o6 /atriarch) 0ar is 9raine9 o6 its meaning. "ar rests u%on t6e unsel-5conscious a%%ro%riation o%atriarc6y as a sense5mana/in/ uni9erse. Gen9ere9 constructsC in s6ortC are constituti>e o6 t6e intersocial %ractice t6at 6as recei9e3 t6e a%%ellation 0ar. ,ar is about /reser>ing /atriarchal 0a)s o6 li6eD an9 es/eciall) about /reser>ing the subor9ination o6 0omen. ,ar6are is the technolog) o6 /atriarch)Kits most 9ramatic instrument o6 maintenance. It is 9ery unlikely t6at &ar &oul3 create a meanin/-ul emanci%atory &in3o& -or &omen &6en it is so -un3amentally ent&ine3 &it6 %atriarc6al culture. *ne must ne9er lose si/6t o- t6e -act t6at 0ar6are isD as 46omas ,aine o8ser9e3 more t6an t&o centuries a/oC Kthe art o6 conHuering at home.K'2 In a recent &ork Susan 2u8ar 3ra&s attention to t6e increasin/ sense o- 3rea3 t6at many -emale intellectuals 6a3 3urin/ t6e Secon3 "orl3 "arC a%%re6ensions im%elle3 8y t6e re%resentation o- &oman as 8ot6 8ooty an3 enemy. Suc6 ima/es an3 re%resentations 8o3e3 %oorly -or &omen in t6e %ost5&ar %erio3C an3 2u8ar conten3s t6at t6ese intellectuals &ere intuitin/ t6at t6e &ar &asC in e--ectC Ka 8litB on t6em.K'3

Patriarch) is the root cause o6 militarism an9 the commo9i6ication o6 0omen P!P 2 (,eo%le#s C6arter -or ,eaceC Aune 1' 200(C &&&.net&orkers.or//user-iles/,eaceP20C6arter.%3-)I0
46e links 8et&een %atriarc6y an3 &ar nee3 to 8e em%6asiBe3. :he >er) structure o6 the militar) is /atriarchal. :o gal>anize to -ull %otential the struggle against militarismD its gen9er;base9 a//roach has to be challenge9 . Since t6e 9ery 8e/innin/ o- &arC 0omen ha>e been consi9ere9 s/oils o6 0ar an9D as >ictims C are to3ay su8sume3 un9er the eu%6emistic /hrase Jcollateral 9amageJ. 46e "ar on 4error intert&ine3 &it6 neo5li8eral /lo8aliBation 6as intensi-ie3 eD%loitation an3 o%%ression o- &omenD commo9i6)ing themD tra66ic'ing themD an9 t6us s)stematicall) >iolating their 9ignit). 46e main casualties o- &ar are &omen an3 c6il3ren. 46e economic conseIuences o- &ar are eDacer8ate3 8y %atriarc6y. 8ilitarization rein6orces the seEual commo9i6ication o6 0omen. It also

/er/etuates seEual >iolence against 0omen. 8ilitar) occu/ation 6urther 9egra9es 0omen.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

===<lternati>e===

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt ( .thnogra/h)
<lt is to con9uct our anal)sis o6 international relations in a manner consistent 0ith ethnogra/h). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. ''5')) A0 7nt6ro%olo/ist Cli--or3 2eertB 6as 3escri8e3 ethnogra/h) as Ea strati-ie3 6ierarc6y o- meanin/-ul structures in terms o- &6ic6 6uman actions are %ro3uce3C %ercei9e3 an3 inter%rete3 an3 &it6out &6ic6 t6ey &oul3 not eDist.F3! It is not an eD%erimental science in searc6 o- la&C 8ut an inter/reti>e one in search o6 meaningI its tas' is to unco>er the conce/tual structures an9 meanings that in6orm sub?ects- acts. 2eertB s%eaks o- an
inter%reti9e a%%roac6 as an ai3 to /ainin/ access to t6e conce%tual &orl3 in &6ic6 our su8:ects li9e so t6at &e can con9erse &it6 t6em.3' "ritin/ a8out t6e natural sciences rat6er t6an t6e social sciencesC $9elyn ;oD <eller 3escri8es t6e met6o3 use3 8y 8iolo/ist >ar8ara 0cClintock in a similar 9ein. S6e contrasts 0cClintock#s 0or' on /enetic trans%osition in corn &it6 t6at more ty%ical o- mo3ern scienceC &6ic6 is /remise9 on a 9i>ision bet0een the obser>er an9 the obser>e9 an3 t6e searc6 -or a sin/le

la& o- eD%lanationC a met6o3olo/y t6at encourages researchers to o>erloo' 9i66erence. !laiming that Gthere-s no such thing as a central 9ogma into 0hich e>er)thing 0ill 6itDF 8c!lintoc' tal'e9 o6 her scienti6ic in>estigations in terms o6 Glistening to the materialF or Gletting the eE/eriment tell )ou 0hat to 9o.F3( In 3escri8in/ 6er Econ9ersationalF relations6i% &it6 %lantsC 8c!lintoc' urge9 res/ect 6or 9i66erenceJ s6e use3 t6e &or3s a--ection an3 em%at6y to 3escri8e 6er -orm o- t6ou/6t.3) "6ile <eller is
care-ul not to conclu3e t6at 0cClintock &as consciously 3oin/ -eminist scienceC s6e 3oes su//est t6atC 8ein/ a &oman &it6 a commitment to %ersonal inte/rityC 0cClintock 6a3 to insist on a 3i--erent meanin/ o- min3C natureC an3 t6e relation 8et&een t6em.3+ In ot6er &or3sC /i9en t6at t6e meanin/ o- t6ese terms an3 t6eir relation to eac6 ot6er 3e%en3 on /en3ere3 constructionsC 8c!lintoc'-s

science reHuire9 a 9i66erent construction o6 gen9er. .m/ath)D listeningD an9 con>ersation are 0or9s 6reHuentl) use9 b) IR 6eminists 0hen 9escribing their research. C6ristine Syl9ester 6as use3 t6e term em%at6etic
coo%eration in connection &it6 6er -iel3&ork amon/ &omen in ^im8a8&e. S6e 3e-ines em%at6etic coo%eration as t6e %ositional sli%%a/e t6at occurs &6en one listens seriously to concerns an3 a/en3as o- t6ose to &6om &e 3o not usually listen &6en 8uil3in/ social t6eory. Uuotin/ 4rin6 0in656aC Syl9ester claims t6at em%at6y in9ol9es takin/ on t6e stru//les o- ot6ers 8y listenin/ to &6at t6ey 6a9e to say in a con9ersational style t6at 3oes not %us6 or 3irectJ it is an a8ility to in9esti/ate Iuestions in &ays t6at o%en us u% to t6e stories t6at 6a9e /enerally 8een 8y%asse3.39 !oo/eration is Ga /rocess o6 negotiation that "real# theorists ?oin because the)

ha>e ta'en on boar9 enough o6 the teEture o6 marginalise9 i9entities that their Sel6;i9entit) 0ith canonical 'no0le9ge is 9isturbe9.F!0 SimilarlyC <at6arine 0oonC an IR -eminist 3oin/ secon35/eneration em%irical &orkC
6as 3escri8e3 6er -iel3&ork in <orea as an attem%t to li-t t6e curtains o- in9isi8ility t6at 6a9e s6rou3e3 <orean %rostitutes# eDistence. In-luence3 8y t6e &ork o- $nloeC 8oon-s stories hel/ us locate 0omen in /laces not normall) consi9ere9

rele>ant to IR an9 to lin' their eE/eriences to 0i9er /rocesses an9 structures that she in>estigate9 through the eEamination o6 national;securit) 9ocuments collecte9 in the *nite9 States an9 Korea. 0oon
o--ers 6er researc6 as a %assa/e&ay -or t6e 9oices o- t6ese &omen &6o &ere -ar -rom silent &6en s6e en/a/e3 t6em in con9ersation on to%ics t6at ran/e3 -rom %olitics to c6il35rearin/ 6a8its.!1 She claims that man) o6 the thoughts an9 eE/eriences 6ormer /rostitutes share9 0ith her in regular con>ersations in6orme9 her thin'ing an9 0riting .!2 .er inter9ie&s are not inten3e3 to o--er statistical e9i3ence 8ut Eto /i9e 9oice to %eo%le &6o most <oreans an3 7mericans 6a9e ne9er consi3ere3 as 6a9in/ anyt6in/ im%ortant to say or &ort6 listenin/ to.F!3 C6ristine C6in#s &ork also res%on3s to t6e IuestionC "6ere are t6e &omenV C6in %resents 6er -iel3&ork &it6 3omestic ser9ants in 0alaysia in a li/6t similar to 0oon#s. Describing her

ethnogra/hic researchM&6ic6 in9ol9e3 li9in/ in 9arious nei/68or6oo3s in <uala Lum%urC 0alaysiaC o9er a siD5mont6 %erio3C sheC tooC re?ects the sur>e) metho9D 0hich in !hin-s >ie0 o>ersim/li6ies com/leEities o6 li6e that cannot be 9istille9 in a series o6 h)/otheses to be teste9. S6e 3escri8es 6er &ork as multimet6o3
et6no/ra%6ic researc6= s6e o--ers Iuotations -rom -iel3 notes t6atC s6e saysC are a Some ,at6&ays -or IR ;eminist ;utures 1!3 style oe9i3ence t6at allo&s 6er su8:ects to use t6eir o&n &or3s an3 s%eak a8out any issue t6ey %lease. C6in &rites a8out 6er e--orts to esta8lis6 trust an3 3escri8es 6er analysis o- 6er inter9ie&s as a stu3y o- narrati9ityC or 6o& &e come to construct our i3entities 8y locatin/ oursel9es &it6in our li-e stories.!! arrati>e is a metho9 sometimes em/lo)e9 b) 6eminists to 6urther their goal

o6 constructing 'no0le9ge that comes out o6 /eo/le-s e>er)9a) eE/eriences . Such 'no0le9ge is im/ortant 6or reaching a le>el o6 sel6un9erstan9ing that can enable /eo/le to com/rehen9 the hierarchical structures o6 ineHualit) or o//ression &it6in &6ic6 t6eir li9es are situate3C an3 t6ere8y mo9e to&ar3
o9ercomin/ t6em. Laurel Ric6ar3sonC a -eminist sociolo/istC 6as claime3 t6at narrati9es are Iuintessential to un3erstan3in/ t6e sociolo/ical. S6e outlines some o- t6e conseIuences o- a3o%tin/ a narrati9e -orm as a &ay o- acIuirin/ an3 re%resentin/ kno&le3/eC su//estin/ t6at it can em%o&er in3i9i3uals an3 su%%ort trans-ormati9e social %ro:ects. Narrati9es 3is%lay t6e /oals an3 intentions o6uman actors an3 are t6e %rimary &ay t6at in3i9i3uals or/aniBe t6eir eD%erience into tem%orally meanin/-ul e%iso3esJ narrati9es make t6e connections 8et&een e9ents t6at constitute meanin/. $D%lanation in a narrati9e mo3e is conteDtually em8e33e3C &6ereas scienti-ic eD%lanation is a8stracte3 -rom s%atial an3 tem%oral conteDts.!' Ric6ar3son 3escri8es narrati9es t6at /i9e 9oice to t6ose social /rou%s &6o are mar/inaliBe3Mto &6at s6e calls t6e Ecollecti9e story.F "6ile %eo%le talk o- s%eci-ic e9ents rat6er t6an articulatin/ 6o&

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K
sociolo/ical cate/ories suc6 as raceC classC an3 /en3er 6a9e s6a%e3 t6eir li9esC s6e 8elie9es t6at t6eir stories 6a9e transcen3ent %ossi8ilities -or social action an3 societal trans-ormation.!(

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


13 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt Sol>enc) ; Re?ection


Patriarch) is at the heart o6 the militar) an9 the militar) in9ustrial com/leE ( there is no ho/e in sol>ing >iolence in the a66irmati>e-s 6rame0or' ( onl) the alternati>e sol>es !oc' $2 (AacklynC ,ro-. o- Sociolo/y at t6e ni9ersity o- "it&atersran3C Sout6 7-rican 1e-ence Re9ie&C
Issue No. ( 1992 6tt%=//&&&.iss.or/.Ba/, >S/7SR/S71R(/Cock.6tml) ,A 8ilitarism in9ol9es more t6an arms 8earin/ an3 t6e %ractice o- &ar. It has been 9e6ine9 as Sa set o6 attitu9es an9 social /ractices 0hich regar9s 0ar an9 the /re/aration o6 0ar as a normal an9 9esirable social acti>it). 46is is a 8roa3er 3e-inition t6an is common amon/ sc6olars. It Iuali-ies %eo%le ot6er t6an Ao6n "ayne as militarists. >ut in an age 0hen 0ar threatens our sur>i>al it is as 0ell to un9erstan9 an) beha>iorC 6o&e9er mil3 in a%%earanceC 0hich ma'es 0ar seem either natural or 9esirable.N (0annC 19+)= 3') 46e role o- &omen in military 6as 8een lar/ely o8scure3 an3 mysti-ie3 8y t&o com%etin/ %ers%ecti9es 5 t6ose o- seDism an3 -eminism. >ot6 analyses eDclu3e &omen -rom &ar on t6e /roun3s t6at t6ey are 8earers o- Ns%ecial IualitiesN. SeEism eEclu9es 0omen 6rom the ran's o6 the militar) on the groun9s o6 their /h)sical in6eriorit) an9 unsuitabilit) 6or 6ighting. <s the 0ea'er seE 0omen must be S/rotecte9S an9 S9e6en9e9S. *ne 9ariant o- -eminism similarly eDclu3es &omen 8ut on o%%osite /roun3s 5 t6at o- t6eir innate nurturin/ IualitiesC t6eir creati9ity an3 %aci-ism. 7not6er 9ariant o- -eminism eDclu3es &omen on t6e /roun3s t6at men ha>e a mono/ol) on /o0er. 46e outcome o- t6ese %ers%ecti9es is t6at 0ar is un9erstoo9 as a totall) male a66air an9 the militar) as a /atriarchal institution 6rom 0hich 0omen are eEclu9e9 an9 b) 0hom 0omen are o6ten >ictimize9. 46e military is 9ie&e3 as t6e last 8astion o- male %o&er5&ar as itNs last %reser9e Cock continues (92 E F) 0ilitary trainin/ is a crucial a/ency o- t6is socialisation. 0en are socialise3 into a conce%tion o- masculinity t6at is 9iolent. S8ilitar) training is socialisation into masculinit) carrie9 to eEtremes.S (Ro8ertsC 19+!= 19)). 46e notion o- Ncom8atN is t6e -ulcrum o- t6is %rocess. NCom8atN is t6e key 3imension in t6e 3e9elo%ment o- t6e masculinityamilitarism neDus. !ombat is /resente9 as 6un9amental to the 9e>elo/ment o6 manhoo9 an9 male su/eriorit). ($nloeC 19+3) *nly in com8at lies t6e ultimate test o- a manNs masculinity. :he image o6 manhoo9 inculcate9 through combat training hinges on aggression an9 9ominanceI it in>ol>es an emotional 9isconnection an9 an im/acte9 seEualit). ($isen6artC 19+3) 46rou/6 com8at t6e man a--irms 6is role as %rotectorC an3 3e-en3er. In t6is sense t6e eDclusion o- &omen -rom com8at roles is essential -or maintainin/ t6e i3eolo/ical structure o%atriarc6y. Cock conclu3es(92K K)C Similarly Rear3on 6as ar/ue3 t6at militarism in /eneral is eD%ressi9e o- a masculine i3eolo/y. 46ere-oreC i6 0omen 0ere inclu9e9 in the /olic) ma'ing /rocessD 6eminine notions o6 9e6ense an9 national securit) coul9 bring about a more /eace6ul an9 less militarize9 0orl9 . 7lso it is su//este3 t6at t6e %resence o- &omen in com8at units 8lurs an3 3ecreases t6e 6ars6ness o- military li-e. It %er6a%s lessens t6e 8rutaliBation o- youn/ men t6ro&n into an all male society -or mont6s on en3. *ne coul3 t6us ar/ue -or &omen sol3iers as an a/ency o- 3e/en3erin/ t6e military an3 loosenin/ t6e militarism/masculinity connection. 46e -unction o- t6e military an3 com8at as a masculine %ro9in/ /roun3 &ill 8e ero3e3 i- &omen are -ully inte/rate3 into t6e military.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


15 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt Sol>enc) ( Gen9ere9 &ens


:he alternati>e is to >ote negati>e. In Huestioning the masculine conce/tions o6 the 1<! 0e are able to embrace a 6eminist ethic that challenges the ineHualities an9 >iolence o6 the status Huo 8ogha9am 1 (LalentineC -eminist sc6olar an3 aut6orC ELiolence an3 4errorism= ;eminist *8ser9ations on
Islamist 0o9ementsC StateC an3 t6e International SystemF 0use) 4ur 0orl9 9es/eratel) nee9s ne0 economic an9 /olitical 6rame0or's in or9er to en9 the >icious c)cle o6 >iolence an9 bring about /eo/le;oriente9 9e>elo/mentD human securit)D an9 socio;economic ?usticeD inclu9ing ?ustice 6or 0omen. Suc6 -rame&orks are 8ein/ %ro%ose3 in international circlesC &6et6er 8y some N circlesC t6e anti/lo8aliBation mo9ementC or t6e /lo8al -eminist mo9ement. ,omenSs /eace mo>ements in %articular constitute an im/ortant countermo>ement to terrorismD an9 the) shoul9 be encourage9 an3 -un3e3. ;eminists an3 &omenNs /rou%s 6a9e lon/ 8een in9ol9e3 in %eace &orkC an3 their anal)ses an9 acti>ities ha>e contribute9 much to our un9erstan9ing o6 the roots o6 con6lict an9 the con9itions 6or con6lict resolutionD human securit)D an9 human 9e>elo/ment. 46ere is no& a %ro3i/ious -eminist sc6olars6i% t6at 3escri8es t6is acti9ism &6ile also critically analyBin/ international relations -rom 9arious 3isci%linary 9anta/e %ointsC inclu3in/ %olitical science.b 46e acti9ities o- antimilitarist /rou%s suc6 as t6e "omenNs international Lea/ue -or ,eace an3 ;ree3om ("IL,;)C "omen Strike -or ,eaceC an3 t6e "omen o2reen6am Common are le/en3aryC an3 t6eir le/acy lies in on/oin/ e--orts to K-eminiBeK %eaceC 6uman ri/6tsC an3 3e9elo%ment. 7t t6e t6ir3 N con-erence on &omenC in Nairo8i in 19+'C &omen 3eci3e3 t6at not only eIuality an3 3e9elo%mentC 8ut also %eace an3 &ar &ere t6eir a--airs.b 46e Nairo8i con-erence took %lace in t6e mi3st o- t6e crisis o- 46ir3 "orl3 in3e8te3ness an3 t6e im%lementation o- austerity %olicies recommen3e3 8y t6e "orl3 >ank an3 t6e I0$ ;eminists &ere Iuick to see t6e links 8et&een economic 3istressC %olitical insta8ilityC an3 9iolence a/ainst &omen. 7s Lucille 0air note3 a-ter t6e Nairo8i con-erence= :his GeconomicO 9istress eEists in a climate o6 mounting >iolence an9 militarism... >iolence 6ollo0s an i9eological continuumD starting 6rom the 9omestic s/here 0here it is tolerate9D i6 not /ositi>el) acce/te9. It t6en mo9es to t6e %u8lic %olitical arena &6ere it is /lamoriBe3 an3 e9en cele8rate3.... ,omen an9 chil9ren are the /rime >ictims o6 this cult o6 aggression.1! Since t6e 19+0sC &6en &omen acti9ists -orme3 net&orks to &ork more e--ecti9ely on local an3 /lo8al issuesC transnational -eminist net&orks 6a9e en/a/e3 in 3ialo/ues an3 alliances &it6 ot6er or/aniBations in or3er to make an im%act on %eaceC securityC con-lict resolutionC an3 social :ustice.. :he eE/ansion o6 the /o/ulation o6 e9ucate9D em/lo)e9D mobileD an9 /oliticall);a0are 0omen has le9 to increase9 acti>ism b) 0omen in the areas o6 /eaceD con6lict resolutionD an9 human rights. 7roun3 t6e &orl3C &omen 6a9e 8een insistin/ t6at t6eir 9oices 8e 6ear3C on t6e streetsC in ci9il society organizationsC an3 in t6e meetin/ 6alls o- t6e multilateral or/aniBations. 1emo/ra%6ic c6an/es an3 t6e rise o- a Kcritical massK o- %olitically en/a/e3 &omen are re-lecte3 in t6e -ormation o- many &omenNs /rou%s t6at are 6i/6ly critical o- eDistin/ %olitical structuresJ that Huestion masculinist >alues an9 beha>iors in 9omestic /oliticsD international relationsD an9 con6lictI an9 that see' to ma'e strategic inter>entionsD 6ormulating solutions that are in6orme9 b) 6eminine >alues. <n im/ortant /ro/osal is the institutionalization o6 /eace e9ucation.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt Sol>enc) ; .thnogra/h)


.thnogra/h) sol>es ( it challenges 6la0e9 un9erstan9ings o6 the international s)stem an9 re/laces them 0ith more com/rehensi>e 6eminist localize9 anal)sis. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 1!351!!) A0 "6ile IR -eminists 6a9e em%loye3 et6no/ra%6ic met6o3sC o-ten &it6 t6ese emanci%atory /oals in min3C t6ey are not usin/ et6no/ra%6y only to narrate an3 un3erstan3 %eo%le#s li9es at t6e local le9el. IR 6eminists %ro9i3e multile9elC mutually constitute3 constructions. Im%ortantlyC t6eir in9esti/ations lin' e>er)9a) eE/eriences 0ith 0i9er regional an9 global /olitical an9 economic structures an9 /rocesses. 7s 3iscusse3 in c6a%ter 2C 0oon#s 0or' 9emonstrates that militar) /rostitution is not sim/l) a 0omen-s issueD but a matter o6 national securit) an9 international /olitics . 46e c6allen/e o- 6er &ork is to analyBe t6e interaction 8et&een -orei/n /o9ernments an3 amon/ /o9ernments an3 local /rou%s.!) :his t)/e o6 un9erstan9ing ma) re>eal /ossibilities 6or social change. Like&iseC C6in uses a neo52ramscian %ers%ecti9e to 3emonstrate 6o& 3omestic ser9ice is an issue t6atC rat6er t6an 8ein/ a %ersonalC %ri9ate oneC as is o-ten assume3C in9ol9es t6e state an3 its international %olitical an3 economic relations. Rein6orcing the 6eminist claim o6 the inter/enetration o6 the /ersonal an9 /oliticalD !hin in>estigates the multicausal lin'ages bet0een region (in t6is caseC t6e $ast 7sian re/ion)C stateD an9 househol9. 7lt6ou/6 %re9ious analyses 6a9e eDamine3 class an3 racial 3imensions o- &6at s6e calls t6e re%ressi9e 3e9elo%mental stateC little &ork 6as 8een 3one on its /en3ere3 3imensions.!+ !hin-s critical %olitical5economy a//roachC one use3 8y ot6er -eministsC tooC 9i66ers 6rom rationalistic a//roaches in t6at it takes into account 8ot6 t6e material an3 i3eational 3imensions o- social relations. !hin claims that a 6ocus on legislation is not su66icient to account 6or the re/ressi>e /olicies o6 the stateI one must also eEamine the i9eological hegemon) necessar) to 6ormulate an9 legitimate such economic /olicies.!9 7s t6ese em%irical stu3ies 3emonstrateC /en3er is a system o- meanin/ t6at comes to 8e eD%resse3 in le/itimatin/ 3iscourses t6at kee% %re9ailin/ %o&er structures in %lace. ;or t6is reasonC -eminists 6a9e also 8een attracte3 to 3iscourse analysis as a met6o3olo/y.cC*N4IN $1@

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


20 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt Sol>enc) ; .thnogra/h)


<lternati>e sol>es ( 6eminist /ers/ecti>es on international relations brea' 6ree o6 tra9itional e/istemological constraints. :ic'ner $2 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gender in International (elations
)eminist Perspectives on c!ieving Global *ecurit+C %.1!) Con9entional international relations t6eory 6as concentrate9 on t6e acti9ities o- t6e great /o0ers at t6e center ot6e system. Feminist theoriesC &6ic6 s%eak out o- t6e 9arious eD%eriences o- &omen55 &6o are usually on t6e mar/ins o- society an3 interstate %olitics55 can o66er us some ne& insights on the beha>ior o6 states an9 the nee9s o6 in9i>i9ualsC %articularly t6ose on t6e %eri%6eries o- t6e international system. Feminist /ers/ecti>esC constructe3 out o- t6e eD%eriences o- &omenC can a33 a ne& 3imension to our un3erstan3in/ o- t6e &orl3 economyJ since &omen are -reIuently t6e -irst casualties in times o- economic 6ar3s6i%C &e mi/6t also /ain some ne& insi/6t into t6e relations6i% 8et&een militarism an3 structural 9iolence. .o&e9erC -eminist t6eories must /o 8eyon3 in:ectin/ &omenNs eD%eriences into 3i--erent 3isci%lines an3 attem%t to c6allen/e t6e core conce%ts o- t6e 3isci%lines t6emsel9es. !once/ts central to international relations t6eory an3 %racticeC such as /o0erD so>ereignt)D an9 securit)C ha>e been 6rame9 in terms t6at &e associate 0ith masculinit). 1ra&in/ on -eminist t6eories to eDamine an3 critiHue t6e meanin/ o6 these an3 ot6er conce/ts -un3amental to international %olitics coul3 hel/ us to re6ormulate these conce/ts in 0a)s that might allo0 us to see ne0 /ossibilities 6or sol>ing our current insecurities. Su//estin/ t6at t6e %ersonal is %oliticalC -eminist sc6olars 6a9e 8rou/6t to our attention 3istinctions 8et&een %u8lic an3 %ri9ate in t6e 3omestic %olity= eEamining these arti6icial boun9ar) 9istinctions in the 9omestic /olit) coul9 she9 ne0 light on international boun9ariesD such as those bet0een anarch) an9 or9erD 0hich are so 6un9amental to the conce/tual 6rame0or' o6 realist 9iscourse. 0ost contem%orary -eminist %ers%ecti9es take t6e /en3er ineIualities t6at I 6a9e 3escri8e3 a8o9e as a 8asic assum%tion. Feminists in 9arious 3isci%lines claim t6at -eminist t6eoriesC 8y re9ealin/ an3 c6allen/in/ t6ese /en3er 6ierarc6iesC ha>e the /otential to trans6orm 9isci/linar) /ara9igms. A) intro9ucing gen9er into t6e 3isci%line o- international relationsC I ho/e to challenge the 0a) in &6ic6 the 6iel9 6as tra9itionall) 8een constructe9 an9 to eEamine the eEtent to &6ic6 t6e /ractices o6 international /olitics are relate9 to these gen9er ineHualities. :he construction o6 hierarchical binar) o//ositions has been central to t6eoriBin/ a8out international relations. 29 Distinctions bet0een 3omestic an3 -orei/nC insi3e an3 outsi3eC or9er an9 anarch)D an3 center an3 %eri%6ery ha>e ser>e9 as im/ortant assum/tions in theor) construction an9 as organizing /rinci/les 6or the 0a) 0e >ie0 the 0orl9 . Aust as realists center t6eir eD%lanations on t6e 6ierarc6ical relations 8et&een states an3 0arDists on uneIual class relationsC 6eminists can bring to light gen9er hierarchies embe99e9 in the theories an9 /ractices o6 0orl9 /olitics an9 allo0 us to see the eEtent to 0hich all these s)stems o6 9omination are interrelate9. 7s Sara6 >ro&n ar/uesC a -eminist t6eory o- international relations is an act o- %olitical commitment to un3erstan3in/ t6e &orl3 -rom t6e %ers%ecti9e o- t6e socially su8:u/ate3. K46ere is t6e nee3 to i3enti-y t6e as yet uns%eci-ie3 relation 8et&een t6e construction o- %o&er an3 t6e construction o- /en3er in international relations.K 30 7ckno&le3/in/C as most -eminist t6eories 3oC t6at t6ese 6ierarc6ies are socially constructe3C also allo&s us to en9isa/e con3itions necessary -or t6eir transcen3ence.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


21 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lt Sol>enc) ( uclear Discourse/ uclear Securit)


:he 9iscourse o6 nuclearism is inherentl) masculine an9 morall) re/rehensible ( in9i>i9ual re?ection is critical Ai90ai an9 Uanai' 2' (,ra-ulC ;ello& at Institute -or ,olicy Stu3ies an3 7c6inC ;ello& o- t6e 4ransnational
Institute o- 7mster3amC Ne& Nukes= In3iaC ,akistanC an3 2lo8al 1isarmament) ,A 46is raises a central %oint a8out t6e nature o- t6e 3iscourse o- e9il. ,rimo Le9iC one o- t6e &isest &itnesses to t6e .olocaustC 6imsel- a sur9i9or o- .itler#s concentration cam%sC eD%laine3 t6e &ay or3inary 2ermansC at least in t6eir o9er&6elmin/ num8erC kno&in/ t6e 6orri-ic manner in &6ic6 Ae&s &ere 8ein/ treate3C nonet6eless 3i3 not allo& t6is to a--ect t6em seriously. Le9i talke3 o- t6e E8anality o- e9il.F *- 6o& the sheer 6reHuenc)D regularit) an9 rece/tion o6 e>il >iolenceD as 0ell as the %ersistent an3 routine rationalization an3 :usti-ication o- its sourcesC mechanisms an9 e66ects in GnormalF /olitical an9 intellectual 9iscourse t6at is to sayC t6e %rocess 8y &6ic6 suc6 9iolence is ma3e 8anal ser>es to utterl) 9iluteD an9 e>en 9isguiseD the e>il in Huestion. &anguageC t6e me3ium o- so muc6 6uman t6ou/6tC is itselmani/ulate9 to 6ul6ill this 6unction. It is use9 to ma'e the human seem inhuman an9 to humanize the inhuman. In 0artimeD the Genem)F is calle9 9ehumanizing names E2ooksF an3 EC6arliesF in Lietnam to 6el% ma'e their elimination more morall) /al/able. :he same /henomenon eEists in the e>er)9a) language o6 racism an9 seEism. :he language an9 9iscourse o6 nuclearism is not onl) inesca/abl) masculinistD aggressi>eD an9 morall) callous. It is also eu%6emisticC 9ece/ti>eC an3 mislea3in/. 46e nuclearist 3iscourse s6o&s 8ot6 t6ese 3e6umaniBin/ an3 -alsely 6umaniBin/ 3imensions. 7ence all the tal' o6 Gcollateral 9amageDF Gacce/table le>els o6 9amageDF Gatomic 9emocrac)DF etc. S scientists calle3 t6e -irst eD%losi9e 3e9ice (Auly 19!') t6e E2a3/etF an3 t6e -irst 8om8s 3ro%%e3 in Aa%an &ere name3 ELittle >oyF an3 ;at 0an.F 46e So9iets calle3 t6eir -irst 8om8 E46e 7rticle.F >ritain calle3 its -irst nuclear eD%losion E.urricaneJF ;ranceC t6e E>lue 0ouseJF an3 C6inaC its -irst &ea%on E1e9ice '9(.F In3ia co3e5 name3 t6e success-ul con3uct o- t6e 19)! eD%losion E46e Smilin/ >u336a.F 46e 199+ tests &ere calle3 sim%ly ES6aktiCF or %o&er. :he /eneral 9iscourse o6 nuclearism 3oes more t6an make t6e morally unt6inka8le t6inka8le. It hel/s routinize an9 ma'e banal the e>il nature o6 nuclear 0ea/ons an9 nuclear 9eterrence. ,hen 0e su//ort or o//ose the /ossession or use or threat or ca/abilit) o6 ha>ing nuclear 0ea/ons (:ust as &6en &e su%%ort or o%%ose sla9ery an3 its :usti-ications)C 0e areC eac6 one o- usC ma'ing a moral statement that hel/s sha/e our o0n /ersonalities an9 li>es. :his a66ects in ho0soe>er small a 0a) other li>es an9 structures aroun9 us. >ut o%%osin/ nuclear &ea%ons is not merely a %ersonal matter. Certain uni9ersal e9ils must 8e reco/niBe3 as suc6. 46ey 3e8ase all o- 6umanity t6ose t6at seeks to 8ene-it -rom t6em as &ell as t6ose &6o are its %ur%orte3 or actual 9ictims. Suc6 is t6e case &it6 e9ils like a%art6ei3C colonialismC an3 nuclearismC all o- &6ic6 insensate 9iolence. :he) are o6ten ?usti6ie9 in the name o6 Gnational securit)DF Gthe national interestDF Gnational greatnessDF etc. ,e cannot create a /ermanent nuclear;6ree 0orl9 unless 0e >alue our common humanit) an9 sustain a share9 9anger 6or such uni>ersal e>ils as nuclearism. *nly on t6e 8asis o- t6is s6are3 8ut controlle3 an/er an3 %assionC &6ose &ells%rin/s are our in3i9i3ual moral ca%acitiesC can &e 6o%e to 8uil3 a &i3er consciousness across national 8oun3aries. 46at alone can 6el% 8rin/ a8out t6e /oal o- com%lete nuclear 3isarmament. 4o -or/et t6e 6orror an3 s6ame o- &6at 6a%%ene3 at .iros6ima an3 Na/asakiC an3 to -ail to 3ra& moral as &ell as %olitical lessons -rom it is to 3e8ase an3 3e/ra3e our common an3 uni9ersal 6umanity.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


22 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

./istemolog) First
Uie0 their claims as sus/ect ( realist 'no0le9ge has been sha/e9 b) masculine e/istemolog). :ic'ner $2 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gender in International (elations
)eminist Perspectives on c!ieving Global *ecurit+C %.1351!) SinceC as I 6a9e su//este3C t6e &orl3 o- international /olitics is a masculine 9omainC 6o& coul3 -eminist %ers%ecti9es contri8ute anyt6in/ ne& to its aca3emic 3iscoursesV 0any male sc6olars 6a9e alrea3y note3 t6atC gi>en our current technologies o6 9estruction an9 the high 9egree o6 economic ineHualit) an9 en>ironmental 9egra9ation t6at no& eDistsC 0e are 3es%erately in nee9 o- changes in the 0a) 0orl9 /olitics is con9ucte9J many o- t6em are attem%tin/ to %rescri8e suc6 c6an/es. ;or t6e most %artC 6o&e9erC t6ese critics 6a9e ignore9 the eEtent to 0hich the 9alues an3 assum/tions that 9ri>e our contem%orary international s)stem are intrinsicall) relate9 to conce/ts o6 masculinit)J %ri9ile/in/ t6ese 9alues constrains t6e o%tions a9aila8le to states an3 t6eir %olicymakers. 7ll 'no0le9ge is /artial an9 is a 6unction o6 the 'no0erSs li>e9 eE/erience in the 0orl9. Since 'no0le9ge about the beha>ior o6 states in t6e international system 9e/en9s on assum/tions that come out o6 menSs eE/eriencesD it ignores a large bo9) o6 human eE/erience that has the /otential 6or increasing the range o6 o/tions an9 o/ening u/ ne0 0a)s o6 thin'ing about interstate /ractices. 46eoretical %ers%ecti9es t6at 3e%en3 on a 8roa3er ran/e o6uman eD%erience are im%ortant -or &omen an3 men alikeC as &e seek ne& &ays o- t6inkin/ a8out our contem%orary 3ilemmas.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

In9i>i9ual <ction Ke)


SeEism is embe99e9 in our societ) ( 0e nee9 to integrate gen9er into our struggles an9 9iscussions !he0 3 (.ui8inC Aune 1( 200)C Le-t 4urn= Notes -rom t6e 2lo8al Inti-a3aC 6tt%=//&&&.le-tturn.or//V
I?no3e/(99)I0
46is s6allo& 9ision o- /en3er :ustice 6as so %ermeate3 e9en %ro/ressi9e circlesC t6at our 9ery 3e-inition o- seDism is circumscri8e3. 4oo o-tenC seEism is merel) seen as a set o6 cultural beha>iors or /ersonal biases J c6allen/in/ seDism is sim%ly seen as 8reakin/ t6ese /en3er eD%ectations. >ut seEism is an institutionalize9 s)stemD 0ith historicalD /oliticalD an9 economic 9imensions. Aust as it &as 8uilt on &6ite su%remacy an3 ca%italismC this countr) 0as built on /atriarch)K on the seEual sub?ugation o6 0omen &6et6er in &ar or E%eaceFC sla9ery or conIuestJ on the abuse o6 our re/ro9ucti>e ca/acit)I t6e eD%loitation o- 8ot6 our %ai3 an3 un%ai3 la8or. :rul) ta'ing on an anti;seEist agen9a means u/rooting institutional /atriarch). :o 9o so 0e must 6irstD as a societ)D o>ercome our 6ears o6 a99ressing 6eminist issues an9 >ie0s. 7 3ee% analysis o- 6o& %atriarc6y o%erates is ty%ically a8sent across %ro/ressi9e or/aniBin/ in t6e SM&6et6er -or a--or3a8le 6ousin/C 3emilitariBationC immi/rant ri/6tsC or &orker ri/6ts. In all o- t6ese stru//lesC &omen are 6ea9ily a--ecte3C an3 moreo9erC a--ecte3 3is%ro%ortionately in /en3ere3 &aysC as &omen. Oet too o-tenC organizers &orkin/ on t6ese issues 3o not reco/niBe 6o& t6ey are /en3ere3. In t6e %rocessC t6ey /rioritize men-s eE/eriencesD an9 /er/etuate seEism. Gen9er is ghettoize9D rather than 6ull) integrate9 into ra9ical struggles . 7%%en3e3 to t6e main concerns o- ot6er mo9ementsC it is at 8est en/a/e3 on a sin/le5issueC not systemic 8asis.

:o ma'e /rogress in human rights la0 the /ers/ecti>e o6 the sociall) sub?ugate9 must be ac'no0le9ge9 in /ublic 6orumsD such as 9ebate !harles0orth $+ (.illaryC La& S 7N C .uman Ri/6ts o- "omen National an3 International ,ers%ecti9esC %.
)(C &&&.ne&sc6ool.e3u/.../C6arles&ort6Q"6atP20areP20"omensP20InternationalP20 .uman P20Ri/6ts.%3-)I0 .o& can international 6uman ri/6ts la& tackle t6e o%%resse3 %osition o- &omen &orl3&i3eV ,omen-s international human rights must be 9e>elo/e9 on a number o6 6ronts. Certainly t6e rele9ance o- t6e tra3itional canon o- 6uman ri/6ts to
&omen is im%ortant to 3ocument. 46e instruments an3 institutions o- t6e E-irst &a9eF o- international la& &it6 res%ect to &omen must also 8e su%%orte3 an3 stren/t6ene3. 46e %otential o- an in3i9i3ual com%laints %roce3ure un3er t6e "omen#s Con9entionC -or eDam%leC s6oul3 8e seriously eD%lore3. 7t t6e same timeC rights that 6ocus on harms sustaine9 b) 0omen in /articular nee9

to be i9enti6ie9 an9 9e>elo/e9D challenging the /ublic//ri>ate 9istinction b) bringing rights 9iscourse into the /ri>ate s/here. >utC most 6un9amental an9 im/ortantD 0e must 0or' to ensure that 0omen-s >oices 6in9 a /ublic au9ienceD /erha/s in the conteEt o6 9ebates an9 9iscussions o>er international relationsD to reorient the boun9aries o6 mainstream human rights la0 so t6at it incor%orates an un3erstan3in/ ot6e &orl3 6rom the /ers/ecti>e o6 the sociall) sub?ugate9. *ne &ay -or&ar3 in international 6uman ri/6ts la& is to challenge the gen9ere9 9ichotom) o6 /ublic an9 /ri>ate 0orl9s.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

===<:-s===

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


21 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Perm
Perm 6ails ( /lan-s metho9ological an9 e/istemological a//roach to international relations is antithetical to that o6 6eminist IR theor). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 35') A0 It is t6is lack o- connection t6at moti9ates many o- t6e issues raise3 in t6is 8ook. "6ile I 6a9e attem%te3 to site -eminist %ers%ecti9es &it6in t6e 3isci%lineC it &ill 8ecome clear -rom t6e to%ics a33resse3 t6at IR 6eminists -reIuently ma'e 9i66erent assum/tions about the 0orl9D ask 3i--erent IuestionsC an9 use 9i66erent metho9ologies to ans&er t6em. .a9in/ re-lecte3 on reasons -or t6ese 3isconnectionsC as &ell as t6e misun3erstan3in/s o9er t6e %otential use-ulness o- -eminist a%%roac6es raise3 8y some o- t6e Iuestions a8o9eC I 8elie9e t6at t6ey lie in t6e -act t6at 6eminist IR scholars see 9i66erent realities an9 9ra0 on 9i66erent e/istemologies 6rom con>entional IR theorists. ;or eDam%leC &6ereas IR has tra3itionally anal)ze9 securit) issues eit6er 6rom a structural /ers/ecti>e or at the le>el o6 the state an9 its 9ecision ma'ersD 6eminists 6ocus on ho0 0orl9 /olitics can contribute to the insecurit) o6 in9i>i9ualsD /articularl) marginalize9 an3 3isem%o&ere3 /o/ulations. :he) eEamine 0hether t6e 9aloriBation oc6aracteristics associate3 ! intro3uction &it6 a 3ominant -orm o- masculinit) in6luences the 6oreign /olicies o6 states. :he) also eEamine 0hether the /ri>ileging o6 t6ese same attributes b) the realist school in IR ma) contribute to the re/ro9uction o6 con6lict;/roneD %o&er5maDimiBin/ beha>iors.11 "6ereas IR theorists 6ocus on the causes an9 termination o6 0arsD 6eminists are as concerne9 0ith 0hat ha//ens 9uring 0ars as 0ell as 0ith their causes an3 en3in/s. Rat6er t6an seein/ military ca%a8ility as an assurance a/ainst outsi3e t6reats to t6e stateC militaries are seen as -reIuently antithetical to in9i>i9ual securit)C /articularl) to t6e security o- 0omen an9 other >ulnerable grou/s. 0oreo9erC 6eminists are concerne9 that continual stress on the nee9 6or 9e6ense hel/s to legitimate a kin3 o- militarize9 social or9er that o>er>alorizes t6e use o- state >iolence -or 3omestic an3 international %ur%oses. !on>entional IP. has ty%ically 6ocuse9 on issues such as the economic beha>ior o6 t6e most %o&er-ul statesD hegemon)D an9 t6e %otential -or buil9ing international institutions in an anarchic s)stem /o/ulate9 b) sel6;intereste9 actorsJ &it6in a s6are3 state5centric -rame&orkC neorealists an3 neoli8erals 3e8ate t6e %ossi8ilities an3 limitations o- coo%eration usin/ t6e notion o- a8solute 9ersus relati9e /ains.12 Feminists more o-ten 6ocus on economic ineHualit)D marginalize9 /o/ulationsD the gro0ing 6eminization o6 /o>ert) an9 economic ?usticeC %articularly in t6e conteDt o- Nort6/Sout6 relations. "6ereas IR 6as /enerally taken a Eto%53o&nF a%%roac6 -ocuse3 on t6e /reat %o&ersC 6eminist IR o6ten begins its anal)sis at the local le>elD 0ith in9i>i9uals embe99e9 in social structures. "6ile IR 6as 8een concerne3 &it6 eD%lainin/ t6e 8e6a9ior an3 interaction o- states an3 markets in an anarc6ic international en9ironmentC 6eminist IRD &it6 its intellectual roots in -eminist t6eory more /enerally D is see'ing to un9erstan9 t6e 9arious 0a)s in 0hich uneIual gen9er structures constrain 0omen-sC as &ell as some men#sC li-e chances an9 to /rescribe 0a)s in &6ic6 these hierarchical social relations might be eliminate9. :hese 9i66erent realities an9 normati>e agen9as lea9 to 9i66erent metho9ological a//roaches . "6ile IR 6as relie9 6ea9ily on rationalistic theories 8ase3 on t6e natural sciences an3 economicsC 6eminist IR is groun9e9 in humanistic accounts o6 social relationsC %articularly /en3er relations. Notin/ t6at muc6 o- our kno&le3/e a8out t6e &orl3 6as 8een 8ase3 on kno&le3/e a8out menC 6eminists ha>e been s'e/tical o6 metho9ologies that claim the neutralit) o6 their 6acts an9 the uni>ersalit) o6 their conclusions. :his s'e/ticism a8out em%iricist met6o3olo/ies eEten9s to t6e %ossi8ility o- 9e>elo/ing causal la0s to eE/lain the beha>ior o6 states. "6ile -eminists 3o see structural re/ularitiesC suc6 as /en3er an3 %atriarc6yC t6ey 3e-ine t6em as socially constructe3 an3 9aria8le across timeC %laceC an3 cultureJ un3erstan3in/ is %re-erre3 o9er eD%lanation.13 :hese 9i66erences o>er e/istemologies ma) &ell be har9er to reconcile t6an t6e 3i--erences in %ercei9e3 realities 3iscusse3 a8o9e.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


22 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Perm
Realism cannot be assimilate9 into 6eminist theor) ( % 0arrants. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 2)52+) A0 In 6er assessment o- t6e %otential -or -in3in/ a s%ace in IR -or -eminist t6eory in t6e realist an3 li8eral a%%roac6es o- t6e inter%ara3i/m 3e8ateC San3ra "6it&ort6 6as su//este3 t6atC to incor/orate gen9erD theories must satis-y t6ree criteria= (1) t6ey must allo0 6or the /ossibilit) o6 tal'ing about the social construction o6 meaningJ (2) t6ey must 9iscuss historical >ariabilit)J an9 (3) t6ey must /ermit theorizing about /o0er in 0a)s that unco>er hi99en /o0er relations. "6it&ort6 claims t6atC in terms o6 these t6ree criteriaC there is little in realism that seems con9uci>e to theorizing about gen9er.)( 46e li8eral %ara3i/m t6at 6as sou/6t to enlar/e concerns 8eyon3 t6e state5centricC national5security -ocus o- realism mi/6t seem more %romisin/J 6o&e9erC accor3in/ to "6it&ort6C it is a6istorical an3 3enies t6e material 8ases o- con-lictC ineIualityC an3 %o&er. Intro3ucin/ &omen an3 /en3er to t6e li8eral %ara3i/m &oul3 also encounter t6e same %ro8lems note3 8y critics o- li8eral -eminism. <ttem/ts to Gbring 0omen into IRF 6ee9 into the mista'en assum/tion that the) are not there in the 6irst /lace. 7s Cynt6ia $nloe tells usC 0omen (as &ell as mar/inaliBe3 %eo%le more /enerally) are highl) in>ol>e9 in 0orl9 /oliticsC but eDistin/ /o0er structuresD institutionalize9 in t6e s%lit 8et&een t6e %u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eres an3 &6at counts as Eim%ortantCF 'ee/ them 6rom being hear9.))

:here-s no net bene6it to assimilating 0omen into /atriarch). Peterson $2 (S%ikeC %ro- o- ,olitical Science at t6e
o- 7riBonaC Gendered *tates: )eminist ,(e-.isions of International (elations %!eor+C %.+)A0 In /eneralC t6e 3econstructi9e %ro:ect 3ocuments t6e eDtent an3 tenacity o- an3rocentric 8ias an3 t6e cultural co3i-ication o- men as Kkno&ers.K It re9eals &omenNs eDclusion -rom or tri9ialiBation &it6in masculinist accounts an3C es%eciallyC &omenNs Ka8senceK t6ere as a/ents o- social c6an/e. >ut e9en more si/ni-icantC Ka99ing 0omenJ to eEisting 6rame0or's eE/oses ta'en;6or;grante9 assum/tions embe99e9 in those 6rame0or's. 7cross 3isci%linesC 6eminists 9is;co>er the contra9ictions o6 Ja99ing 0omanJ to constructions that are literall) 9e6ine9 b) their Jman;nessJ@ the /ublic s/hereD rationalit)D economic /o0erD autonom)D /olitical i9entit)D ob?ecti>it) . 46e systematic inclusion o6 0omenKour bo9iesD acti>itiesD 'no0le9geK challenges categorical gi>ensD 9isci/linar) 9i>isionsD an9 theoretical 6rame0or's. It 8ecame increasin/ly clear t6at it 0as not /ossible sim/l) to inclu9e 0omen in those theories 0here the) ha9 /re>iousl) been eEclu9e9D 6or this eEclusion 6orms a 6un9amental structuring /rinci/le an9 'e) /resum/tion o6 /atriarchal 9iscourse. It &as not sim%ly t6e ran/e an3 sco%e o- o8:ects t6at reIuire3 trans-ormation= more %ro-oun3lyC an3 t6reatenin/lyC t6e 9ery Iuestions %ose3 an3 t6e met6o3s use3 to ans&er t6em . . . nee3e3 to 8e seriously Iuestione3. 46e %oliticalC ontolo/ical an3 e%istemolo/ical commitments un3erlyin/ %atriarc6al 3iscoursesC as &ell as t6eir t6eoretical contents reIuire3 re5e9aluation. !( 46e reconstructi9e %ro:ect marks t6e s6i-t K-rom reco9erin/ oursel9es to critically eDaminin/ t6e &orl3 -rom t6e %ers%ecti9e o- t6is reco9ery ... a mo9e -rom mar/in to center.K !) Not sim%ly seekin/ access to an3 %artici%atin/ &it6in (8ut -rom t6e mar/ins o-) an3rocentric %ara3i/msC -eminist reconstruction eD%lores t6e t6eoretical im%lications o- re9ealin/ systemic masculinist 8ias an3 systematically a33in/ &omen. Not sur%risin/lyC the shi6t 6rom J0omen as 'no0ableJ to J0omen as 'no0ersJ locates 6eminism at the heart o6 contem/orar) 9ebates o>er 0hat constitutes science an9 the /o0er o6 Jclaims to 'no0 .K 46is is 3i--icult terrain to ma%C so I start -rom a 9anta/e %oint t6at I 6o%e is reasona8ly -amiliar.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


23 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Perm/&in' ( Aenign &ogic/Reason


:he /olitical s/here uses a benign logic to a//ease 6eminist theor) but 9iscre9its it in the /rocessD es/eciall) in terms o6 militarism. !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A In 9iscussion o6 8iolo/ical 0ea/onsC as in issues o- %roli-erationC the 9ichotomous 9i>ision bet0een reason an9 emotion is ent0ine9 0ith a similar 9i>ision bet0een N,esternO Sel6 an9 Nunrul)O 4therD a %articular instance o- sel- an3 ot6erC *s an9 .nem) t)/ical o6 /eace an9 arms negotiation. E*ne test o8elon/in/ an3 8ein/ 6ear3 in t6is /rou% &as &6et6er one acce%te3 t6e nature o- t6e source o- t6e >" %ro8lem. 1i3 one acce%t t6e i3entity o- t6e a39ersaryVF 46at i3entity &as o-ten 3escri8e3 in racist terms e./.C EGt6eyH 3on#t 9alue 6uman li-e t6e &ay &e 3oF an3 t6ese remarks elicite3 no comment.!+ R:o belong an9 s/ea' an9 be hear9- 0oul9 mean ignoring the rules an9 interru/ting the cool 9etache9 >oice o6 reason. 7/ain t6e /en3er 3iscourse system is at &orkC -rustratin/ t6ese e--orts. <n ob?ection 0hich ac'no0le9ges emotionD 0hich tal's about the 6ate o6 bo9ies or li>esD becomes an Goutburst.F Reason ignores them in or9er to continue the 9iscussion o6 0ea/ons an9 their e66ects. 4utbursts are G6eminineFI in the silence that 6ollo0s an outburst an)oneD male or 6emaleD can G6eel li'e a 0oman.F :he e66ect o6 gen9er 9iscourse 9e/en9s u/on a /erson-s com/leE /ersonal an9 social i9entities. >ut -or a -eministC &6o aims to s%eak as 6ersel-5&6o5 isa5 &omanC t6e accusation o- E8ein/ a &omanF or a &im% 6as to 8e %oi/nantly in6i8itin/. For 6eminists struggling to /artici/ate e66ecti>el)D the 6inal insult ma) be the realization that the negotiationsD es/eciall) i6 the) are /resente9 as inclusi>e an9 9emocraticD are more ritualistic 9is/la)s than /olitical action. EIn realit)D ma?or 9ecisions are ma9e in secret in the ca/italsD base9 on calculations that see' militar) (an3 increasin/ly commercial) a9>antages.F!9 In t6e &or3s o- a male %olitical scientist= Earms control is &ar 8y ot6er means.F Real %o&er is al&ays alrea3y some&6ere else 8y t6e time a &oman takes 6er %lace at t6e ta8le.'0 S6oul3 &omen t6en /i9e u% t6e e--ort to :oin in ne/otiationsV It seems t6at many 3o. G46eyH E/et intimi3ate3C an3 3on#t %ut u% &it6 itC so t6ey ste% asi3e.F '1 >ut ot6er &omen in increasin/ num8ers are resistin/ ri3icule an3 3iscrimination in or3er to make t6eir 9ie&s kno&n. 46ere are many reasonsC %ersonal an3 socialC &6y some &omen %erse9ere &6ere ot6ers 3o not. Cultural attitu3es to&ar3 &omen 9aryJ &omen are more easily 6ear3 &6en many &omen are %resentC es%ecially i- t6ey are linke3 in alliances t6at inclu3e all %arties in con-lict.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


25 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<2@ Realism
Realism is a 6la0e9 mentalit) that legitimizes the >iolence it attem/ts to 9eter. !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A < so5calle3 ErealistF res/onse to this :u3 /ement might 0ell /a) li/;ser>ice to the Gmoral nicetiesF it embo9iesD but then argue that 9eterrence is 0orth those costs. *rC %er6a%s to 8e more accurateD it might argue that the results o6 a nuclear attac' 0oul9 be so catastro/hic that the rest o6 these consi9erations are reall) an irrele>ant 9istractionI 9eterring a ,8D attac' on our homelan9 is the /recon9ition on 0hich /olitical 6ree9om an9 social li6e 9e/en9C an3 so it must 8e t6ou/6t a8out in a class 8y itsel-. "e make t&o re:oin3ers to t6is claim. ;irstC 0e note that in the culture o6 nuclear 9e6ense intellectuals C e9en raisin/ t6e issue o- costs is 9elegitimize9C in lar/e %art t6rou/6 its association &it6 Et6e -eminine.F It is the 'in9 o6 thing that Gh)sterical house0i>esF 9oI something 9one b) /eo/le not tough an9 har9 enough to loo' harsh Grealit)F in the e)eC unsentimentallyJ not stron/ enou/6 to se%arate t6eir -eelin/s -rom t6eoriBin/ mass 3eat6J /eo/le 0ho 9on-t ha>e Gthe stones 6or 0ar.F Feminist anal)sis re?ects the cultural 9i>ision o- meanin/ &6ic6 3e9alues anyt6in/ associate3 &it6 &omen or -emininity. It sees in t6at same cultural 9aluin/ o- t6e so5calle3 EmasculineF o9er t6e so5calle3 E-eminineF an eD%lanation o- &6y it a%%ears so sel-5e9i3ent to many t6at &6at is calle3 Emilitary necessityF s6oul3 a%%ro%riately 8e %rioritiBe3 o9er all ot6er 6uman necessities. <n9 it Huestions the assum/tions that besto0 the mantle o6 GrealismF on such a constraine9 6ocus on 0ea/ons an9 state /o0er. Rat6er t6an sim%ly 8ein/ an Eo8:ecti9eF re-lection o%olitical realityC 0e un9erstan9 this thought s)stem as 1# a /artial an9 9istorte9 /icture o6 realit)D an9 2# a ma?or contributor to creating the >er) circumstances it /ur/orts to 9escribe an9 /rotect against . Secon3C :ust as -eminists ten3 to 8e ske%tical a8out t6e e--icacy o- 9iolenceC t6ey mi/6t 8e eIually ske%tical a8out t6e e--icacy o- 3eterrence. *rC to %ut it anot6er &ayC i6 0ar is a GlieDF so is 9eterrence. :his is notC ocourseC to sa) that 9eterrence as a /henomena ne>er occursI no 9oubt one o//onent is sometimes 9eterre9 6rom attac'ing another b) the 6ear o6 retaliation. Aut rather 9eterrence as a theor) C a 3iscourse an3 set o- %ractices un3er&ritten 8y t6at 3iscourseC is a 6iction.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


2$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<2@ Realism
Realism is inherentl) masculine an9 ma'es >iolence ine>itable ( the Kriti' is the onl) 0a) to sol>e these 6orms o6 >iolence. :ic'ner $2 (A. 7nnC ,ro-essor o- International Relations an3 1irector o- t6e Center -or International Stu3ies at t6e
ni9ersity o- Sout6ern Cali-orniaC 1992. 2en3er in International RelationsC %. !15!!) Aehin9 this rei6ication o6 state /ractices hi9e social institutions that are ma9e an9 rema9e b) in9i>i9ual actions. In realityC t6e neorealist 9e/iction o6 the state as a unitar) actor is groun9e9 in the historical /ractices o6 the ,estern state s)stem= neorealist c6aracteriBations o- state 8e6a9iorC in terms osel-56el%C autonomyC an3 %o&er seekin/C %ri9ile/e c6aracteristics associate3 &it6 t6e "estern construction omasculinity. Since t6e 8e/innin/ o- t6e state systemC the national securit) 6unctions o6 states ha>e been 9ee9e9 to us through gen9ere9 images that /ri>ilege masculinit). 46e "estern state system 8e/an in se9enteent65century $uro%e. 7s 3escri8e3 8y C6arles 4illyC t6e mo3ern state &as 8orn t6rou/6 &arJ lea3ers o- nascent states consoli3ate3 t6eir %o&er t6rou/6 t6e coerci9e eDtraction o- resources an3 t6e conIuest oe9er5lar/er territories. Success in 0ar continue9 to be im/erati>e 6or state sur>i>al an9 the buil9ing o6 state a//aratus.3+ 46rou/6out t6e %erio3 o- state 8uil3in/ in t6e "estC nationalist mo9ements 6a9e use3 /en3ere3 ima/ery t6at eD6orts masculine 6eroes to -i/6t -or t6e esta8lis6ment an3 3e-ense o- t6e mot6er country. 46e collecti9e i3entity o- citiBens in most states 3e%en3s 6ea9ily on tellin/ stories a8outC an3 cele8ration o-C &ars o- in3e%en3ence or national li8eration an3 ot6er /reat 9ictories in 8attle. National ant6ems are -reIuently &ar son/sC :ust as 6oli3ays are cele8rate3 &it6 military %ara3es an3 uni-orms t6at recall /reat -eats in %ast con-licts. 46ese collecti9e 6istorical memories are 9ery im%ortant -or t6e &ay in &6ic6 in3i9i3uals 3e-ine t6emsel9es as citiBens as &ell as -or t6e &ay in &6ic6 states comman3 su%%ort -or t6eir %oliciesC %articularly -orei/n %olicy. RarelyC 6o&e9erC 3o t6ey inclu3e eD%eriences o- &omen or -emale 6eroes. "6ile t6e -unctions o- t&entiet65century states eDten3 &ell 8eyon3 t6e %ro9ision o- national securityC national security issuesC %articularly in time o- &arC o--er a sense o- s6are3 %olitical %ur%ose lackin/ in most ot6er areas o- %u8lic %olicy.39 :he state continues to 9eri>e muc6 o- its legitimac) 6rom its securit) 6unctionI it is 6or national securit) that citizens are 0illing to ma'e sacri6ices C o-ten unIuestionin/ly.!0 0ilitary 8u3/ets are t6e least likely area o- %u8lic s%en3in/ to 8e conteste3 8y %oliticians an3 t6e %u8licC &6o are o-ten mani%ulate3 into su%%ortin/ military s%en3in/ 8y linkin/ it &it6 %atriotism. ,hen 0e thin' about the state acting in matters o6 national securit)D 0e are entering a /olic) 0orl9 almost eEclusi>el) inhabite9 b) men. 8en ma'e national securit) /olic) both insi9e an9 outsi9e the militar) establishment. Carol Co6n ar/ues t6at strategic 9iscourseD 0ith its em/hasis on strengthD stabilit)D an9 rationalit)D bears an uncann) resemblance to the i9eal image o6 masculinit) . Critics o- .S. nuclear strate/y are 8ran3e3 as irrational an3 emotional. In t6e nite3 StatesC t6ese E3e-ense intellectualsF are almost all &6ite menJ Co6n tells us t6at &6ile t6eir lan/ua/e is one o- a8stractionC it is loa3e3 &it6 seDual ima/ery.!' S6e claims t6at the 9iscourse em/lo)e9 in %ro-essional an3 %olitical 3e8ates about *.S. securit) /olic) G0oul9 a//ear to ha>e colonize9 our min9s an9 to ha>e sub?ugate9 other 0a)s o6 un9erstan9ing relations among states.F Co6n su//ests t6at t6is 3iscourse 6as 8ecome t6e only le/itimate res%onse to Iuestions o- 6o& 8est to ac6ie9e national securityJ it is a 3iscourse -ar remo9e3 -rom %olitics an3 %eo%leC an3 its 3eli8erations /o on 3isconnecte3 -rom t6e -unctions t6ey are su%%ose3 to ser9e. Its %o&er-ul claim to le/itimacy restsC in %artC on t6e &ay national security s%ecialists 9ie& t6e international system.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


30 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<2@ Realism/Deterrence
Realism an9 9eterrence are inherentl) masculine an9 re;/er/etuate the >iolence the) attem/t to alle>iate. !ohn an9 Ru99ic' % (CarolC Researc6er an3 4eac6er at .ar9ar3 0e3ical Si/nsC an3 SaraC aut6orC 7 ;eminist
$t6ical ,ers%ecti9e on "ea%ons o- 0ass 1estructionC 6tt%=//&&&./en3eran3security.um8.e3u/co6nru33ick.%3-) ,A 1eterrence t6eory is an ela8orateC a8stract conce%tual e3i-iceC &6ic6 %osits a 6y%ot6etical relation 8et&een t&o 3i--erent sets o- &ea%ons systems or rat6erC 8et&een a8stractions o- t&o 3i--erent sets o- &ea%ons systemsC -or in -actC as 8ot6 common sense an3 military eD%ertise tells usC 6uman error an3 tec6nolo/ical im%er-ection mean t6at one coul3 not actually eD%ect real &ea%ons to -unction in t6e &ays sim%ly assume3 in 3eterrence t6eory. Aecause 9eterrence theor) sets in /la) the h)/othetical re/resentations o6 >arious 0ea/ons s)stemsD rather than assessments o6 ho0 the) 0oul9 actuall) /er6orm or 6ail to /er6orm in 0ar6areD it can be nearl) in6initel) elaborate9D in a ne>er en9ing regression o6 intercontinental ballistic missile ga/s an9 theater 0ar6are ga/s an9 tactical Gmini; nu'eF ga/sC a3 in-initumC thus legitimating both massi>e >ertical /roli6eration an9 arms racing. Deterrence theor) is also a 6iction in that it 9e/en9s u/on Grational actorsDF -or &6om &6at counts as ErationalF is t6e sameC in9e/en9ent o6 cultureD histor)D or in9i>i9ual 9i66erence. It 9e/en9s on those Grational actorsF /er6ectl) un9erstan9ing the meaning o6 GsignalsF communicate9 b) militar) actionsD 9es/ite 9e/en9ence on technologies that sometimes mal6unctionI 9es/ite cultural 9i66erence an9 the lac' o6 communication that is /art o6 being /olitical enemiesI 9es/ite the 9i66iculties o6 ensuring mutual un9erstan9ing e>en 0hen best 6rien9s ma'e 9irect 6ace;to; 6ace statements to each other. It 9e/en9s on those same Grational actorsF engaging in a >er) s/eci6ic 'in9 o6 calculus that inclu9es one set o6 >ariables (e./.C &ea%ons siBeC 3eli9era8ilityC sur9i9a8ilityC as &ell as t6e Ecre3i8ilityF o- t6eir an3 t6eir o%%onent#s t6reats)C an9 eEclu9es other >ariables (suc6 as 3omestic %olitical %ressuresC economicsC or in3i9i3ual su8:ecti9ity). "6at is strikin/ -rom a 6eminist /ers/ecti>e is that e>en 0hile GrealistsF ma) 0orr) that some o//onents are so Ginsu66icientl) rationalF as to be un9eterrableD this 9oes not lea9 them to search 6or a more reliable 6orm o6 ensuring securit)C or an a%%roac6 t6at is not so &ea%ons53e%en3ent. Cynt6ia Cock8urnC in 6er stu3y o- &omen#s %eace %ro:ects in con-lict BonesC 3escri8es one o- t6e &omen#s acti9ities as 6el%in/ eac6 ot6er /i9e u% E3an/erous 3ay 3reams.F3' ;rom a -eminist anti5&ar %ers%ecti9eC 6a9in/ "01 as 3eterrents is a 3an/erous 3ream. 46e 3ream o- %er-ect rationality an3 control &6ic6 un3er&rites 3eterrence t6eory is a 3an/erous 3reamC since it le/itimates constructin/ a system t6at only coul3 8e (relati9ely) sa-e i- t6at %er-ect rationa lity an3 control &ere actually %ossi8le. Deterrence theor) itsel6 is a 9angerous 9ream because it ?usti6ies /ro9ucing an9 9e/lo)ing ,8DD thereb) ma'ing their acci9ental or /ur/osi>e use /ossible (an3 -ar more likely) t6an i- t6ey &ere not %ro3uce3 at allC nor 3e%loye3 in suc6 num8ers. ERealistsF are Iuick to %oint out t6e 3an/ers o- not 6a9in/ "01 -or 3eterrence &6en ot6er states 6a9e t6em. ;eminist %ers%ecti9es su//est t6at t6at 3an/er only a%%ears so sel-5e9i3ently /reater t6an t6e 3an/er o- 6a9in/ "01 i- you 3iscount as Eso-tF serious attention to t6e costs o- 3e9elo%ment an3 3e%loyment.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


31 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Realism
Realism 6ails ( it can-t e>en eE/lain some o6 the most im/ortant e>ents o6 the /ast 200 )ears. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 35') A0 Since its ince%tionC at t6e 8e/innin/ o- t6e centuryC t6e 3isci%line o- international relations 6as /one t6rou/6 a series o- 3e8ates o9er 8ot6 its su8:ect matter an3 t6e met6o3olo/ies a%%ro%riate -or its in9esti/ations. 1 None o- t6ese 3e8ates 6a9e 8een as -un3amental as t6ose o- t6e last t&o 3eca3es. :he en9 o6 the !ol9 ,ar an9 t6e %lurality o- ne0 issues on the global agen9aC to &6ic6 I re-erre3 in my intro3uctory c6a%terC ha>e been accom/anie9 b) increasin/ calls 6or rethin'ing t6e -oun3ations o- a 3isci%line t6at a%%ears to some to 8e out o- touc6 &it6 t6e re9olutionary c6an/es in &orl3 %oliticsC as &ell as 3e-icient in 6o& to eD%lain t6em. Austin Rosen8er/ 6as su//este3 t6at it is stran/e t6at momentous e>entsD such as the colla/se o6 So>iet !ommunismC t6e strains o- .uro/ean integrationC an9 t6e economic gro0th o6 !hina (&6ic6 %resently contains one5-i-t6 o- t6e &orl3#s %o%ulation)C e>ents that are /art o6 a gigantic 0orl9 re>olution o6 mo9ernizationD in9ustrializationD nationalismD an9 globalization in 0hich the ,est has been caught u/ -or t6e last t&o 6un3re3 yearsC ten9 to be eEclu9e9 6rom most IR theor).2 Instea9 o6 &6at 6e claims are ari9 9ebates about hegemonic stabilit) or or3er 9ersus :usticeC 0hich abstract 6rom real;0orl9 issuesC Rosen8er/ calls -or t6eory /roun3e3 in 6istorical an3 social analyses. 7e suggests that global issues can be better eE/laine9 through narrati>e 6orms o6 eE/lanation rather than social;scienti6ic metho9ologies o6 con>entional IR.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


32 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Realism
:he realism inherent in IR eEclu9es 0omen-s >oices an9 6emininit) ( this /re>ents 0omen 6rom gaining in6luence in securit) /olicies Alanchar9 % ($ricC Si/ns 2+(!)C Summer 2003C %.1292)
;eminist incursions into t6e -iel3 o- IR security can 8e use-ully situate3 on t6e &i3enin/ si3e o- t6e K&i35 enin/K 9ersus Knarro&in/K 3e8ate= t6e -ormer ar/ues t6at t6e sco%e o- t6e neorealist conce%t o- security nee3s to 8e eD%an3e3 to a33ress a ran/e o- t6reatsC utiliBe a 8roa3er s%ectrum o- met6o3olo/iesC an3 a33ress mountin/ et6ical concerns (<olo3Bie: 1992)J t6e latter ar/ues t6at a mo>e

be)on9 the stu9) o6 militar) 6orce 0oul9 9eal a serious blo0 to the 6iel9Ss intellectual coherence 0hile 9istracting 6rom serious threats ("alt 1991). Critical se5 curity 3iscourse 6as /enerally in9oke3C 8ut not en/a/e3C -eminist
sc6olar5 s6i%C an3 e9en a%%roac6es t6at ima/ine3 societal sectors o- security (>uBanC "a9erC an3 3e "il3e 199+) 6a9e yet to take /en3er seriously (.ansen 2000).3 ;eminists in IR ar/ue t6at realismD 9ominate9 b) eliteD 0hiteD male /ractitionersD is a /atriarchal 9iscourse t6at ren9ers 0omen in>isible 6rom the high /olitics o6 IR e>en as it 9e/en9s on 0omenSs sub?ugation as a JS9omesticate9S 6igure 0hose S6eminineS sensibilities are 8ot6 at o33s &it6 an3 inconseHuential to the harsh SrealitiesS o6 the /ublic 0orl9 o6 men an9 states K (Runyan an3 ,eterson 1991C (+5 (9). ;eminists in IR eD%lain t6e eDclusion o- &omen -rom -orei/n %olicy 3ecision makin/ 8y %ointin/ to t6e KeDtent to &6ic6

international /olitics is such a thoroughl) mas; culinize9 s/here o6 acti>it) that 0omenSs >oices are consi9ere9 inauth; enticK (4ickner 1992C !). "omenNs tra3itional eDclusion -rom t6e military an3 continuin/ lack o- access to %olitical %o&er at times %resents &omen &it6 a Kcatc6522K situation. ;or eDam%le D the im/ortance o6 a can9i9ateSs militar) ser>ice as a Huali6ication 6or go>ernment o66ice in *.S. /olitical cam/aigns /uts 0omen C &6o cannot a%%eal to t6is eD%erienceC at a 9is; a9>antage in obtaining the elite status o6 national o66ice an9 thus the abilit) to a66ect 9e6ense an9 securit) /olicies (4o8ias 1990J c-. $ls6tain 2000C !!').

Realism ignores human agenc) an9 i9entit) an9 brutall) eEclu9es all that is 6eminine Alanchar9 % ($ricC Si/ns 2+(!)C Summer 2003C %.1312)I0
<n im/ortant com/onent o6 the stu9) o6 IRis a sel6;/ositioning in the tra9ition o6 ,estern /olitical theor);tracing an intellectual lineage to 8achia>elli an3 .o88es5%articularly as it concerns t6e state. ;eminist analysis o- t6is %e35 i/ree s6o&s t6at the 6eminine has long ser>e9 as a s)mbolic threat to mil; itarize9 ,estern conce/tualizations o- %olitical communityC -rom t6e ancient 2reeks to t6e t&entiet6 centuryJ 7esc6ylusNs ;uries an3 0ac6ia9elliNs ;or5 tuna are 8ut t&o eDam%les (.arstock 19+3). Re8ecca 2rant (1991) ar/ues t6at a gen9er bias in IRC transmitte3 un%ro8lematically -rom "estern %o5 litical t6ou/6t to t6e stu3y o- IRC results in the Huestion o6 gen9er being ta'en as irrele>ant. ;or 2rantC IRNs inter%retation o- .o88es allo&s Kno room -or t6e Iuestion o- 6o& /en3er relations a--ect t6e transition out
o- t6e 8rutis6 state o- nature an3 into societyCK &6ile Aean5AacIues RousseauNs -amous sta/ 6untC o-ten in9oke3 as a %ara8le o- t6e %ro8lems o- securityC i/nores t6e -amilial relations t6at control t6e 6unterNs 3e-ection -rom t6e 6untin/ circle (1051'). :a'ing men

as the sole /olitical actors an9 citizensD the /olitical theor) borro0e9 b) IR /ostulates a 9omestic/international 9i>i9e /remise9 on the /ri>ate//ublic 9istinction that relegates 0omen to a s/ace outsi9e /olitics (9). Aean >et6ke $ls6tainNs ric6 8len3 o- %olitical t6eoryC %ersonal narrati9eC an3 6istoryC "omen an3 "ar
(G19+)H 199')C ser9es as a re:oin3er to t6e 3isci%lineNs %6iloso%6ical conceit an3 issues a key c6allen/e to t6e 3o5 mestic/international 3i9i3e t6at 2rant i3enti-ies. In a s&ee%in/ sur9ey o- t6e 3iscourse o- &ar -rom t6e 2reeks on&ar3C $ls6tain 3etails &omenNs com%leD relations6i%s to t6e 8o3y %oliticC an3 t6us to &arC as t6ey emer/e -rom t6e narrati9es (&ar stories) t6at are constituti9e o- &ar. $ls6tain -ocuses on t6e &ays in &6ic6 &arNs K/ro9ucti>e 9estructi>enessJ inscribes an9 reinscribes menSs an9 0omenSs i9entities an9 thus the boun9aries o6 communit)= K"ar creates t6e %eo%le. "ar %ro3uces %o&erC in3i9i3ual an3 collecti9eK (1((5()). Reactin/ to &6at s6e sees as t6e onset o- scientism an3 6y%errationality in aca3emic IRC $ls6tain critiIues t6e retreat into a8straction t6at t6e Iuest -or scienti-ic certainty %ro3uce3 in K%ro-es5 sionaliBe3K &ar 3iscourse an3 attem%ts to re9i9e t6e 8on3 8et&een %olitics an3 morality 8roken 8y 0ac6ia9elli. >y rei-yin/ state 8e6a9iorC $ls6tain ar/uesC the realist narrati>e

ignores human agenc) an9 i9entit)@ J o chil; 9ren are e>er bornD an9 nobo9) e>er 9iesD in this constructe9 0orl9. 46ere are statesC an3 t6ey are &6at isK (91).!

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


3% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Realism
RealismD the basis o6 international relationsD is /ro6oun9l) gen9ere9 an9 eEclu9es the 6eminine Duncanson an9 .schle 5 (Claire an3 Cat6erineC o- $3in8ur/6 an3 o- Strat6cly3eC Ne& ,olitical Science
30(!)C %. ''3)I0
46is is t6e t6ir3 stran3 o- t6e -eminist critiIue o- t6e &ay in &6ic6 states talk a8out nuclear tec6nolo/y. Co6n#s assertion /ains stron/ su%%ort -rom ot6er -eminist &orkC %articularly t6at in t6e 3isci%line o- International Relations (IR)C &6ic6 6as 3e9elo%e3 an eDtensi9e critiIue o- the gen9ere9 un9er/innings o6 9ominant conce/tions o6 both the state an9 securit). Such

0or' 6ocuses its critiHue /articularl) on RealismD a school o6 thought that sees the 0orl9 as an anarchic s)stem o6 sel6;intereste9 states struggling to 9e6en9 themsel>es through militar) /o0er . Since "orl3 "ar 4&oC Realism has been the 9ominant a//roach in IR as &ell as amon/st statesmenC %olicy5makers an3 3e-ence intellectualsC an3 t6e < is no eDce%tion. 7s &e &ill s6o& 8elo&C the Realist 0orl9 >ie0 is a masculinise9 oneD in 0hich Gmanl)F states stri>e 6or sel6;reliance an9 securit) . Feminists in IR %ro8lematiBe t6e Realist a%%roac6 to security on se9eral /roun3s. 0ost o89iouslyC t6ey Huestion 0h) militar) threats -rom ot6er states (orC more recentlyC -rom terrorist /rou%s) are consi9ere9 more im/ortant an3 imme3iate than the threat"s# to 6uman li-e %ose3 8y %o9ertyC .IL/7I1SC en9ironmental 3estruction or 3omestic a8useC all o- 0hich are claime9 to 9is/ro/ortionatel) a66ect 0omen. 7s a corollaryC the) challenge the Realist reliance on 9estructi>e militar) technolog)D insistin/ t6at
&el-are 8u3/ets 3o more to %ro9i3e /enuine security -or &omen t6an increase3 3e-ence s%en3in/.!( ;eminists also seek to un3ermine t6e 9ie& t6at security is somet6in/ &6ic6 can 8e %ossesse3 or /uarantee3 8y t6e state. Instea3C t6ey 6a9e ur/e3 us to un3erstan3 security as a %rocessC immanent in our relations6i%s &it6 ot6ersC an3 al&ays %artialC elusi9eC an3 conteste3. Concei9e3 in t6is &ayC it must in9ol9e su8:ectsMinclu3in/ &omenMin t6e %ro9ision o- t6eir o&n security.!) 4&o /en3ere3 as%ects o- Realist conce%tions osecurity are %articularly im%ortant -or our %ur%oses. ;irstC Realists correlate securit) 0ith in>ulnerabilit)D in>incibilit) an9 im/regnabilit). 7s Susanna6 Ra3st one 6as ar/ue3C 6o&e9erC i n>ul nerabi l i t ) i s an

unachie>able 6antas) 0ith ob>iousl) gen9ere9 connotations. It is the 6emale bo9) that is /enetrate9 an9 im/regnate9 0hile the male bo9) remainsC or ou/6t to remainC intact an3 im/ermeable Secon3C an3 %er6a%s more im%ortantC Realist >ie0s o6 securit) cast the state an9 its militar) 0ing as G/rotectorF an9 ci>ilians 0ithin the state as G/rotecte9DF a 9ichotom) 0hich is /ro6oun9l) gen9ere9 . Au3it6 .icks Stie6mC -or instanceC 6i/6li/6ts t6e 6istorical association o- t6e %rotector role &it6 men an3 t6e %rotecte3 role &it6 &omenJ -urt6erC s6e claims t6at the /rotector role gains meaning an9 status /recisel) through its /ri>ileging o>er those 0ho are 6eminise9 as >ulnerable.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


3+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

74= Realism
Realism 3enies t6e use o- 3i%lomacy in -orei/n %olicy Ruiz 3 (4riciaC La& S "as6C *ct. 1' 200)C 6onors.csustan.e3u/:ournals/Soun3in/s/RuiB.%3-)I0
Realism centers its theoretical structure on ho0 the state see's /o0er an9 9e6en9s its national interests a/ainst ot6er com%etin/ states &it6in a /lo8al anarc6yC or &6ere t6ere is t6e lack o- aut6ority 6i/6er t6an t6e state.
States seek security t6rou/6 a 8alance o- %o&er in t6e international arenaC %rimarily t6rou/6 military meansC an3 resortin/ to &arC inecessary. Realists generall) >ie0 the state as the 'e) actor in international /oliticsD an9 3e5em%6asiBe orC as -eminist t6eory ar/uesC ignore ;; the role o6 the in9i>i9ual. 0uc6 -eminist IR t6eory stems -rom a critiIue orealism"Ps#D &6ose Esociall) constructe9 0orl9>ie0 continues to gui9e much thought about 0orl9 /olitics.F1! ;irstC 6eminists argue that realists o>er>alue the role o6 the state in 9e6ining international relationsD 0ithout Huestioning ho0 the state itsel6 is internall) structure9 C %olitically an3 socially. ;eminist t6eory &oul3 consi9er ho0 the state inclu9esD or eEclu9esD the >ie0s o6 its in9i>i9ual citizens C an3 6o&C in turnC t6e state#s 3omestic 9ie&s translate into -orei/n %olicies. .o& &oul3 t6e 3e-inition o- Rsecurity# c6an/eV "oul3 military an3 3e-ense ca%a8ilities still 8e ato% t6e a/en3aV "oul3 &omen necessarily 8e less militaristic in t6eir a%%roac6 to IR issuesV Gen9er

eHualit) can be lin'e9 to increase9 use o6 9i/lomac) an9 com/romise in their state-s 6oreign /olic).
7not6er -eminist critiIue o- realism concerns 6o& realists 3e-ine an3 em%6asiBe %o&er in IR 3iscussions. ;eminists &oul3 ask= &6o 3e-ines %o&erC &6o 6as itC an3 6o& is it use3V I6 /o0er is 9e6ine9 b) a /atriarchal an9 realist societ)D 0hich see's global balances o6 /o0erD then /o0er is eHuate9 0ith militar) an9 economic strength . >ut 6o& &oul3 t6is c6an/e i- t6e 3iscussion inclu3e3 &omen#s 9ie&%ointsV "oul3 t6e in3icators o- %o&er 8e measure3 3i--erentlyV "oul3 %o&er 8e seen as lea3ers6i% in %eace a/reementsC or mi/6t it 8e measure3 in terms o- t6e a8ility to ac6ie9e transnational coo%erationV

Realism /reclu9es 6eminist 9iscussion ( it eEclu9es in9i>i9ual citizensD 6ails to anal)ze the state an9 9e6ines /o0er as masculine militar) might Ruiz 3 (4riciaC La& S "as6C *ct. 1' 200)C 6onors.csustan.e3u/:ournals/Soun3in/s/RuiB.%3-)I0
Realism centers its theoretical structure on ho0 the state see's /o0er an9 9e6en9s its national interests a/ainst ot6er com%etin/ states &it6in a /lo8al anarc6yC or &6ere t6ere is t6e lack o- aut6ority 6i/6er t6an t6e state.
States seek security t6rou/6 a 8alance o- %o&er in t6e international arenaC %rimarily t6rou/6 military meansC an3 resortin/ to &arC inecessary. Realists generall) >ie0 the state as the 'e) actor in international /oliticsD an9 3e5em%6asiBe orC as -eminist t6eory ar/uesC ignore ;; the role o6 the in9i>i9ual. 0uc6 -eminist IR t6eory stems -rom a critiIue orealism"Ps#D &6ose Esociall) constructe9 0orl9>ie0 continues to gui9e much thought about 0orl9 /olitics.F1! ;irstC 6eminists argue that realists o>er>alue the role o6 the state in 9e6ining international relationsD 0ithout Huestioning ho0 the state itsel6 is internall) structure9 C %olitically an3 socially. ;eminist t6eory &oul3 consi9er ho0 the state inclu9esD or eEclu9esD the >ie0s o6 its in9i>i9ual citizens C an3 6o&C in turnC t6e state#s 3omestic 9ie&s translate into -orei/n %olicies. .o& &oul3 t6e 3e-inition o- Rsecurity# c6an/eV "oul3 military an3 3e-ense ca%a8ilities still 8e ato% t6e a/en3aV "oul3 &omen necessarily 8e less militaristic in t6eir a%%roac6 to IR issuesV Gen9er

eHualit) can be lin'e9 to increase9 use o6 9i/lomac) an9 com/romise in their state-s 6oreign /olic).
7not6er -eminist critiIue o- realism concerns 6o& realists 3e-ine an3 em%6asiBe %o&er in IR 3iscussions. ;eminists &oul3 ask= &6o 3e-ines %o&erC &6o 6as itC an3 6o& is it use3V I6 /o0er is 9e6ine9 b) a /atriarchal an9 realist societ)D 0hich see's global balances o6 /o0erD then /o0er is eHuate9 0ith militar) an9 economic strength . >ut 6o& &oul3 t6is c6an/e i- t6e 3iscussion inclu3e3 &omen#s 9ie&%ointsV "oul3 t6e in3icators o- %o&er 8e measure3 3i--erentlyV "oul3 %o&er 8e seen as lea3ers6i% in %eace a/reementsC or mi/6t it 8e measure3 in terms o- t6e a8ility to ac6ie9e transnational coo%erationV In relation to realismC -eminist t6eory is clear= realism is the antithesis to achie>ing gen9er eHualit)D both in 9iscussion an9 /racticeD an9 e9en in its tools o6 0ar an9 securit)D /atriarch) remains the central theme. States are the actors an9 the in9i>i9ual is o6 little im/ortance. ,hen the in9i>i9ual is 9e;

em/hasize9D there is e>en less ac'no0le9gement o6 a 6emale in9i>i9ualD 0hich e66ecti>el) eEclu9es 6eminist 9iscussion.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


31 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ ot Real ,orl9


Feminist IR is the most connecte9 to e>er)9a) inter/ersonal eE/erience. :ic'ner % (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC %!e &rown 'ournal of World ffairsC 10(2)C
%. '0) A0 7 lot o- t6e em%irical IR 6eminist 0or' t6at#s no& comin/ outC is groun9e9 in the Greal 0orl9.F *r may8e &e s6oul3 talk a8out multi%le Ereal &orl3sF since t6e &orl3s t6at -eminists are &ritin/ a8out 6a9e -reIuently 8een 6i33en -rom t6e a/en3as o- international %olitics. 4ake <at6y 0oon#s 8ook &6ic6 talks a8out militar) /rostitution in KoreaC or $liBa8et6 ,rd/l#s &ork on home;base9 labor. AacIuie 4rue 6as :ust -inis6e3 a 8ook on t6e e66ects on 0omen o6 the /ost;!ommunist transition in the !zech Re/ublic. <n9 all oCynt6ia $nloe#s 0or' is groun9e9 in the Greal 0orl9F although not the same Greal 0orl9FKthe 0orl9 o6 states an9 statesmenKthat IR has stu9ie9. "6ile some -eminist t6eory may 8e esotericC muc6 o- it 6as e9ol9e3 out o- social mo9ements an3 %olitical %ractice. ;reIuentlyC 6eminists em/hasize constructing theor) out o6 /racticeD /articularl) the /ractice o6 e>er)9a) li>es o6 or9inar) /eo/le. I thin' that this is a strength o6 6eminist theor). .o&e9erC many IR t6eorists 3on#t t6ink t6at it#s a le/itimate &ay to 8uil3 kno&le3/e.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


32 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ .ssentialism
K associates 6eminismD not 0omenD 0ith /eace ( the 9istinction is critical to /roblematizing essentialism an9 masculinit). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. (05(1) A0 "6ile t6is essentialiBin/ association o- &omen &it6 %eace is %ro8lematicC it is t6e case t6at 0omen in t6e nite3 States ha>e consistentl) sho0n less su//ort 6or 6orce6ul means o6 /ursuing 6oreign;/olic) /oals than menC an3 t6is /en3er /a% continues to /ro&. It &as &i3est at t6e time o- t6e 2ul- "ar o- 1991M alt6ou/6 it close3 some&6at once t6e -i/6tin/ 6a3 8e/un.+3 It 6as also 8een su//este3 t6at those 0ho o//ose militar) inter>ention are among those most li'el) to su//ort 6eminist goals C a claim su//orte9 b) an anal)sis o- attitu3es to&ar3 t6e %eace %rocess in t6e 0i33le $ast. 7 stu3y o- IsraeliC $/y%tianC ,alestinianC an3 <u&aiti attitu9es to0ar9 the <rab/Israeli con6lictC bro'en 9o0n b) seEC 6oun9 t6at men an3 &omen 3i3 not 6a9e 3i--erent attitu3es an3 t6ere &as no e9i3ence o- &omen 8ein/ less militaristic. sin/ 3ata collecte3 8et&een 19++ an3 199!C t6e stu3y 3i3C 6o&e9erC -in3 a strong %ositi9e correlation bet0een attitu9es to0ar9 su//ort 6or eHualit) o6 0omen an9 su//ort 6or 9i/lomac) an9 com/romise. 46e aut6ors t6ere-ore sa& a connection 8et&een -eminism an3 %ositi9e attitu3es a8out t6e resolution ointernational con-lict.+! 46is eDam%le is instructi9eJ re9ucing uneHual gen9er hierarchies coul9 ma'e a /ositi>e contribution to /eace an9 social ?ustice. Like&iseC 8y mo9in/ 8eyon3 3ic6otomous &ays ot6inkin/ a8out &ar an3 %eaceC %ro8lematiBin/ t6e social construction o- /en3er 6ierarc6iesC an3 eE/osing m)ths about male /rotection that these 0a)s o6 thin'ing /romoteC &e 0oul9 be able to construct less; gen9ere9 an9 more;inclusi>e 9e6initions o6 securit) . *--erin/ a counter%osition t6at re:ects 8ot6 t6e masculinity o- &ar an3 a -eminine %eaceC 0ary >ur/uieres 6as ar/ue3 -or 8uil3in/ a -eminist security -rame&ork on commonC un/en3ere3 -oun3ations. S6e 6as su//este3 a role -or -eminism in 3ismantlin/ t6e ima/ery t6at un3erlies %atriarc6y an3 militarism an3 a :oint e--ort in &6ic6 8ot6 &omen an3 men &oul3 8e res%onsi8le -or c6an/in/ eDistin/ structures.+' Such e66orts reHuire a /roblematization o6 9ichotomize9 constructions such as 0ar an9 /eace an9 realism an9 i9ealism in or9er to /ro>i9e ne0 0a)s o6 un9erstan9ing t6ese %6enomena t6at can 6el% us en9isa/e a more ro8ust notion o- security.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


33 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Autler
Aailing on legal change 6or /aro9ic /er6ormance 6ails to brea' 9o0n gen9er categories an9 colla/ses into Huietism ussbaum 2' (0art6aC %ro-essor an3 %6iloso%6erC E46e ,ro-essor o- ,aro3yF) ,A
So &6at 3oes AutlerSs 0or' a33 to t6is co%ious 8o3y o- &ritin/V Gender %rouble an3 &odies t!at Matter contain no 3etaile3 argument a/ainst 8iolo/ical claims o- KnaturalK 3i--erenceC no account o- mec6anisms o- /en3er re%licationC an3 no account o- t6e le/al s6a%in/ o- t6e -amilyJ nor 3o t6ey contain any 3etaile3 -ocus on %ossi8ilities 6or legal cahange. "6atC t6enC 3oes >utler o--er t6at &e mi/6t not -in3 more -ully 3one in earlier -eminist &ritin/sV *ne relati9ely ori/inal claim is t6at &6en &e reco/niBe t6e arti-iciality o- /en3er 3istinctionsC an3 re-rain -rom t6inkin/ o- t6em as eD%ressin/ an in3e%en3ent natural realityC &e &ill also un3erstan3 t6at t6ere is no com%ellin/ reason &6y t6e /en3er ty%es s6oul3 6a9e 8een t&o (correlate3 &it6 t6e t&o 8iolo/ical seDes)C rat6er t6an t6ree or -i9e or in3e-initely many. K"6en t6e constructe3 status o/en3er is t6eoriBe3 as ra3ically in3e%en3ent o- seDC /en3er itsel- 8ecomes a -ree5-loatin/ arti-iceCK s6e &rites. ;rom this claim it 9oes not 6ollo0C -or >utlerC t6at &e can -reely rein9ent t6e /en3ers as &e like= s6e 6ol3sC in3ee3C t6at there are se>ere limits to our 6ree9om. S6e insists t6at &e s6oul3 not nai9ely ima/ine t6at t6ere is a %ristine sel- t6at stan3s 8e6in3 societyC rea3y to emer/e all %ure an3 li8erate3= K46ere is no sel- t6at is %rior to t6e con9er/ence or &6o maintains Zinte/rityN %rior to its entrance into t6is con-licte3 cultural -iel3. :here is onl) a ta'ing u/ o6 the tools 0here the) lieD 0here the >er) Rta'ing u/S is enable9 b) the tool l)ing there.J >utler 3oes claimC t6ou/6C that 0e can create categories that are in some sense ne0 onesD b) means o6 the art6ul /aro9) o6 the ol9 ones. 46us 6er 8est kno&n i3eaC her conce/tion o6 /olitics as a /aro9ic /er6ormanceD is born out o6 the sense o6 a (strictly limite9# 6ree9om that comes 6rom the recognition that oneSs i9eas o6 gen9er ha>e been sha/e9 b) 6orces that are social rather than biological. ,e are 9oome9 to re/etition o6 the /o0er structures into 0hich 0e are bornD but 0e can at least ma'e 6un o6 themI an9 some 0a)s o6 ma'ing 6un are sub>ersi>e assaults on the original norms .

Strategicall) using gen9er categories is more /oliticall) e66ecti>e Aal90in $3 (0ar/aret 7C ,ro-essor o- La& at ;S C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateF)
.o&e9er salutary t6e %ostmo3ern /oal o- 3e5essentialiBin/ &omenC /ostmo9ern theor) ultimatel) e66aces the s/eci6ic situation o6 /ublic 0omenD an9 6or6eits altogether an) account o6 gen9er along the 0a) . 46is 3i--icultyC an3 its im%lications -or %olitical strate/yC is o-ten s%oken o- 8ut rarely a33resse3 seriously &it6in %ostmo3ern -eminism. 1enise Riley o--ers t6e 3iktat t6at at such ?unctures 0omen can 'no0 amongst themsel>es Jthat S0omenS 9onSt eEist ;; 0hile maintaining a /olitics o6 Ge1(0H Nas i6 the) eEiste9S 55 since t6e &orl3 8e6a9es as i- t6ey unam8i/uously 3i3.K !3! Au3it6 Autler ma'es the same tactical concession 0hen she a66irms the continue9 necessit) o6 asserting Ja generall) share9 conce/tion o6 S0omenSK !3' as a /olitical strateg)@ "it6in -eminismC it seems as i- t6ere is some %olitical necessity to s%eak as an3 -or &omenC an3 I &oul3 not contest t6at necessity. SurelyC t6at is t6e &ay in &6ic6 re%resentational %olitics o%eratesC an3 . . . lobb)ing e66orts are >irtuall) im/ossible 0ithout recourse to i9entit) /olitics. So 0e agree that 9emonstrations an9 legislati>e e66orts an9 ra9ical mo>ements nee9 to ma'e claims in the name o6 0omen. !3(

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


35 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<:@ Social !onstructi>ism ot :rue


Gen9ere9 i9entities are 6orme9 b) societ)D 0e aren-t ?ust born 0ith themD un9erstan9ing this is 'e) to gen9er ?ustice Gibson 2 (IanC .uman Security %ost59/11C &&&.ritsumei.ac.:%/ac3/c//ir/colle/e/8ulletin/e59ol.3//i8son.%3-)I0
4o look at /en3er %ers%ecti9es &e must -irst re-er to Rear3on#s o8ser9ations on t6e issue o- /en3er. Gen9er is culturall) an9 /s)chologicall) 6ormulate9 through internalize9 6orms o6 i9entit) . It is -lui3 an3 c6an/ea8le an3 so t6ere is a 3e/ree o- -lui3ity in seDual i3entity. Gen9er is biologicall) base9 but not biological an9 re6ers to Gthe social an9 cultural 9i66erences bet0een the seEes.F (Rear3onC 2001=3)) Societ) ma'es us 0ho 0e are an9 not the birth 6actorD 0e are limite9 b) societ) eE/ectations an3 so Rear3on su//ests t6at &e nee3 to 8ecome more /en3er a&are. "omen are constantly -i/6tin/ stereoty%es internally an3 eDternally &6ic6 is eDtremely limitin/ -or t6eir an3 t6eir society#s 3e9elo%ment. 0oreo9er there isn-t an) common 6unction o6 the meaning o6 gen9er. < gen9ere9 as/ect is ho0 one li>es in societ). :o un9erstan9 this is to bring about gen9er ?ustice.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


3$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

===!uomo===

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


50 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

!uomo 8o9ule ( &in' ; ,ar as an .>ent


:reating 0ar as an e>ent that onl) ha//ens 0hen /eo/le are being shot or 6ighting is 6un9amentall) 6la0e9 ( it ignores multi/le 6orms o6 0ar 9ue li'e 0om)n-s o//ression an9 ecological >iolence. Cuomo 9( "!hrisD Pro6essor o6 Philoso/h) an9 ,omenSs Stu9iesD an9 Director o6 the Institute 6or ,omenSs
Stu9ies at the *ni>erit) o6 GeorgiaD G,ar Is ot Just an .>ent@ Re6lections on the Signi6icance o6 .>er)9a) UiolenceF Publishe9 in 7)/atia 11.+D /. %0;+2# 7lt6ou/6 my %osition is in a/reement &it6 t6e notion t6at &ar an3 militarism are -eminist issuesC I ar/ue t6at a%%roac6es to t6e ethics o6 0ar an9 /eace 0hich 9o not consi9er G/eacetimeF militar) >iolence are ina9eHuate 6or 6eminist an9 en>ironmentalist concerns . >ecause much o6 the militar) >iolence 9one to 0omen an9 ecos)stems ha//ens outsi9e the boun9aries o6 9eclare9 0arsD 6eminist an9 en>ironmental /hiloso/hers ought to em/hasize the signi6icance o6 e>er)9a) militar) >iolence . ,6iloso%6ical attention to &ar 6as ty%ically a%%eare3 in t6e -orm o- :usti-ications -or enterin/ into &arC an3 o9er a%%ro%riate acti9ities &it6in &ar. 46e s%atial meta%6ors use3 to re-er to &ar as a se%arateC 8oun3e3 s%6ere in3icate assum%tions t6at &ar is a realm o- 6uman acti9ity 9astly remo9e3 -rom normal li-eC or a sort o- 6a%%enin/ t6at is a%%ro%riately concei9e3 a%art -rom e9ery3ay e9ents in %eace-ul times. Not sur%risin/lyC most 9iscussions o6 the /olitical an9 ethical 9imensions o6 0ar 9iscuss 0ar solel) as an e>ent Man occurrenceC or collection o- occurrencesC 6a9in/ clear 8e/innin/s an3 en3in/s t6at are ty%ically marke3 8y -ormalC institutional 3eclarations. 7s 6a%%enin/sC 0ars an9 militar) acti>ities can be seen as moti>ate9 b) i9enti6iableD i6 com/leED intentionsD an9 9irectl) enacte9 b) in9i>i9ual an9 collecti>e 9ecision;ma'ers an9 agents o6 states. >ut man) o6 the Huestions about 0ar that are o6 interest to 6eminists inclu9ing ho0 large;scaleD state;s/onsore9 >iolence a66ects 0omen an9 members o6 other o//resse9 grou/sI ho0 militar) >iolence sha/es gen9ere9D race9D an9 nationalistic /olitical realities an9 moral imaginationsI 0hat such >iolence consists o6 an9 0h) it /ersistsI ho0 it is relate9 to other o//ressi>e an9 >iolent institutions an9 hegemoniesKcannot be a9eHuatel) /ursue9 b) 6ocusing on e>ents . 46ese issues are not merely a matter o- /oo3 or 8a3 intentions an3 i3enti-ia8le 3ecisions. In K2en3er an3 N,ostmo3ernN "arCK Ro8in Sc6ott intro3uces some o- t6e &ays in &6ic6 &ar is currently 8est seen not as an e9ent 8ut as a %resence (Sc6ott 199'). Sc6ott ar/ues t6at %ostmo3ern un3erstan3in/s o- %ersonsC statesC an3 %oliticsC as &ell as t6e 6i/65tec6 nature o- muc6 contem%orary &ar-are an3 t6e %re%on3erance o- ci9il an3 nationalist &arsC ren3er an e9ent58ase3 conce%tion o- &ar ina3eIuateC es%ecially inso-ar as /en3er is taken into account. In t6is essayC I &ill eD%an3 u%on 6er ar/ument 8y s6o&in/ t6at accounts o- &ar t6at only -ocus on e9ents are im%o9eris6e3 in a num8er o- &aysC an3 t6ere-ore -eminist consi3eration o- t6e %oliticalC et6icalC an3 onto5 lo/ical 3imensions o- &ar an3 t6e %ossi8ilities -or resistance 3eman3 a muc6 more com%licate3 a%%roac6. I take Sc6ottNs c6aracteriBation o- &ar as %resence as a %oint o- 3e%artureC t6ou/6 I am not committe3 to t6e i3ea t6at t6e constancy o- militarismC t6e -act o- its omni%resence in 6uman eD%erienceC an3 t6e %aucity o- an e9ent58ase3 account o- &ar are eDclusi9e to contem%orary %ostmo3ern or %ostcolonial circumstances) 46eory t6at 3oes not in9esti/ate or e9en notice t6e omni%resence o- militarism cannot re%resent or a33ress t6e 3e%t6 an3 s%eci-icity o- t6e e9ery3ay e--ects o- militarism on &omenC on %eo%le li9in/ in occu%ie3 territoriesC on mem8ers o- military institutionsC an3 on t6e en9ironment. :hese e66ects are rele>ant to 6eminists in a number o6 0a)s because militar) /ractices an9 institutions hel/ construct gen9ere9 an9 national i9entit)D an9 because the) ?usti6) the 9estruction o6 natural nonhuman entities an9 communities 9uring /eacetime. &ac' o6 attention to these as/ects o- t6e 8usiness o- makin/ or %re9entin/ military 9iolence in an eDtremely tec6nolo/iBe3 &orl3 results in t6eory t6at cannot accommo3ate t6e connections amon/ t6e constant %resence o- militarismC 3eclare3 &arsC an3 ot6er closely relate3 social %6enomenaC suc6 as nationalistic /lori-ications o- mot6er6oo3C me3ia 9iolenceC an3 current i9eological gra>itations to militar) solutions 6or social /roblems.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


51 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

!uomo 8o9ule ( !risis Politics


:he crisis;base9 /olitics o6 the status Huo ser>e to Huiet acti>ism b) a//ealing to threats to securit) as the most;9eser>ing o6 consi9eration. In or9er to combat >iolenceD 0e ha>e to rethin'ing our un9erstan9ing o6 crisis. Cuomo 9( "!hrisD Pro6essor o6 Philoso/h) an9 ,omenSs Stu9iesD an9 Director o6 the Institute 6or ,omenSs
Stu9ies at the *ni>erit) o6 GeorgiaD G,ar Is ot Just an .>ent@ Re6lections on the Signi6icance o6 .>er)9a) UiolenceF Publishe9 in 7)/atia 11.+D /. %0;+2# .thical a//roaches that 9o not atten9 to the 0a)s in 0hich 0ar6are an9 militar) /ractices are 0o>en into the >er) 6abric o6 li6e in t0ent);6irst centur) technological states lea9 to crisis;base9 /olitics an9 anal)ses. ;or any -eminism t6at aims to resist o%%ression an3 create alternati9e social an3 %olitical o%tionsC crisis;base9 ethics an9 /olitics are /roblematic because the) 9istract attention 6rom the nee9 6or sustaine9 resistance to the enmeshe9D omni/resent s)stems o6 9omination an9 o//ression that so o6ten 6unction as gi>ens in most /eo/leSs li>es. Ne/lectin/ t6e omni%resence o- militarism allo&s t6e -alse 8eliet6at t6e a8sence o- 3eclare3 arme3 con-licts is %eaceC t6e %olar o%%osite o- &ar. It is %articularly easy -or t6ose &6ose li9es are s6a%e3 8y t6e sa-ety o- %ri9ile/eC an3 &6o 3o not re/ularly encounter t6e realities omilitarismC to maintain t6is -alse 8elie-. :he belie6 that militarism is an ethicalD /olitical concern onl) regar9ing arme9 con6lictD creates 6orms o6 resistance to militarism that are merel) eEercises in crisis control. 7nti&ar resistance is t6en mo8iliBe3 &6en t6e KrealK 9iolence -inally occursC or &6en t6e sta8ility o%ri9ile/e is 3irectly t6reatene3C an3 at t6at %oint it is 3i--icult not to res%on3 in &ays t6at make resisters 3ro% all ot6er %olitical %riorities. Crisis53ri9en attention to 3eclarations o- &ar mi/6t actually kee% resisters com%lacent a8out an3 com%licitous in t6e /eneral %resence o- /lo8al militarism. Seeing 0ar as necessaril) embe99e9 in constant militar) /resence 9ra0s attention to the 6act that horri6icD state;s/onsore9 >iolence is ha//ening nearl) all o>erD all o6 the timeD an9 that it is /er/etrate9 b) militar) institutions an9 other militaristic agents o6 the state. 8o>ing a0a) 6rom crisis;9ri>en /olitics an9 ontologies concerning 0ar an9 militar) >iolence also enables consi9eration o6 relationshi/s among seemingl) 9is/arate /henomenaD an9 there6ore can sha/e more nuance9 theoretical an9 /ractical 6orms o6 resistance. ;or eDam%leC in9esti/atin/ t6e &ays in &6ic6 &ar is %art o- a %resence allo&s consi3eration ot6e relations6i%s amon/ t6e e9ents o- &ar an3 t6e -ollo&in/= 6o& militarism is a -oun3ational tro%e in t6e social an3 %olitical ima/inationJ 6o& t6e %er9asi9e %resence an3 sym8olism o- sol3iers/&arriors/%atriots s6a%e meanin/s o- /en3erJ t6e &ays in &6ic6 t6reats o- state5s%onsore3 9iolence are a sometimes in9isi8le/sometimes 8ol3 a/ent o- racismC nationalismC an3 cor%orate interestsJ t6e -act t6at 9ast num8ers ocommunitiesC citiesC an3 nations are currently in t6e mi3st o- eDcruciatin/ly 9iolent circumstances. It also %ro9i3es a lens -or consi3erin/ t6e relations6i%s amon/ t6e 9arious kin3s o- 9iolence t6at /et la8ele3 K&ar.K 2i9en current 7merican o8sessions &it6 nationalismC /unsC an3 militiasC an3 /ro&in/ 6un/er -or t6e 3eat6 %enaltyC %risonsC an3 a more %o&er-ul %olice stateC one cannot un9erestimate the nee9 6or /hiloso/hical an9 /olitical attention to connections among /henomena li'e the J0ar on 9rugsDJ the J0ar on crimeDJ an9 other state;6un9e9 militaristic cam/aigns.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


52 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

===<66 <ns0ers===

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


5% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ o <lt Sol>enc)


K turns itsel6 ( associating men 0ith 0ar an9 0omen 0ith /eace rein6orces hierarch). :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. '95(0) A0 In a conteDt o- a male53ominate3 societyC the association o6 men 0ith 0ar an9 0omen 0ith /eace also rein6orces gen9er hierarchies an9 6alse 9ichotomies that contribute to the 9e>aluation o6 both 0omen an9 /eace. :he (0 gen9ere9 9imensions association o- &omen an3 %eace 0ith i9ealism in IRC &6ic6 I 6a9e ar/ue3 is a 3ee%ly /en3ere3 conce%tC has ren9ere9 it less legitimate in the 9iscourse o6 international relations. 7lt6ou/6 /eace mo>ements t6at 6a9e relie3 on maternal ima/es may 6a9e 6a3 some successC t6ey 9o nothing to change eEisting gen9er relationsJ this allo0s men to remain in control an9 continue to 9ominate the agen9a o6 0orl9 /oliticsC an3 it continues to ren3er &omen#s 9oices as inaut6entic in matters o- -orei/n %olicymakin/.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


5+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ &in' ( Gen9ere9 State


:he belie6 that the state is al0a)s;alrea9) /atriarchal is both a 6iction an9 /re>ents the 0omen-s mo>ement 6rom securing lasting changes in gen9er relations. 1e8ora6 L. Rho9eC ,ro-essorC Stan-or3 La& Sc6oolJ 1irectorC Institute -or Researc6 on "omen an3 2en3erC Stan-or3 ni9ersityC 7%ril 1$$+C .ar9ar3 La& Re9ie&C 10) .ar9. L. Re9. 11+1C %. 11+!511+(
In man) le-t 6eminist accountsD the state is a /atriarchal institution in t6e sense t6at it re-lects an3 institutionaliBes male 3ominance. 8en control /ositions o6 o66icial /o0er an9 menSs interests 9etermine ho0 that /o0er is eEercise9. 7ccor3in/ to Cat6arine 0ac<innonC t6e stateNs in9ocation o- neutrality an3 o8:ecti9ity ensures
t6atC KGtH6ose &6o 6a9e -ree3oms like eIualityC li8ertyC %ri9acy an3 s%eec6 socially kee% t6em le/allyC -ree o- /o9ernmental intrusion.K n1' In t6is 9ie&C Kt6e state %rotects male %o&er G8yH a%%earin/ to %ro6i8it its eDcesses &6en necessary to its normaliBation.K n1( SoC -or eDam%leC to t6e eDtent t6at a8ortion -unctions Kto -acilitate male seDual access to &omenC access to a8ortion &ill 8e controlle3 8y Na man or 46e 0an.NK n1) *t6er t6eorists similarly %resent &omen as a class an3 ela8orate t6e &ays in &6ic6 e9en state %olicies ostensi8ly 3esi/ne3 to assist &omen 6a9e institutionaliBe3 t6eir su8or3ination. n1+ SoC -or eDam%leC &el-are %ro/rams sti/matiBe -emale reci%ients &it6out %ro9i3in/ t6e su%%ort t6at &oul3 ena8le t6em to alter t6eir 3isa39anta/e3 status. n19 In %atriarc6al accountsC t6e c6oice -or many &omen is 8et&een 3e%en3ence Ge11+'H on an intrusi9e an3 insensiti9e 8ureaucracyC or 3e%en3ence on a controllin/ or a8usi9e man. n20 $it6er situation in9ol9es slee%in/ &it6 t6e enemy. 7s Lir/inia "ool- note3C t6ese %u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eres o- su8or3ination are similarly structure3 an3 Kinse%ara8ly connecte3J . . . t6e tyrannies an3 ser9ilities o- t6e one are t6e tyrannies an3 ser9ilities o- t6e ot6er.K n21 46is account is also %ro8lematic on many le9els. 4o treat &omen as a class o8scures ot6er c6aracteristicsC suc6 as race an3 economic statusC t6at can 8e eIually %o&er-ul in or3erin/ social relations. "omen are not Kuni-ormly o%%resse3.K n22 Nor are t6ey eDclusi9ely 9ictims. Patriarch) cannot account a9eHuatel) 6or the mutual 9e/en9encies an9 com/leE /o0er

9)namics that characterize male;6emale relations. either can the state be un9erstoo9 solel) as an instrument o6 menSs interests. 7s a t6res6ol3 matterC 0hat constitutes those interests is not sel6;e>i9entC as 0ac<innonNs o&n illustrations su//est. I-C -or eDam%leC %olicies li8eraliBin/ a8ortion ser9e male o8:ecti9es 8y en6ancin/ access to -emale seDualityC %olicies curtailin/ a8ortion %resuma8ly also ser9e male o8:ecti9es 8y re3ucin/ -emale autonomy. n23 In e--ectC /atriarchal 6rame0or's >erge on tautolog). <lmost an) gen9er;relate9 /olic) can be seen as either 9irectl) ser>ing menSs imme9iate interestsD or as com/romising short;term concerns in the ser>ice o6 broa9erD long;term goalsC suc6 as KnormaliBin/K t6e system an3 sta8iliBin/ %o&er relations. < 6rame0or' that can characterize all state inter>entions as 9irectl) or in9irectl) /atriarchal o66ers little /ractical gui9ance in challenging the con9itions it con9emns. 7n3 i- &omen are not a 6omo/enous /rou% &it6 unitary concernsC surely t6e same is true o- men. 0oreo9erC i- t6e state
is 8est un3erstoo3 as a net&ork o- institutions &it6 com%leDC sometimes com%etin/ a/en3asC t6en t6e %atriarc6al mo3el o- sin/le5min3e3 instrumentalism seems 6i/6ly im%lausi8le. It is 3i--icult to 3ismiss all t6e anti53iscrimination initiati9es o- t6e last Iuarter century as %urely counter5re9olutionary strate/ies. 7n3 it is %recisely t6ese initiati9esC &it6 t6eir a%%eal to KmaleK norms o- Ko8:ecti9ity an3 t6e im%ersonality o- %roce3ureC t6at G6a9e create3H Ge11+(H le9era/e -or t6e re%resentation o- &omenNs interests.K n2! !ross;cultural

research also suggests that the status o6 0omen is /ositi>el) correlate9 0ith a strong stateD 0hich is scarcel) the relationshi/ that /atriarchal 6rame0or's im/l). n2' "6ile t6e KtyranniesK o- %u8lic an3 %ri9ate 3e%en3ence are %lainly relate3C many -eminists c6allen/e t6e claim t6at t6ey are t6e same. 7s Carole ,ateman notesC 0omen 9o not Jli>e 0ith the state an9 are better able to ma'e collecti>e struggle against institutions than in9i>i9uals.K n2( :o a9>ance that struggleD 6eminists nee9 more concrete an9 conteEtual accounts o6 state institutions than /atriarchal 6rame0or's ha>e su//lie9 . &um/ing together /oliceD 0el6are 0or'ersD an9 Pentagon o66icials as agents o6 a unitar) /atriarchal structure 9oes more to obscure than to a9>ance anal)sis. ,hat seems necessar) is a conteEtual a//roach that can account 6or greater com/leEities in 0omenSs relationshi/s 0ith go>erning institutions . Oet 3es%ite t6eir limitationsC
%atriarc6al t6eories un3erscore an insi/6t t6at /enerally in-orms -eminist t6eoriBin/. 7s ,art II re-lectsC /o9ernmental institutions are im%licate3 in t6e most -un3amental structures o- seD58ase3 ineIuality an3 in t6e strate/ies necessary to a33ress it.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


51 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ &in' ( 8ilitar)


Distancing 6eminists 6rom the militar) ensures the)-ll al0a)s be outsi9ersD onl) able to 9rag 9o0n men not li6t u/ 0omen 8azur $$ (1iane .. 8azur 5 7ssociate ,ro-essor o- La&C . o- ;lori3a. Ca%tainC S 7ir ;orceC 19)95+3 19$$ S%rin/C 22 .ar9. "omenNs L.A. 39 E7 C7LL 4* 7R0SF)
:he 9eliberate 9istance that legal 6eminists ha>e create9 bet0een 0omen an9 the militar) has ma9e it 9i66icult 6or 0omen o6 legal in6luence to s/ea' /ersuasi>el) about the institution. ,e 0ill ne>er 0in the 0ar o6 narrati>e bet0een Jinsi9erJ an9 Joutsi9erJ i6 6eminists al0a)s remain on the outsi9e . Insi9er accounts 0ill al0a)s ha>e the cre9ibilit) o6 eE/ertiseD an9 it is no ans0er to sim/l) >o0 to Jo66er 3etaile3 accounts o6 the /artialit) an9 /er/etuation o6 9ominantC strai/6t male /ers/ecti>es.K 13' "it6out %artici%ationC it is im%ossi8leJ le/al -eminists 6a9e not 8een a8le to construct -actually accurate accounts -rom a stu3ie3 3istance. Rather than see'ing 0a)s to 9iscount the eE/ertise o6 menC 13( 0e shoul9 instea9 0or' to increase the eE/ertise o6 0omen.

Stu9ents lac' 9isci/line to /ursue changeD the militar) teaches organization an9 9etail 6ocus that bene6its acti>ists 8azur $$ "1iane .. 8azur 5 7ssociate ,ro-essor o- La&C . o- ;lori3a. Ca%tainC S 7ir ;orceC 19)95+3 19$$ S%rin/C 22 .ar9. "omenNs L.A. 39 E7 C7LL 4* 7R0SF)
7s la& teac6ersC 0e

see it in t6e classroomJ one mi/6t call it the J0ell . . . 0hate>erJ s)n9rome. ,hen 0e tr) to remin9 stu9ents o6 the criticall) im/ortant nature o6 some seemingl) insigni6icant -actC e9entC 0or9C or turn o6 /hraseD the 0ear) but incre9ulous loo' &e sometimes recei9e in return is one that s/ea'sD J0ell . . . 0hate>er.K 1+0 "6ile I am certainly Ge)'H not recommen3in/ t6at la& stu3ents nee3 any -orm o- a39ersati9e Kla& sc6ool 8oot cam%CK la0 stu9ents 0oul9 be better o66 0ith enhance9 s'ills o6 JconcentrationD attention to 9etailD an9D abo>e allD /atience.K 1+1 4ne o6 the ob?ecti>es o6 militar) training is to scrub 6rom ci>ilians this com6ortableness 0ith a//roEimationD an9C -urt6ermoreC to teach a JXen;li'e 6etish 6or minor 9etailsJ 1+2 that /re>ails e>en un9er con9itions o6 se>ere /h)sical stress an9 mental con6usion. 7 trainin/ eDercise t6atC to
a -eminist le/al sc6olarC mi/6t a%%ear to 8e not6in/ more t6an sa3istic s%ort a8out tri9iality actually 6as a %ointC an3 it 6as a -air %oint. 1+3 &ac' o6 6amiliarit) 0ith the militar) has 9isa9>antage9 legal 6eminists in their e66orts to a9>ance cre9ibleD /ro9ucti>e arguments about gen9er issues in militar) training C 8ut it 6as also 3isa39anta/e3 -eminist liti/ation in a more 3irect an3 conseIuential &ay. 46e Iuality o- ci9il5ri/6ts re%resentation 3e%en3s on more t6an :ust eD%ertise in ci9il5 ri/6ts liti/ationJ t6e most e--ecti9e re%resentation also reIuires an un3erstan3in/ o- rele9ant -actual conteDt in t6e clientNs community=

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


52 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ State Ke)


:he state can use its /o0er to 6urther 6eminist goals. :ic'ner 1 (A. 7nnC %ro- at t6e Sc6ool o- International RelationsC SCC Gendering World Politics: Issues and
pproac!es in t!e Post"#old War $raC %. 9)59+) A0
"6ile t6e relati9e a8sence o- &omen -rom %olitical institutions 6as le3 -eministsC %articularly "estern -eministsC to 8e sus%icious o- t6e stateC t6ey are also Iuestionin/ 9isions o- alternati9e mo3els t6at a39ocate t6e 3e9olution o- %o&er u% to international /o9ernmental institutionsC &6ere o-ten there are e>en 6e0er 0omen in 9ecision;ma'ing /ositions. ni9ersal normsC suc6 as

stan3ar3s o- 6uman ri/6tsC articulate3 at t6e international le9el are also 8ein/ eDamine3 -or /en3er 8ias. 4y%icallyC 0omen-s mo>ementsC &6ic6 stri9e -or &6at t6ey claim is a more /enuine -orm o- 3emocracyC ha>e been situate9 at the local le>el or in non/o9ernmental transnational social mo9ements. 7s 3iscusse3 in
c6a%ter 3C -eminists 6a9e stresse3 t6e im%ortance o- t6ese mo9ementsC not only in terms o- t6eir attem%ts to %lace &omen#s issues on t6e international a/en3aC 8ut also in terms o- t6eir success in re3e-inin/ %olitical t6eory an3 %ractice an3 t6inkin/ more 3ee%ly a8out o%%ressi9e /en3er relations an3 6o& to reconstitute t6em. .o&e9erC certain 6eminists 6a9e 8e/un to Huestion 0hether

0omen-s /artici/ation in these nongo>ernmental arenas can ha>e su--icient /o0er to e66ect changeI &6ile t6ey remain ske%tical o- t6e %atriarc6al un3er%innin/s o- many contem%orary statesC certain 6eminists are no& beginning to reeEamine the /otential o6 the state as an emanci/ator) institution. ,articularly -or &omen an3 -eminists -rom t6e Sout6C 3emocratiBation 6as o%ene3 u% some s%ace &it6in &6ic6 to le9era/e t6e state to 3eal &it6 t6eir concernsJ man) o6 them see the state as ha>ing the /otential to /ro>i9e a bu66er against an international s)stem 9ominate9 b) its most /o0er6ul members. .o&e9erC a /enuinely 3emocratic stateC 3e9oi3 o- /en3er an3 ot6er o%%ressi9e social 6ierarc6iesC &oul3 reIuire a 3i--erent 3e-inition o- 3emocracyC citiBens6i%C an3 6uman ri/6tsC as &ell as a 3i--erent relations6i% &it6 t6e international system.

:he la0 can be use9 to re>erse >iolence. :here is nothing inherent in the la0 that ties our han9s >utler 9)"Ju9ithD Pro6essor o6 Rhetoric an9 !om/arati>e &iterature at *! Aer'ele)C$Dcita8le S%eec6= 7 ,olitics o- t6e ,er-ormati9eC Routle3/e= Ne& OorkC %. 9+)
46e stateNs eDercise o- t6is %ro3ucti9e 3iscursi9e -unction is un3erestimate3 in t6e &ritin/s t6at -a9or o- 6ate s%eec6 le/islation. In3ee3C t6ey minimiBe t6e %ossi8ility o- a misa%%ro%riation 8y t6e la& in -a9or o- a 9ie& o- t6e la& as %olitically neutral an3 mallea8le. 8atsu9a argues that la0D though 6orme9 in racismD can be re9irecte9 against racism. She 6igures the la0 as a set o6 JratchetJ toolsD 9escribing it in /urel) in ; strumental termsD an9 9iscounting the /ro9ucti>e misa//ro/riations b) 0hich it /rocee9s. :his >ie0 in>ests all /o0er an9 agenc) in the sub?ect 0ho 0oul9 use such an instrument. 7o0e>er reactionar) its histor)D this instrument can be /ut in the ser>ice o6 a /rogressi>e >isionD thus J9e6)ing the habit o6 neutral /rinci/les to entrench eEisting /o0er@N Later s6e &rites= Knothing inherent in la0 ties our han9s=N ('0) a%%ro9in/ o- a met6o3 o- 3octrinal reconstruction. In ot6er &or3sC legal language is /recisel) the 'in9 o6 language that can be cite9 into a re>erse meaningD 0here the re>ersal ta'es a la0 0ith a reactionar) histor) an9 turns it into a la0 0ith a /rogressi>e aim.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


53 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)


< criticall) realist a//roachD such as the /ermD is essential to the 6eminist /ro?ect e0 + (CarolineC La& S 7N C Critical RealismC
&&&.ra//e3cla&s.com/criticalrealism/arc6i9e/7L$4.I791n1Qne&2.%3-)I0 Like most %oststructuralist -eministsC >utler re-ers to t6e &ron/s 3one to &omen. Oet it is har9 to see 0h) cruelties mat; terD 0hether su66ere9 b) 0omen or menD 0ithout some im%licit moral realism. "6yC -or EtacticalF reasonsC 3o &e &ant
-emi5 nism to 8rin/ to/et6er t6e 3is%arate /rou%s o- &omenV "6y not let -eminism itsel- /o t6e &ay o- /en3erC t6e tar/et o- t6e Esu89ersi9e 8o3ily actsF >utler recommen3s 5 i.e. o- 3iscursi9eC 3econstructi9e onesV It can only 8e 8ecause >utlerC an3 ot6ersC care a8out t6e real con3itions o- &omen#s li9esC an3 &ant to see t6em ameliorate3C &6ic6 only makes sense in terms o- a 6i33en et6ic o6uman nee3sC an3 collecti9e interests in t6e li/6t o- t6ese. 7/ainC critical realism has the tools to 9econstruct ; an9 thus eE/ose K the limits /ost;structuralists /ut on their o0n 9econ; structions . 46e necessity o- (critical) realism In this caseD as in othersD /oststructuralists ine>itabl) return to realism . In ESituate3 <no&le3/esFC .ara&ay -amously retreats -rom 6er earlier 9ie& t6at -eminist %olitics s6oul3 8e /roun3e3C not on t6e cate/ory E&omanFC 8ut on an Eironic %olitical myt6F o- t6e sel- as cy8or/ (1991C 1!'). Instea3C s6e no& returns to t6e notion o- a Esuccessor scienceF. 0y %ro8lem an3 EourF /roblem is ho0 to ha>e simultaneousl) an account o6 ra9ical historical contingenc) 6or all 'no0le9ge claims an3 kno&5 in/ su8:ectsC a critical %ractice -or reco/nisin/ our o&n Esemiotic tec6nolo/iesF -or makin/ meanin/sC an9 a no nonsense commitment to 6aith6ul accounts o6 a GrealF 0orl9... (.ara&ay 1991C 1+)). Oet e9en a-ter t6is clear statement s6e a33s= Et6e a%%roac6 I am recommen3in/ is not a 9ersion o- realismC &6ic6 6as %ro9e3 a rat6er %oor &ay oen/a/in/ &it6 t6e &orl3#s acti9e a/encyF (i8i3.C 19)). S6e sim%ly 3oes not realise that realism can recognise the his;

toricit) o6 theories an9 'no0le9ge claims 0ithout assuming that 0hat is true o6 our constructions nee9 be true o6 their re6erents (Sayer 199)C !(+). Feminism ma'es claims about the nature o6 social relationsD an9 a99uces >arious sorts o6 e>i9ence 6or these. It /oints out the 6alsit) o6 9ominant accounts o- t6e social &orl3 an3 ar/ues on t6e 8asis o- ri9al accounts t6at 3ee% an3 &i3e c6an/es s6oul3 take %lace. < realist a//roach (an3 an et6ically naturalist one) is there6ore essential to the 6eminist /ro?ect. :o 9eal 0ith the /oststruc; turalist challengeD this realism nee9s to be critical.

*ni>ersalization is inesca/able ( /re6er the critical realism o6 the /erm to 6ormulate emanci/ator) aims Poutanen 1 (Se%%oC Researc6erC 7ca3emy o- ;inlan3C Auly 200'C Critical 0ana/ement Con-erenceC
interculture.-su.e3u/%3-s/%irott5IuinteroP20lis%ectorQan3QciDous.%3-)I0
46e essential o8:ect o- 4ony La&son#s contri8ution to t6e 3ialo/ue is to s6o& 6o& ontolo/ical anal)sis in critical realist st)le is able to bene6it t6e eD%lanatory /oals (mainly meanin/ /oals o- stan3%oint e%istemolo/y)C an3 critical an3 emanci%atory goals o6 6eminist research. In 6is -irst articleC &6ic6 6e mostly uses to sketc6 t6e content o- critical realismC La&son (1999) notes /eneral a9ersion amon/ -eminists to&ar3s realism an3 su//ests a 3ia/nosis o- t6is %6enomenon. 7ccor3in/ to 6is 3ia/nosisC e--ecti9e -eminist critiIue o- /roun3less a %riori uni9ersaliBin/ in researc6 sli3es easily to a %ro8lematic %osition o- o%%osin/ /eneraliBin/ alto/et6er. La&son sus%ects 6eminists to see realism as an ontological un9er0riter o6 all 6alse generalizing C an3 6e stresses t6at onl) nai>e realism is /rone to bac' misle9 uni>ersalizations. In contrastC La&son consi3ers /eneraliBin//uni>ersalizing "is# an inesca/able /art o6 research an9 3etails 6o& un9erstan9ing the basic ontological nature o6 "social# realit) in the critical realist 0a) can hel/ us to attain mo3erately correct or ?usti6ie9 generalizations. Suc6 generalizations concerningC es%eciallyC human natureC nee3s an3 interests areC in t6e 9ie& o- La&sonC necessarily nee9e9 in 6ormulations o6 emanci/ator) /olitical aims.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


55 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)


!ritical realism 9oesn-t eEclu9e the consi9eration o6 6emininit) ( it-s 'e) to e66ecti>e 6eminism Sa)er + (7n3re&C Lancaster C <C $conomics Re9ie& no. 29C 1ec. ( 200!C
6tt%=//&&&.%aecon.net/,7$Re9ie&/issue29/Sayer29.6tm)I0 Lan Sta9eren en3orses Aulie Nelson#s claim that critical realism has a built;in bias against emotion C counter%osin/ t6is to science an3 reason. 46is mista'es realism 6or /ositi>ism. !ritical realists 0ar/aret 7rc6er an3 7n3re& Collier insistently re?ect the o//osition o6 reason an9 emotionD arguing that emotions ha>e a cogniti>e element C
%ro9i3in/ an em8o3ie3C usually unarticulate3 commentary on t6e &orl3 an3 our situation &it6in itC o-ten %ro9i3in/ 6i/6ly %erce%ti9e 3iscriminations amon/ situations (7rc6erC 2000C 2003J CollierC 2003). .ence 8ot6 aut6ors em%6asiBe an3 9alue t6e intelli/ence oemotions. 7s 0art6a Nuss8aum %uts itC emotions are e9aluati9e :u3/ements re/ar3in/ matters a--ectin/ or likely to a--ect &ell58ein/ (Nuss8aumC 2001). :here is no reason 0h) critical realists shoul9 not be com6ortable 0ith the i9ea o6 emotional reason. ,e are angr) or ha//) about thingsD /rou9 or ashame9 o6 actions. "e are more emotionally a--ecte3 8y t6e loss o- a lo9e3 one t6an t6e loss o- a %encil 8ecause t6e -ormer is more im%ortant -or our &ell58ein/= t6e 3i--erences in emotional res%onses are rational. .motional reason in>ol>es a largel) /re;9iscursi>e e>aluation o6 things suc6 as t6e &ay ot6ers treat us an3 t6e e--ect t6at t6is is 6a9in/ or is likely to 6a9e on usC -or eDam%le &6et6er t6ey are res%ectin/ or 6umiliatin/ usC 8e-rien3in/ or t6reatenin/ us. .motions also re6lect our 9ee/l) social nature (anot6er uni9ersalist claim)C -or as social beings 0e are /s)chologicall) 9e/en9ent on others -or t6eir reco/nitionC lo9e an3 a%%ro9al. 7nti5realism may 8e 3ominant in -eminismC t6ou/6 o-ten t6rou/6 a con-usion 8et&een realism an3 %ositi9ismC 8ut as I 6a9e trie3 to s6o&C 6eminists can be realists an9 realists can be 6eministsD in9ee9 0ithout realism 6eminism is >ulnerable to being 9ismisse9 as a 6orm o6 relati>ism. ;or -urt6er ar/uments on t6e nee3 o- -eminism to 8e realistC I re-er rea3ers to t6e &ork o- <ate So%er (199'a an3 8)C Caroline Ne& (199+C 2003C 200!)J an3 Lin3a 0artfn 7lco-- (200') .

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


5$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ <2@ &in' ( *ni>ersalism


Feminist literature is more uni>ersalizing that securit) 9iscourse Sa)er + (7n3re&C Lancaster C <C $conomics Re9ie& no. 29C 1ec. ( 200!C
6tt%=//&&&.%aecon.net/,7$Re9ie&/issue29/Sayer29.6tm)I0 7s re/ar3s uni9ersalism an3 a%%eals to 6uman natureC there are 9angers o6 i9enti6)ing local an9 historicall);s/eci6ic characteristics as uni>ersalC an3 o- -ailin/ to take seriously t6e remarka8le 9ariety o- cultural -ormsC inclu3in/ /en3er or3ersC &6ic6 s6a%e %eo%le 3ee%ly. In res/onse to the treatment o6 local >ariants as uni>ersal or as t6e normC an3 t6e common ten3ency to naturalise contin/ent 6istorical -orms o- 3ominationC it is tem/ting to re?ect an) notion o6 human nature. .uman 8ein/s are in3ee3 eDtraor3inarily 3i9erseC 8ut &e s6oul3 ask &6at is it a8out t6em &6ic6 ena8les t6em to eD6i8it suc6 9arietyV 7umans can be /ro6oun9l) culturall) sha/e9 in a >ast >ariet) o6 0a)sD but not ?ust an)thing can be culturall) sha/e9. 7 lum% o- roc' cannot ta'e 9i66erent cultural 6orms (it may 8e eDternally construe3 in 3i--erent culturally me3iate3 &aysC an3 use3 in 9arious &aysC 8ut limestone 9oesn-t change its nature 0hen 0e thin' about it 9i66erentl)D an) more than the earth change9 sha/e 0hen 0e 9eci9e9 it 0as roun9 rather than 6lat.) Certain ot6er s%ecies are ca%a8le o- cultural 9ariation tooC 8ut t6at :ust 8e/s t6e same Iuestion= &6at is it a8out t6em &6ic6
ena8les t6isV ;or it to 8e %ossi8le -or anyt6in/ to 8e s6a%e3 in a %articular &ay (-or eDam%le 8y culture) it must 8e t6e kin3 o- t6in/ &6ic6 is susce%ti8le to suc6 s6a%in/C t6at isC it must 6a9e (or 6a9e acIuire3) t6e a--or3ances an3 resistances &6ic6 allo& suc6 s6a%in/. 7s 7n3re& Collier %oints outC -ar -rom remo9in/ t6e Iuestion o- 6uman natureC the /henomenon o6 cultural >ariet) actually %oses it. It /resu//oses a uni>ersal human ca/acit) 6or cultural >ariation . 46usC a certain kin3 o- uni>ersalism t6ou/6 not uni-ormityC &it6 &6ic6 it is o-ten con-use3 is /resu//ose9 b) cultural >ariet) (CollierC 2003). In t6is &ayC

using a structure9 ontolog)D 0e can un9erstan9 both sameness an9 9i66erence@ 0e can see that multi/le >ariants an3 outcomes can be generate9 on the basis o6 common structures (see La&sonC 2003C %. 2!2). :he abstract le>el 9oesC contra 9an Sta9erenC Eallo0 6or relations an9 9i66erencesFD 6or social structures are constitute9 b) internal relations an3 t6e &6ole %oint o- a8straction is to tease out relations an3 3i--erences t6at ena8le an3
constrain t6e 8liBBar3 o- em%irical 3ataC an3 to 3istin/uis6 &6ic6 t6in/s are merely contin/ently associate3 an3 &6ic6 necessarily or internally relate3 (SayerC 2000). 0oreo9erC in line &it6 So%er#s %ointC &e nee3 to i3enti-y t6e ca%acities o- 6umans an3 in3ee3 ot6er s%ecies 5 -or -louris6in/ an3 su--erin/C an3 t6eir nee3s (La&sonC 2003)C t6us ena8lin/ critiIues o- not :ust economic t6eories 8ut economic %ractices in terms o- t6eir e--ect on %eo%le#s &ell58ein/. 46is accor3s &it6 t6e 7ristotelian %osition o- 0art6a Nuss8aumC &6o 6as ma3e im%ortant contri8utions to -eminist 3e9elo%ment t6eory (Nuss8aumC 2000). 4o 8e sure t6ere are many 3i--erent -orms o-louris6in/ an3 3i--erent cultures %ro9i3e 3i--erent conce%tions o- &6at constitutes -louris6in/C an3 Nuss8aum attem%ts to accommo3ate t6is. >ut not :ust anyt6in/ can 8e %asse3 o-- as -louris6in/. I6 0e 0ere to insist that it 0as /urel) culturall) relati>e

then 0e 0oul9 ha>e no 0arrant 6or using terms li'e Po//ression-. <gain 0e encounter a relation bet0een general human nee9s an9 s/eci6icC contin/ent >ariantsC suc6 as t6e /eneral %syc6olo/ical nee3 -or reco/nition
an3 t6e innumera8le -orms t6at reco/nition takes in 3i--erent cultures. 46is is &6y Nuss8aum 3escri8es 6er conce%tion o- t6e /oo3 as a Rt6ick 9a/ue# oneC -or &6ile it inclu3es many con3itions o- -louris6in/C t6ey are eD%resse3 in terms 9a/ue enou/6 to allo& -or cultural 9ariation an3 6ence a9oi3 et6nocentrism. 46is also seems com%ati8le &it6 9an Sta9eren#s lar/ely -a9oura8le commentary on 7ristotle#s an3 73am Smit6#s 3iscussions o- 9irtuesC &6ic6 mostly a8stract -rom cultural 9ariations (9an Sta9erenC 1999). ,e cannot a>oi9

some 'in9 o6 uni>ersalism. Di66erent cultures /ro>i9e 9i66erent norms but this /resu//oses that one o6 the 9istincti>e 6eatures o6 humans is that the) can un9erstan9C internalise or contest theseD o-ten t6rou/6 eD%loitin/
tensions an3 contra3ictions &it6in cultural 3iscoursesC as in t6e case o- t6e tension 8et&een i3eals o- eIuality an3 /en3er ineIualities. 46e 6eminist literatureC inclu3in/ 9an Sta9eren#s o&n &ork on t6e et6ic o- care /resu//oses that all humans are in nee9 o6 care at >arious times in their li>esC al8eit in 3i--erent &ays. ,eo%le are not :ust 8ein/s &6o 6a9e %re-erences an3 make c6oicesC 8ut 8ein/s &6o are 9ulnera8leC an3 3e%en3ent on care. 46us all economies 3e%en3 onC an3 3istri8ute t6e %ro9ision an3 recei%t o- care. *ne o- t6e contri8utions o- t6is literature is to im%ro9e our economic t6eories 8y enric6in/ our un3erstan3in/ o- &6at it is to 8e 6uman.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$0 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ <2@ &in' ( Pri>ate S/here


,omen-s rights 6all 0ithin the /olitical s/here ( the state 0ill be hel9 /oliticall) accountable 6or >iolence committe9 against 0omen <rmstrong 1 (SallyC Sciences S o- 4orontoC
6tt%s=//ts%ace.li8rary.utoronto.ca/8itstream/1+0)/1'(93/1/0U(30!2.%3-)I0
0oreo9erC t6e 8asis o- t6e ri/6t to 6ealt6 nee3s to 8e -ully eD%lore3 to un3erstan3 t6e intent o- t6e aut6ors o- t6e 3ocuments an3 t6e o8li/ations o- t6e states t6at are reIuire3 to im%lement t6em inC -or eDam%leC access to 6ealt6 ser9ices t6at 3eli9er %re9entati9e an3 me3ical care an3 %roacti9e 6ealt6 %olicies t6at contri8ute to &ell 8ein/. Is it t6e ri/6t o- a /irl in 7-/6anistan to 6a9e access to 6ealt6 ser9icesV Is it t6e ri/6t o- Cana3ian sc6ool/irls to re/ain access to %6ysical an3 6ealt6 e3ucationV 7n3 i- so. can any o- t6ose ri/6ts 8e im%lemente3 &it6 current international an3 re/ional 4reatiesV Consi3erin/ t6at most o- t6e 3ocuments &ere &ritten 8y men an3 t6e la& &asn#t -eminiBe3 until a 3eca3e a/o. ,omen-s eE/eriences ha>e been marginalize9 an9 the eE/eriences o6

a9olescent girls ha>e been >irtuall) ignore9. 7o0e>erD in international la0 there is a 9i66erence bet0een State res/onsibilit) an9 State accountabilit)@ :he State is legall) res/onsible but /oliticall) accountable (Cook. 2000). ,omenSs rights in>ariabl) 6a11 in the /olitical s/here. 7s &ellC researc6 con3ucte3 %ost 19)9 on 0omenSs re/ro9ucti>e healthD >iolence against 0omen an9 abortion 0ere eEclu9e9 6rom the 9ocuments. :heir inclusion to9a) is /roblematic because o6 the /o0er o6 6un9amentalist States suc6 as
Sau3i 7ra8iaC IranC ,akistan an3 t6e Latican to 3elay t6e 3e8ate or e9en annul t6e 6ar35&on articles t6at alrea3y eDistC i- t6e 3ocuments are o%ene3 -or 3iscussion.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ ,ar BC Patriarch)


,ar re/ro9uces /atriarch) ( creates cultural crises o6 gen9er an9 6orces the gen9ering o6 e>er) eE/erience ,or'man $2 (46omC ,oli Sci S o- Ne& >runs&ickC OCISS ,a%er no. 31C %. !C Aanuary 199(C
6tt%=//&&&.yorku.ca/yciss/%u8lications/*,315"orkman.%3-)I0 "it6 the loosening o6 the %ositi9ist/Realist hol9 on international relations an3 t6e simultaneous rise
o- -eminist analysisC intellectual s%ace 6as 8een create3 to a33ress &ar in terms o- t6e social relations o- %o&er 8et&een men an3 &omen. 46is 3e9elo%ment %laces &ar &it6in a 8roa3er %atriarc6al matriDC an3 has hel/e9 to 9e>elo/ an un9erstan9ing o6 0ar as one (o89iously im%ortant) mani-estation o- /atriarchal >iolence. 46is 3e9elo%ment also 6as %romote3 a more unassumin/ c6aracter &it6 res%ect to t6e su8:ect matter itsel-. :he concerns lies less 0ith 0ar6are or its 9estructi>e /otential (alt6ou/6 t6is concern remains) than it 9oes 0ith the relationshi/ bet0een 0ar6are an9 the o//ression o6 0omen . ,rimary concernC t6at isC rests less &it6 &ar t6an &it6 t6e re%ro3uction o- %atriarc6y. 46is %a%er a33resses t6e /en3er critiIue o- &ar 3irectly. It ar/ues t6at t6e /en3er critiIue o- &ar 6as racke3 enou/6 to 8e a8le to i3enti-y a %reliminary t6esis re/ar3in/ &ar an3 t6e re%ro3uction o- %atriarc6y. :he altere9 eE/eriences an9 /ractices o6 0arD combine9 0ith the sometimes 9ramatic mo9i6ications in gen9er re/resentations (t6rou/6 %ro%a/an3aC literature etcetera)C are consi9erable. ,ar /ro9uces cultural crises o6 gen9erC es%ecially as it t6ro&s t6e 6istorical contin/ency an3 cultural ar8itrariness o/en3ere3 constructs into relie-. 46ere is t6e su//estion t6at t6rou/6 &ar tra3itional /en3ere3 constructs can mo3ulate an3 un&in3. 7n emer/in/ sense o- cultural crisis re9ol9in/ aroun3 /en3er s6i-ts ty%ically accom%anies 8ot6 &ar an3 %ost5&ar %erio3s. In3ee3C muc6 ot6e initial researc6 on /en3er an3 &arC in 9ie& o- t6e eDtensi9e s6i-ts in re%resentations an3 %ractices 3urin/ &arC 3irectly or in3irectly eD%lores t6e emanci%atory e--ect o- &ar u%on &omen. 4o t6e eDtent t6at &ar is contin/ent u%on suc6 /en3ere3 constructsC constructs t6at t6e %ractice itsel- a%%ears to t6reaten an3 en3an/erC t6e relations6i% 8et&een &ar an3 /en3er mi/6t 8e sai3 to 8e %ara3oDical. 46e %ara3oDical 3ynamic 8et&een /en3er an3 &arC 6o&e9erC is so-tene3 8y t6e %ro-un3ity o- t6e links 8et&een &ar an3 %atriarc6y. :he

gen9ering o6 eE/eriences 9uring 0arD along 0ith the restoration o6 tra9itional gen9ere9 constructs a6ter 0arD more than com/ensate 6or an) 0ar; in9uce9 sun9ering o6 the /atriarchal ta/estr) . "6ile t6e %ractice o- 0ar su//ests t6at it mi/6t encoura/e a ru%ture in t6e /en3ere3 -a8ric o- societyC it o>er0helmingl) contributes to /atriarchal re/ro9uction. Uuestions oriente3 aroun3 t6e emanci%atory %otential o- &ar &6ere &omen are concerne3C t6ere-oreC
run t6e risk o- losin/ a %ers%ecti9e on t6e o9erall role o- mo3ern &ar-are in t6e re%ro3uction o- &omenNs o%%ression.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ ,ar BC Patriarch)


Gen9er o//ression 9oes not cause 0arD it-s the other 0a) aroun9 Gol9stein 1 (Aos6uaC Int#l Rel ,ro- S 7merican C 2001C "ar an3 2en3erC %. !12)
;irstC /eace acti>ists 6ace a 9ilemma in thin'ing about causes o6 0ar an9 0or'ing 6or /eace. 8an) /eace scholars an9 acti>ists su//ort the a//roachD Gi6 )ou 0ant /eaceD 0or' 6or ?ustice.F 46enC i6 one belie>es that seEism contributes to 0ar one can 0or' 6or gen9er ?ustice s/eci6icall) (%er6a%s amon/ ot6ers) in or9er to /ursue /eace. :his a//roach 8rin/s strate/ic allies to t6e %eace mo9ement (&omenC la8orC minorities)C 8ut rests on the assum/tion that in?ustices cause 0ar. :he e>i9ence in t6is 8ook suggests that causalit) runs at least as strongl) the other 0a). ,ar is not a /ro9uct o6 ca/italismD im/erialismD gen9erD innate aggressionD or an) other single causeD alt6ou/6 all o- t6ese in-luence &ars# out8reaks an3 outcomes. RatherD 0ar has in /art 6uele9 an9 sustaine9 these an9 other in?ustices.$ SoDFi6 )ou 0ant /eaceD 0or' 6or /eace.F In9ee9D i6 )ou 0ant ?ustice (/en3er an3 ot6ers)C 0or' 6or /eace. Causality 3oes not run :ust u%&ar3 t6rou/6 t6e le9els o- analysisC -rom ty%es o- in3i9i3ualsC societiesC an3 /o9ernments u% to &ar. It runs 3o&n&ar3 too. $nloe su//ests t6at changes in attitu9es to0ar9s 0ar an9 the militar) ma) be the most im/ortant 0a) to Gre>erse 0omen-s o//ression.F 46e 3ilemma is t6at %eace &ork -ocuse3 on :ustice 8rin/s to t6e %eace mo9ement ener/yC alliesC an3 moral /roun3in/C yetC in li/6t o- t6is 8ook#s e9i3enceC t6e em%6asis on in:ustice as t6e main cause o- &ar seems to 8e em%irically ina3eIuate. Kmen o- 7-ricaK as a /rou%V) are seen as a grou/ %recisely because the) are /enerally 9e/en9ent an9 o//resse9D the anal)sis o6 s/eci6ic historical 9i66erences becomes im/ossibleD because realit) is al0a)s a//arentl) structure9 b) 9i>isionsMt&o mutually eDclusi9e an3 :ointly eD6austi9e /rou%sC t6e 9ictims an3 t6e o%%ressors. .ere the sociological is substitute9 6or the biological in or3erC 6o&e9erC to create t6e sameMa unit) o6 0omen. 46usD it is not t6e 3escri%ti9e %otential o- /en3er 3i--erenceC 8ut t6e /ri>ilege9 /ositioning an9 eE/lanator) /otential o6 gen9er 9i66erence as the origin o6 o//ression that I Huestion. In usin/ K&omen o- 7-ricaK (as an alrea3y constitute3 /rou% o- o%%resse3 %eo%les) as a cate/ory o- analysisC Cutru-elli 3enies any 6istorical s%eci-icity to t6e location o- &omen as su8or3inateC %o&er-ulC mar/inaiC centralC or ot6er&iseC 9is5a59is %articular social an3 %o&er net&orks. ,omen are ta'en as a uni6ie9 JPo0erlessJ grou/ /rior to the anal)sis in Huestion. :husD it is then merel) a matter o6 s/eci6)ing the conteEt a6ter the 6act. K"omenK are no& %lace3 in t6e conteDt o- t6e -amiiyC or in t6e &ork%laceC or &it6in reli/ious net&orksC almost as i- t6ese systems eDiste3 outsi3e t6e relations o- &omen &it6 ot6er &omenC an3 &omen &it6 men. :he /roblem 0ith this anal)tic strateg) is that it assumes men an9 0omen are alrea9) constitute9 as seEual;/olitical sub?ects /rior to their entr) into the arena o6 social relations. *nly i- &e su8scri8e to t6is assum%tion is it %ossi8le to un3ertake analysis &6ic6 looks at t6e Ke--ectsK o- kins6i% structuresC colonialismC or/aniBation o- la8orC etc.C on &omenC &6o are alrea3y 3e-ine3 as a /rou% a%%arently 8ecause o- s6are3 3e%en3enciesC 8ut ultimately 8ecause o- t6eir /en3er. >ut &omen are %ro3uce3 t6rou/6 t6ese 9ery relations as &ell as 8ein/ im%licate3 in -ormin/ t6ese relations. 7s 0ic6elle Rosal3o states= K . . . 0omanSs /lace in human social li6e is not in an) 9irect sense a /ro9uct o6 the things she 9oes (or e9en lessC a -unction o- &6atC 8iolo/icallyC s6e is) but the meaning her acti>ities acHuire through concrete social interactions.KK :hat 0omen mother in a >ariet) o6 societies is not as signi6icant as the >alue attache9 to mothering in these societies . 46e 3istinction 8et&een t6e act omot6erin/ an3 t6e status attac6e3 to it is a 9ery im%ortant oneMone t6at nee3s to 8e ma3e an3 analyBe3 conteDtually.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ State Goo9


!ritiHue groun9e9 in 9iscourse 6ails ( it can-t un9ermine larger /o0er structures. Aro0n 1("en3yC %ro- ,olitical Science C >erkeleyC Politics /ut of 0istor+C %. 3'53))A0
>ut 6ere t6e %ro8lem /oes &ell 8eyon3 su%er-iciality o- %olitical analysis or com%ensatory /estures in t6e -ace o- -elt im%otence. < moralisticC /estural /olitics o-ten ina9>ertentl) becomes a regressi>e /olitics. 8oralizing con9emnation o- t6e National $n3o&ment -or t6e 7rts 6or not 6un9ing /oliticall) ra9ical artC o6 the *.S. militar) or t6e "6ite .ouse 6or not embracing o%en homoseEualit) or sanctionin/ /ay marria/eC or e9en o- t6e National Institutes o- .ealt6 -or not treating as a /olitical /riorit) the li>es o6 7IU tar/et /o/ulations (/ay menC %rostitutesC an3 3ru/ a33icts) con>e)s at 8est nai>e %olitical eE/ectations an3 at &orstC %atently con-use3 ones. ;or this con9emnation im%licitly 6igures the state (an3 ot6er mainstream institutions) as i6 it 9i9 not ha>e s/eci6ic /olitical an9 economic in>estmentsD as i6 it 0ere not the co9i6ication o6 >arious 9ominant social /o0ersC but 0asC rat6erC a momentaril) misgui9e9 /arent 0ho 6orgot her /romise to treat all her chil9ren the same 0a). 46ese eE/ressions o- moralistic outra/e im%licitly cast the state as i- it &ere or coul3 8e a 3ee%ly 9emocratic an9 non>iolent institutionJ con9erselyC it ren9ers ra3ical artC ra3ical social mo>ementsC an3 9arious -rin/e %o%ulations as i6 the) 0ere not /otentiall) sub>ersi>eC re%resentin/ a si/ni-icant %olitical c6allen/e to t6e norms o- t6e re/imeC 8ut rat6er &ere 8eni/n entities an3 %o%ulations entirely a%%ro%riate -or t6e state to eIually %rotectC -un3C an3 %romote. .ereC moralism#s o8:ection to %olitics as a 3omain o- %o&er an3 6istory rat6er t6an %rinci%le is not sim%ly irritatin/= it results in a trou8lin/ an3 con-use3 %olitical stance. It mislea9s about the nature o6 /o0erD the stateD an9 ca/italismJ it mislea3s a8out t6e nature o- o%%ressi9e social -orcesC an3 a8out t6e sco%e o- t6e %ro:ect o- trans-ormation reIuire3 8y serious am8itions -or :ustice. Such ob6uscation is not t6e aim o- t6e moralists 8ut 6alls 0ithin that more general /ac'age o6 9is/lace9 e66ects conseHuent to a 6elt )et unac'no0le9ge9 im/otence. It signals 9isa>o0e9 9es/air o>er the /ros/ects 6or more 6ar;reaching trans6ormations.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ State Goo9


Aene6its 6or 0omen ha>e long been achie>e9 through the normati>e 9iscourse o6 /olitical structures Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % )0)I0
"omen 6a9e not 8een stran/ers to cam%ai/ns -or an3 stru//les &it6 li8eral state 3emocracies. FeministsC es%ecially -eminist le/al acti9istsC ha>e long /artici/ate9 in an9 sought bene6its 6or all 0omen 0ithin the /olitical an9 ?u9icial structures o- t6e nite3 StateC Cana3a an3 t6e li8eral states o- "estern $uro%e. 46e recent cele8ration o- t6e )'t6 anni9ersary o- t6e -e3eral -emale su--ra/e in t6e nite3 States is a remin3er o- t6e lon/e9ity an3 %ersistence o- &omen#s 3eman3s -or -ull %olitical ri/6ts in t6is countryC &6ile t6e re%eate3 3e-eat o- a -e3eral constitutional $Iual Ri/6ts 7men3ment ins%ires continue3 acti9ism. Success6ul

cam/aigns 6or anti;9iscrimination legislation an9 litigation o6 gen9er;eHuit) claims 0ere signi6icant a9>ances 6or 0omen achie>e9 through the normati>e 9iscourses an3 %u8lic institutions c6aracteristic o6 liberal 9emocracies. "omen also 6a9e stru//le3 in Sout6 7-rica an3 in t6e -ormer So9iet 8loc to secure 8asic 3emocratic /uarantees. :he continue9 integrit) o6 the state s)stems through 0hich these aims ha>e been met is a matter to0ar9 0hich 0omen cannot be in9i66erentC t6eoretically or ot6er&ise.

Greater engagementD not re?ectionD o6 the mo9ern state is 'e) to sol>e Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % 9+)I0 Feminist /olitical theorists a9>ocate stronger mo9els o6 grou/ re/resentation an3 %artici%ation as a structural
res%onse to t6is %ro8lem. 46ese %ro%osals 3ra& si/ni-icant ins%iration -rom t6e role o- consciousness5raisin/ in -eminist %olitical %ractice. :he intense in>ol>ement these /ro/osals reHuire o6 citizens C to/et6er &it6 t6e locally 8ase3 institutions u%on &6ic6 t6ey 3e%en3C challenge the 3istance3C 6ormalize9 9ecision;ma'ing that 6lattens 0omen-s /artici/ation an9 6urthers the 6alse uni>ersalism o6 the interests re/resente9 in the /ublic s/here . 4o t6at eDtentC

6eminists ha>e /artici/ate9 in the localizing 9iscourse characteristic o6 man) mo9ern attac's on the liberal state. ;urt6erD 6eminists o6ten theorize G0omenF as a 9istinct /olitical classC 8ot6 &it6in eDistin/ state 8or3ers an3 irres%ecti9e o- state citiBens6i%sD thus a9>ocating a 6orm o6 nationalist i9entit) in9e/en9ent o6 territorial a66iliation. ,omen-s interestsC an3 &omen#s commitments an3 con-lictsC t6en are alrea9) 9ee/l) 0o>en into the 0eb o6 contem/orar) contests o>er the nature an9 6uture o6 the liberal state .

,or'ing 0ithin 9ominant institutions sub>erts 9escri/ti>e 9ichotomiesD to inclu9e 0omen Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % 102)I0
46is &i3e5an/le %resentation ine9ita8ly -or-eits t6e com%leDity an3 nuance o- a more ti/6tly -ocuse3 an3 t6orou/6ly ren3ere3 account o- a sin/le as%ect o- &omen#s %u8lic or %ri9ate eD%erience. Oet I 6o%e to recou% t6at loss 8y t6e /ain in t6eoretical %ers%ecti9e accesse3 8y t6e 8roa3er 9ie&. 7s Carole ,ateman 6as su//este3C such a 6rame0or' ma) also be able to 9econstruct the 9escri/ti>e 9ichotomies that ensnare our theoretical imaginations an9 tell lies about the con9itions o6 0omen-s real li>es . 46e reco/nition that 0omen are situate9 in one 6orm or another Gas 0omenF in 8ot6 %ri9ate an3 %u8lic s%6eres alrea9) begins to

un9ermine 6eminism-s t)/ical un9erstan9ing o6 0omen-s central /olitical challenge as the mo>ement 6rom 0holesale eEclusion to /ublic inclusion. Carole ,ateman eD%lains= E7 -eminist strate/y t6at calls -or t6e inte/ration into citiBens6i% o&omen#s 3istincti9e contri8ution Y rests on t6e assum%tion t6at R&omen# an3 R3i--erence# nee3 to 8e 8rou/6t into t6e %olitical or3er. :he /ertinent Huestion is assume9 to be 0hether seEual 9i66erence is /oliticall) rele>antD or ho0 P9i66erence- coul9 be rele>ant. :hus the >ital Huestion is o>erloo'e9 o6 ho0 to sub>ert an9 change the manner in 0hich 0omen ha>e alrea9) been incor/orate9C an3 so to trans-orm t6e relation 8et&een ReIuality# (men) an3 R3i--erence# (&omen).F 46e -act that the /ublic s/here alrea9) inclu9es 0omenC e9en i- not as -ullC sel-53eterminin/ citiBensC suggests that the matter o6 inclusion is alrea9) more com/licate9 than a single 6ocus on 0omen-s relegation to the /ri>ate s/here might im/l). ConseIuentlyC to t6e eDtent t6at a &i3e5an/le %ers%ecti9e can account -or t6e 3i--erential treatment o- &omen &it6in an3 across t6e
%u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eresC t6e more com%re6ensi9e t6e analysis o- &omen#s %olitical situation.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$1 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

== Feminist Juris/ru9ence==

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$2 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "1/%#
1. :he GrightsF the a66irmati>e /romotes are a 6aLa9e ( the) /er/etuate masculine hierarchies b) sustaining the /ublic//ri>ate 9ichotom) that 'ee/s >ictims o6 >iolence unhear9 4-7are $$ ( rsula 7C LL.>. an3 LL.0. in .uman Ri/6tsC 1iscrimination an3 $mer/ency La& -rom t6e UueenNs
ni9ersity >el-astC ERealiBin/ .uman Ri/6ts -or "omenFC 0use) 7 num8er o- reasons 6a9e 8een %ut -or&ar3 to eD%lain &6y t6e international 6uman ri/6ts community 6as 8een slo& to res%on3 to &omenNs /lo8al 3isa39anta/e. <t the heart o6 the /roblem is the eEclusion o6 0omenSs >oices 6rom the /ublic 0orl9. 0o3ern 6uman ri/6ts la& o&es muc6 to t6e le/acy o- national %ressure -or ci9il an3 %olitical ri/6ts at t6e en3 o- t6e ei/6teent6 an3 early nineteent6 centuries. <s 0omen struggle9 6or access to the /ublic 0orl9 9uring this timeD menSs >oices 0ere in the >anguar9 6or /olitical rights. 10 46e em%6asis on ci9il an3 %olitical ri/6ts re-lecte3 manNs 3esire to re/ulate 6is relations6i% to t6e state an3 to set t6e 8oun3aries o- %ermissi8le state inter-erence in 6is li-e. 11 8ale hegemon) o>er /ublic li6e G$n3 ,a/e 3((H an9 institutions meant that rights came to be 9e6ine9 b) men. 12 :he /resent hierarch) 0ithin human rights la0C &6ic6 /i9es /reater attention to ci9il an3 %olitical ri/6ts as o%%ose3 to economicC social an3 cultural ri/6tsC can be /ercei>e9 as a mani6estation o6 the continuing 9ominance men ha>e o>er the /rocess o6 9e6ining the content o6 rights. 7s .ilary C6arles&ort6 commentsC rights are J9e6ine9 b) the criterion o6 0hat men 6ear 0ill ha//en to them.J 13 46e eDclusion o- &omen -rom t6e %u8lic s%6ere cannot sim%ly 8e note3 as a matter o- 6istorical recor3 8ecause the im/act o6 t6is 6istoric eEclusion o6 0omen continues to be 6elt in the un9erre/resentation o6 0omen in those /ublic 9ecision ma'ing bo9ies o6 the global communit) that 6rame the 9imensions o6 human rights. 1! "6ere &omenNs
9oices are 6ear3 in international -oraC t6ey are 6ear3 in -ora 3esi/ne3 es%ecially to 3eal G$n3 ,a/e 3()H &it6 &omenNs issues an3 not &it6in t6e Kmainstream.K 1' 46is 6as le3 to t6e c6ar/e t6at &omenNs issues are K/6ettoiBe3K &it6in t6e nite3 Nations system55a c6ar/e t6at is su%%orte3 8y t6e -act t6at t6ose international 8o3ies res%onsi8le -or &omenNs issues 6a9e lon/ su--ere3 -rom more limite3 resources an3 &eaker en-orcement %roce3ures t6an mainstream 6uman ri/6ts 8o3ies. 46e eDclusion o- &omenNs 9oices -rom 3e-inin/ t6e content o- 6uman ri/6ts 3iscourse 6as in turn meant t6at 6uman ri/6ts la& 6as e9ol9e3 alon/ a /en3ere3 K-ault5lineK t6at 3istin/uis6es 8et&een t6e %u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eres -or t6e %ur%ose o- le/al re/ulation. :he essence o6 the 6eminist critiHue o6 human rights la0 lies in the 0a) in 0hich it me9iates the /ublic an9 /ri>ate s/heres . 7lon/ t6ese linesC t&o main ar/uments 6a9e emer/e3. 1( *ne ar/ument su//ests t6at t6e -ailure o- t6e 6uman ri/6ts system to reac6 &omen results -rom t6e 3e-erence it maintains to&ar3 t6e %ri9ate s%6ere556uman ri/6ts la& %ri9ile/es t6e %u8lic &orl3 &6ile t6e %ri9ate s%6ere is consi3ere3 outsi3e t6e sco%e o- le/al re/ulation. 1) *t6ers ar/ue t6at t6e myt6 o- noninter9ention in t6e %ri9ate s%6ereC &6ic6 6as /ro&n u% in

human rights 9iscourseC sim%ly mas's the gen9ere9 a//lication o6 human rights la0. 1+ .uman ri/6ts la&C accor3in/ to t6is secon3 ar/umentC does attem%t to re/ulate t6e %ri9ate s%6ereC 8ut 6as sim%ly -aile3 to 3o so in res%ect o- issues t6at %articularly touc6 &omenNs li9es. In eit6er caseC 8ot6 t6eories ar/ue t6at 0omenSs issues ha>e not been ta'en seriousl) b) the human rights communit). 19 46e eDtent to &6ic6 t6e
%u8lic/%ri9ate 3ic6otomy 6as s6a%e3 t6e 6uman ri/6ts e3i-ice is mani-est in t6e t6eory o- state res%onsi8ility -or 6uman ri/6ts a8uses. >ecause 6uman ri/6ts la& is concerne3 &it6 re/ulatin/ t6e eDercise o- %u8lic %o&erC it -ollo&s t6at only t6e state can 8e 6el3 res%onsi8le -or 6uman ri/6ts a8uses. 46ose a8uses committe3 8y %ri9ate actors &it6in t6e %ri9ate s%6ere 3o not attract t6e attention an3 s6ame o- t6e 6uman ri/6ts community. *- courseC &omen o%erate across t6e %u8lic an3 G$n3 ,a/e 3(+H %ri9ate s%6eres an3 t6e 8oun3aries o- t6ose &orl3s 3o not remain -iDe3C 8ut t6e im%ortance o- t6e 3istinction in 6uman ri/6ts la& 8et&een %u8lic an3 %ri9ate is t6at -or many &omen t6e %u8lic s%6ere 6as scant si/ni-icance to t6eir li9es. 20 :he maintenance o6 this /ublic//ri>ate 9ichotom) 0or's Jto mu66le an9 o6ten

com/letel) silence the >oices o6 0omen.K 21 0oreo9erC it is an Karti-icial 3i9i3e.K 22 ;or as Cat6erine 0ac<innon 6as ar/ue3C JNtOo act as i6 Nthe state is all there is to /o0erO /ro9uces an eEce/tionall) ina9eHuate 9e6inition 6or human rights 0hen so much o6 the secon9 class status o6 0omen . . . is 9one b) men to 0omen /rior to eE/ress state in>ol>ement.J 23

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$3 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "2/%#
2. 8ilitaristic >iolence 9ue to /atriarchal >alues ine>itabl) results in eEtinction S/retna' 5$ (C6arleneC 07 in $n/lis6 at >erkeleyC E$D%osin/ Nuclear ,6allaciesC %. (0)
"omen an3 men can li9e to/et6er an3 can relate to ot6er societies in any num8er o- cultural con-i/urationsC 8ut i/norance o- t6e con-i/urations t6emsel9es locks a %o%ulace into 8lin3 a36erence to t6e status Iuo. In t6e nuclear a/eC suc6 uneDamine3 acce%tance may 8e -atal as cerZtain cultural assum%tions in our o&n society are %us6in/ us closer an3 closer to &ar. Since a ma:or &ar coul3 no& easily 8rin/ on massi9e anni6ilation oalmost unt6inka8le %ro%ortionsC &6y are 3iscussions in our national -orums a33ressin/ t6is ma3ness o- t6e nuclear arms race limite3 to matters o- 6ar3&are an3 statisticsV 7 more com%re6ensi9e analysis is nee3e35 unlessC as t6e 3oomsayers claimC &e collecti9ely 6ar8or a 3eat6 &is6 an3 no not really &ant to look closely at 3ynamics %ro%ellin/ us stea3ily to&ar3 t6e 8rink o- eDtinction. :he cause o6 nuclear arms /roli6eration is militarism. ,hat is the cause o6 militarismT :he tra9itional militarist eE/lanation is that the Gmasters o6 0arF in the militar)in9ustrial com/leE /ro6it enormousl) 6rom 9e6ense contracts an9 other 0ar /re/arations. < ca/italist econom) /erio9icall) reHuires the economic boon that large;scale go>ernment s/en9ingD ca/itol in>estmentD an9 0or'er sacri6ice /ro9uce 9uring a crisis o6 0ar. In a33itionC 7merican arme3 -orcesC &6et6er nuclear or con9entionalC are statione3 &orl3&i3e to %rotect t6e status IuoC &6ic6 reIuires 9ast an3 interlockin/ 7merican cor%orate interests. Suck an economic analysis alone in ina3eIuateC as t6e recent res%onses to t6e nuclear arms race t6at i/nore t6e cultural orientation o- t6e nations in9ol9e3= :he) are /atriarchies. 8ilitarism an9 0ar6are are continual 6eatures o6 /atriarchal societ) because the) re6lect an9 instill /atriarchal >alues an9 6ul6ill essential nee9s o6 such a s)stem. <c'no0le9ging the conteEt o6 /atriarchal conce/tualizations that 6ee9 militarism is 6irst ste/ to0ar9 re9ucing their im/act an9 /reser>ing li6e on .arth.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$5 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Juris/ru9ence 1 ! "%/%#
%. :he alternati>e is to >ote negati>e. Re?ecting to act on masculine conce/tions o6 the 0orl9 allo0s 6or us to utilize a gen9ere9 anal)sis on Huestions o6 rights an9 >iolence <mirthalingam 1 (<umaralin/amC 7ssociate ,ro-essor an3 1irector o- International ,ro/ramsC ;aculty o- La&
an3 7ssociateC 7sia Researc6 InstituteC National ni9ersity o- Sin/a%oreC E"omen#s Ri/6tsC International NormsC an3 1omestic Liolence= 7sian ,ers%ecti9esF) 1omestic 9iolence 6as 8een on t6e /lo8al a/en3a -or se9eral 3eca3esC an3 in t6e last t&oC 6as 8een t6e su8:ect o- consi3era8le re-orm acti9ity in 7siaC %articularly in Sin/a%ore an3 0alaysiaC &6ic6 6a9e enacte3 le/islation to 3eal &it6 t6e %ro8lem.1 "6ile 3omestic 9iolence a--ects 9arious %arties (inclu3in/ %artnersC 2 %arentsC c6il3ren an3 eDten3e3 -amily)C t6is article is limite3 to %artner 9iolence an3 ar/ues -or an en6ance3 /en3er analysis o- t6e %ro8lem in t6is re/ion. 46e e9i3ence su//ests t6at 3omestic 9iolence 3is%ro%ortionately a--ects &omen as 9ictims. 46e "orl3 .ealt6 *r/aniBationC in its -irst "orl3 Re%ort on Liolence an3 .ealt6 in 2002C re9eale3 t6at 8et&een !0 %ercent an3 )0 %ercent o- &omen &6o 3ie 3ue to 6omici3e are kille3 8y current or -ormer %artners.3 46e N S%ecial Ra%%orteur on Liolence 7/ainst "omen 6as 3e-ine3 3omestic 9iolence in /en3er terms as E9iolence %er%etrate3 in t6e 3omestic s%6ere &6ic6 tar/ets &omen 8ecause o- t6eir role &it6in t6at s%6ere or as 9iolence &6ic6 is inten3e3 to im%actC 3irectly an3 ne/ati9elyC on &omen &it6in t6e 3omestic s%6ere.F+:he signi6icance o6 using gen9er as a basis o6 anal)sis is that it 6orces a /ara9igmatic shi6t a0a) 6rom 9omestic >iolence anal)sis best ca/ture9 b) the 6ollo0ing o8ser9ation= EInstea9 o6 as'ing 0h) he battersD there is a ten9enc) to as' 0h) she sta)s.F1 < gen9ere9 anal)sis com/els us instea9 to Huestion 0h) men resort to >iolence an9 0h) >iolence against 0omen occurs an9 is tolerate9 in man) societies. Restructuring the 9ebate in this 0a) is >ital 6or meaning6ul legal re6ormD es/eciall) 6rom the /ers/ecti>es o6 criminal ?ustice an9 human rights .( :he 'e) to un9erstan9ing 3omestic >iolence 6rom a gen9er /ers/ecti>e is to a//reciate that the root cause o6 >iolence lies in an uneHual /o0er relationshi/ bet0een men an9 0omen that is com/oun9e9 in male 9ominate9 societies. 7s note3 recentlyC EUiolence is . . . a sign o6 the struggle 6or the maintenance o6 certain 6antasies o6 i9entit) an9 /o0er. Uiolence emerges C in t6is analysisC as 9ee/l) gen9ere9 an9 seEualise9.F) In many :uris3ictionsC an3 %articularly in 7siaC 3omestic 9iolence is seen as a %ri9ate matter an3 consi3erations o- -amilyC cultureC or reli/ion ten3 to %re9ail o9er &omen#s interests. 46is article seeks to %romote le/al re-orm in t6is area (8ot6 in terms o- su8:ect matter an3 t6e re/ion) 8y a33ressin/ international normsC /en3er analysisC an3 transcultural 9alues. Section II o- t6is article analyBes t6e recently enacte3 3omestic 9iolence la&s in 0alaysia an3 Sin/a%ore. "6ile t6e legal re6orms in 8ot6 :uris3ictions 6a9e 8een %ro/ressi9eC t6ey ha>e also been hin9ere9 b) /ercei>e9 cultural constraints an9 an ina9eHuate a//reciation o6 the gen9ere9 nature o6 3omestic >iolence. Section III 3ra&s on 6eminist theories o6 -amily 9iolence an3 international human rights 9iscourse to create an alternati>e narrati>e that can better a9>ance legal re6orm in the region. >y 3e-inin/ -amily 9iolence 8ot6 as a /en3er issue an3 a 6uman ri/6ts issueC t6e locus o- 3omestic 9iolence is s6i-te3 a&ay -rom t6e %ri9ate 3omain to t6e %u8licC a critical ste% in t6e 7sian conteDt. 46e t6eoretical an3 %6iloso%6ical ar/uments are 3esi/ne3 to %ro9i3e t6e tools &it6 &6ic6 to c6allen/e certain 7sian assum%tions a8out 3omestic 9iolenceC -amily an3 cultural 9aluesC as &ell as t6e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3i9i3e t6at 3e-ines t6e 8oun3aries o- State re/ulation. 46is article -inally su//ests t6at 7sian 9alues are not incom%ati8le &it6 6uman ri/6ts 3iscourse in /eneral or &omen#s ri/6ts in %articular.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


$$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
:he state is inherentl) /atriarchal an9 creates a 6aLa9e o6 granting rights to assuage 0omen an9 continue their >ictimization. Rho9e $+ (1e8ora6 LC ,ro-essor o- La& at Stan-or3 ni9ersityC E;eminism an3 t6e stateF) ,A
< -inal line o- 6eminist critiHue challenges liberalismSs 3e-erence to in3i9i3ual %re-erences an3 its insistence that the state remain neutral Ge11+9H 8et&een suc6 %re-erences an3 8et&een com%etin/ 9isions o- t6e /oo3 li-e. Li8eral -rame&orks -reIuently take &omenNs o8:ecti9es as /i9en an3 assume t6at &omen can enlist t6e state on t6eir 8e6al- t6rou/6 /rou% le9era/e in 3emocratic %rocesses. n33 Oet to an im%ortant eDtentC &omenNs %re-erences are socially constructe3 an3 constraine3. :he state 9oes not sim/l) res/on9 to eE/resse9 9esiresI it /la)s an acti>e role in legitimatingD su//ressingD or re9irecting them. <ttem/ts to challenge ineHualit) through con>entional 9emocratic measures 6all short 0hen subor9inate grou/s a9a/t or accommo9ate their /re6erences to the uneHual o//ortunities a>ailable . n3! 7s <at6y ;er/uson %uts itC liberalism J/rocee9s as i6 0omen 0ere alrea9) 6ree . . . &6en t6e entire -orce o- t6e 6eminist critiHue is to sho0 /recisel) the o//osite. ,art o- t6e %erniciousness o- -emininity in our society is t6at it %ro3uces %eo%le &6o claim to c6oose &6at t6ey are su%%ose3 to &ant.K n3' Contrary to con9entional &is3omC most >ictims o6 9iscrimination 9o not i9enti6) themsel>es as such. In3i9i3uals /enerally &ant to 8elie9e in a K:ust &orl3KJ t6ey %re-er to a9oi3 t6e 6ostilityC as &ell as t6e 3iminis6e3 sense o- e--icacy an3 sel-5esteemC t6at ackno&le3/in/ oneNs 9ictimiBation ty%ically entails. n3(

:he state ine>itabilit) mani/ulates la0s in a masculine /ers/ecti>e. Rho9e $+ (1e8ora6 LC ,ro-essor o- La& at Stan-or3 ni9ersityC E;eminism an3 t6e stateF) ,A
In many le-t -eminist accountsC the state is a /atriarchal institution in the sense that it re6lects an9 institutionalizes male 9ominance. 8en control /ositions o6 o--icial /o0er an9 menSs interests 9etermine ho0 that /o0er is eEercise9. 7ccor3in/ to Cat6arine 0ac<innonC the stateSs in>ocation o6 neutralit) an9 ob?ecti>it) ensures thatD JNtOhose 0ho ha>e 6ree9oms li'e eHualit)D libert)D /ri>ac) an9 s/eech sociall) 'ee/ them legall)D 6ree o6 go>ernmental intrusion.K n1' In t6is 9ie&C Jthe state /rotects male /o0er Nb)O a//earing to /rohibit its eEcesses 0hen necessar) to its normalization. K n1( SoC -or eDam%leC to t6e eDtent t6at a8ortion -unctions Kto -acilitate male seDual access to &omenC access to a8ortion &ill 8e controlle3 8y Na man or 46e 0an.NK n1)

:he state marginalizes 6eminist /ers/ecti>es an9 acts arrogantl) on their behal6 Fellmeth 2' (7aron ga9ierC >.7. in Social Sciences -rom t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E;eminism an3
International La&= 46eoryC 0et6o3olo/yC an3 Su8stanti9e Re-ormF) ,A Some 6eminists also criticiBe state so9erei/nty on %ractical /roun3s. 46ey claim that the state cannot re/resent 0omen-s nee9s on an international le>el because 0omen are not re/resente9 a9eHuatel) at the state le>el.!1 *89iouslyC t6is %ro8lem is 8est a33resse3 8y some6o& increasin/ eIual re%resentation in t6e state 6alls o- %o&er. *t6ers ar/ue t6at the state re/resents a male conce/t o6 autonom) an9 9isconnecte9nessD an9 9oes not re6lect the 6emale-s >ision o6 hersel6 as Gconnecte9 to others through a 0eb o6 relationshi/s.F!2 46is 9ie& a39ances t6e eDtreme %ro%osition t6at men generall) 9o not >alue an9 i9enti6) 0ith human relationshi/s as much as 0omenD an9 ta'es issue 0ith the ra9ical 6eminist notion that men an9 0omen are not 6un9amentall) 9i66erent . 7 -inal :usti-ication -or a8olis6in/ state so9erei/nty relates to arme3 con-lictJ E%u8licF international con-licts an3 E%ri9ateF internal con-licts 8ot6 6arm &omen at least eIually. 46e %u8lic/%ri9ate 3istinction sim%ly 3oes not re-lect &omen#s actual eD%eriences o- &ar. !3

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


100 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ; State
:he rights o6 GeHualit)F a//ortione9 to us b) the state 6ail to ac'no0le9ge the source o6 0omen-s eEclusion an9 there6ore maintain it Sn)9er % (0oseC La& S o- ConnecticutC -e.uconn.e3u/3ocuments/$ssayP20Connections/20035
200(/Sny3er.%3-)I0 although our legal s)stem contains la0s that ensure eHualit) bet0een men an9 0omenD these la0s 9o not /er6orm the 6unction 6or 0hich the) are inten9e9C because the) em/lo) a conce/tion o6 eHualit) that is biase9 in 6a>or o6 male 9ominance . 4ur s)stem concei>es o6 eHualit) as a state o6 SamenessC in &6ic6 males an3 -emales are /rante3 i3entical ri/6ts &it6
In K4o&ar3s a ;eminist Auris%ru3enceCK 0ac<innon ar/ues t6at res%ect to a situation. Corres%on3in/lyC ineIuality is construe3 as a state o- 3i--erence. *n t6is Ksameness/3i--erenceK conce%tion oeIualityC males an3 -emales in to3ayNs society are eIualC i.e.C t6e la& /uarantees t6em t6e same ri/6ts. .o&e9erC 0ac<innon 8elie9es t6at this is eHualit) in name onl)C t6at 0omen 9o not ha>e true eHualit)D an3 t6us t6at t6ere is somet6in/ &ron/ &it6 our /en3er eIuality la&s (23+5!2). o- 3i--erence. *n t6is Ksameness/3i--erenceK conce%tion o- eIualityC males an3 -emales in to3ayNs society are eIualC i.e.C t6e la& /uarantees t6em t6e same ri/6ts. .o&e9erC 0ac<innon 8elie9es t6at t6is is eIuality in name onlyC t6at &omen 3o not 6a9e true eIualityC an3 t6us t6at t6ere is somet6in/ &ron/ &it6 our /en3er eIuality la&s (23+5!2). *n t6e sameness/3i--erence conce%tion o- eIualityC our le/al system 3oes not e9en con-ront &6at 0ac<innon %erhei9es as t6h real ro8lem &it6 %orno/ra%6yC let alone &ork to resol9e It. 46e realIty o- hornenNs con3ition &it6 res%ect to %orno/ra%6y is one o- su8or3inationC an3 our conce%tion o- eIualityC 0ac<innon ar/uesC must re-lect t6is. "6en &e make t6e re59ision -rom eIuality as sameness/3i--erence to eIuality as 3ominance/su8missionC %orno/ra%6y can no lon/er 8e seen as a ;irst 7men3ment issue (2!)). *nce t6is c6an/e is ma3eC our /en3er eIuality le/islation &ill reco/niBe t6e ineIuality in9ol9e3 in %orno/ra%6yC an3 &ill 3eman3 t6at it 8e remo9e3. "it6 0ac<innonNs ar/ument in min3C one can see clearly t6e %arallels. 8et&een t6e. c.once%hhl re9ihion s6e %ro%oses an3 Ric6=s %rescri%tI*n -or t6e -emIllst re5LISI*n o- lIterature. 46e -irst t6ree ste%s m Ric6Ns al/orit6m instruct t6e re59iser to Ktake t6e &ork -irst o- all as a clue to 6o& &e li9eC 6o& &e 6a9e 8een li9in/C 6o& &e 6a9e 8een le3 to ima/ine oursel9esK ((29). "e see t6is clearly in 0ac<innonNs essayJ s6e 8e/ins 8y 3iscussin/ &6at t6e la& tells us a8out t6e con3ition an3 status o- &omen to3ay. Ric6 ur/es t6e re5 9iser o- a teDt to consi3er K6o& &e 6a9e 8een li9in/K ((29)C an3 accor3in/lyC 0ac<innon %oints out some o- t6e &ays in &6ic6 &omen 6a9e 8een eDclu3e3 -rom t6e construction o- le/al systems. K:hose 0ith /o0er in ci>il societ)CK 0ac<innon &ritesC Knot usuall) 0omenD 9esign its norms an9 institutionsD 0hich become the status Huo K (23+). S6e notes t6at

0omenD an o6ten /o0erless 6action o6 a societ)D are normall) eEclu9e9 6rom the 0riting o6 constitutions an9 legislationD an9 /rece9ents establishe9 Jbe6ore 0omen 0ere /ermitte9 to >ote G

... H are consi3ere3 9ali3 8ases -or 3e-eatin/ Nun%rece3ente3N inter%retations or initiati9es -rom &omenNs %oint o- 9ie&K (23+). 46rou/6 %rocesses suc6 as t6eseC 0omen ha>e been 'e/t 6rom /artici/ating in the 6ormation o6 our legal s)stemD a s)stem 0hich no0D un3er t6e /uise o- eIualityC 0or's to maintain the subor9ination o6 0omen to men.

<n a//eal to 0omen-s rights in the current legal s)stem can onl) rein6orce male 9ominance :uc'er 5 (Au3it6C La& S 2eor/eto&nC *cto8er 200+C "omenC ;amily an3 2en3er in Islamic La&C %. ')I0
Not all critics o- li8eral -eminist t6eory accentuate t6e %ositi9e in &oman5 centere3ness. Cat6arine 0ac<innonC -or oneC seems to caution a/ainst romanticiBin/ t6e eD%erience o- &omen e9en as s6e em8races t6e %osition t6at t6e &oman#s %oint o- 9ie& 6as 8een i/nore3 in le/al t6ou/6t an3 %ractice. 46e -un3amental %ro8lemC -or 0ac<innonC is t6at the legal s)stem enshrines a gen9er hierarch) o6 subor9ination o6 the 6emale b) the male. 46is is not :ust 3i--erenceC it is 3ominance. :he la0 re6lects an9 enables social an9 /olitical institutions o6 ineHualit)= &omen /et uneIual %ayC 3o 3isres%ecte3 &orkC an3 are seDually a8use3. Such ineHualities /rece9e the la0D 0hich subseHuentl) in the case o6 the liberal state legit; imates the i9ea o6 non;inter6erence 0ith the status Huo an3 t6e correction o- only t6ose ineIualities actually create3 8y %rior le/al action. In3ee3C t6e li8eral notion o- %ri9acyC t6at restrains t6e state an3 t6e la& -rom enterin/ into t6e E%ri9ateF &orl3 o8o3y an3 6omeC %ermits t6e o%%ression an3 a8use o- &omen to %rocee3 a%ace in t6e 9enueC t6e 6omeC &6ere it is at its most %er9asi9e.

<n) a//eal to abstract rights in such a conteEt o6 social ineHualit) can onl) authorize an9 rein6orce male 9ominance.) 46e 6istory o- &omen#s eD%erienceC t6enC is a ne/ati9e one &6ic6 &e 3ra& on to re9eal 6arms an3 a8uses=
t6ere is little sense in 0ac<innon#s &ritin/ o- a su%erior -emale et6ics o- connection t6at can ser9e as an alternate 8asis -or le/al 3e9elo%ment. StillC t6ere is a 9ery real role -or -eminist :uris%ru3ence 0ac<innon critiIues the Gtra9itional le6tF >ie0 t6at la& can onl) re6lect eEisting social relations. Rat6erC a /roacti>e 6eminist ?uris/ru9ence nee9s to /ush 6or substanti>e rights 6or 0omen. 4o t6e eDtent -eminist la& em8o3ies &omen#s %oint o- 9ie&C it &ill 8e sai3 t6at its la& is not neutral. It &ill 8e sai3 t6at it un3ermines t6e le/itimacy o- t6e le/al system. >ut t6e le/itimacy o- eDistin/ la& is 8ase3 on -orce at &omen#s eD%ense. "omen 6a9e ne9er consente3 to its rule su//estin/ t6at t6e system#s le/itimacy nee3s re%air t6at &omen are in a %osition to %ro9i3e. It &ill 8e sai3 t6at -eminist la& is s%ecial %lea3in/ -or a %articular /rou% an3 one cannot start t6at or &6ere &ill it en3. >ut eDistin/ la& is alrea3y s%ecial %lea3in/ -or a %articular /rou%C &6ere it 6as en3e3.+

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


101 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
:he la0s o6 the state are ba9 ( the) ignore the in9i>i9ualD conceal /ain an9 su66ering an9 because the) gi>e rights the) can re>o'e rights Fellmeth 2' (7aronC Int. Rel. S OaleC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 22(3)C %. ((()I0
46e secon3 -eminist analytical met6o3 is kno&n as K-eminist %ractical reasonin/.K 7ccor3in/ to one %ro%onentC suc6 reasonin/ 9alues in3i9i3ualiBe3 -act5-in3in/ o9er 8ri/6t5line rulesC reasonin/ -rom conteDtC an3 accountin/ -or t6e %ers%ecti9es o- t6e %o&erless. 2!

Feminist ?uris/ru9ence teaches res/ect 6or 9i>erse /ers/ecti>es because 6eminism itsel6 is an JotherJ /ers/ecti>eC an3 it -ocuses on real5&orl3 eD%eriences o- &omen 8ecause t6e abstract theories characteristic o6 male; 9ominate9 economicsD sociolog)D or /olitical science o6ten generalize about social con9itions or e66ectsD ignoring gen9er;base9 9is/arities. 0ost -eminists s6are t6is in3ucti9eC conteDtual met6o3olo/y -ocusin/ on &omenNs
%ers%ecti9es an3 eD%eriences. 46e uniIuely K-eministK as%ect o- -eminist %ractical reasonin/ is its -ocus on t6e eDclu3e3 Kot6erCK not its met6o3olo/y. 21 Rules are abhorrent %er se because the) o/erate 9e9ucti>el) an9 gloss o>er in9i>i9ual /ain. 2( For eEam/leC <at6arine >artlett o8:ects to bright;line la0s reHuirin/ minors to obtain /arental consent be6ore see'ing an abortion 8ecause o- t6e Kactual accounts o- t6e &renc6in/ circumstancesK o- a minor. 2) >artlett reco/niBes t6e 9alue o- rules as Knecessities 8ecause &e are not al&ays /oo3 :u3/esCK t6at isC 8ecause sometimes t6e collecti9e :u3/ment osociety is su%erior to t6at o- many in3i9i3uals. 2+ .o&e9erC s6e 3e%lores t6eir unnecessar) uni6ormit)C &6ic6 /re>ents societ) 6rom 9ealing 0ith in9i>i9ual circumstances that may cause nee9less su66ering. I6 nothing is a Jgi>enDJ nothing can be ta'en a0a).

:he rights gi>en to 0omen b) the state are inherentl) /atriarchal :uc'er 5 (Au3it6C La& S 2eor/eto&nC *cto8er 200+C "omenC ;amily an3 2en3er in Islamic La&C %. 3)I0
46e a%%roac6 &it6 t6e lon/est linea/eC reac6in/ -rom mi35Lictorian times u% to t6e %resentC is t6at o- li8eral -eminist t6inkers. 46e li8eral tra3itionC %articularly %rominent in t6e 7n/lo57merican conteDtC acce%ts la& an3 le/al institutions as 8ase3 on %rinci%les o- rationalityC o8:ecti9ityC an3 -airness in t6eir 3ealin/s &it6 an autonomous le/al su8:ect. :he /roblemC as -ar as &omen an3 /en3er are concerne3C is that certain as/ects o6 la0 ha>e built;inC an3 o-ten 6i33enC ineHualities bet0een men an9 0omen as a result o6 the e>olution o6 the la0 in a /atriarchal social en>iron; ment. 46e -eminist taskC as -ar as li8eral t6eorists are concerne3C is to i3enti-y an3 correct t6ose as%ects o- la& t6at 8elie t6e li8eral %romise o- eIuality an3 -ree3om o- in3i9i3uals 8e-ore t6e la& 8y 3iscriminatin/ a/ainst &omen. $Dam%les o- suc6 3iscrimination inclu3e= 3isa39anta/in/ &omen 8y allocatin/ -e&er material resources to t6emC as &as lon/ t6e case in %ro%erty settlements in 3i9orce casesJ :u3/in/ men an3 &omen#s similar actions in 3i--erent &aysC as in criminaliBin/ t6e 8e6a9ior o- t6e -emale %rostitute 8ut not 6er male clientJ an3 assigning men an9 0omen to 9istinct social rolesD as in the seE;base9 classi6ications o6 Gbrea90innerF an9 Ghome; ma'er .F 4nl) 0ith the era9ication o6 such 9iscriminator) la0s an9 legal categories 0ill 0omen be able to realize the liberal /romise o6 eHual treat; ment as in9i>i9uals 0ith eHual rights. 46e task is one o- i3enti-ication osuc6 le/al ineIualities an3 t6eir correction so that 0omen can realize the /romises o6 6ree9om an9 eHualit) ma9e b) the liberal state an9 its legal institutions.1

:he state-s stan9ar9s o6 authorit) ?usti6) men-s right to eEercise authorit) o>er 0omen Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 12))I0
;or Cat6arine 0ac<innonC the stateSs most basic stan9ar9s o6 authorit) summarize the male >ie0/ointSs /ur/oses. :he /ur/ose o6 ha>ing courts is to eEhibit the relationshi/ o6 men an9 0omen re9uce9 to its ?uris9ictions. 46ese :uris3ictions inclu3e t6e 8iolo/ical an3 %syc6olo/ical 8ut not o-ten t6e %oliticalC &6ic6 is t6e 3omain o- men alone. !ourtsS 9ecisions re9eal t6e eDtent to &6ic6D as 0ac<innon %uts it in anot6er conteDtC KseDuality is /en3ere3 as /en3er is seDualiBe3CK33 8y ?usti6)in/ menSs right to eEercise authorit). 46is is &6at is meant 8y le/itimiBation. Since legal institutions hel/ regularize menSs /o0er o>er time b) 9emonstrating male ?uris9ictions C t6at isC t6e 3omains &it6in &6ic6 men eDercise aut6orityC t6ey constitute an im%ortant 6istorical source -or inter%retin/ t6e %o&er relation o/en3er. 0ac<innon ar/ues t6at t6e a3:u3ication o- /rie9ances turns on K&6ose meanin/ &ins.K3! 7n a6istorical an3C t6ere-oreC uni3iminensional reality is assume3 to un3erlie la&C an3 grie>ances that arise un9er a go>ernment o6 la0s 0ill be settle9 ?u9iciall) in an outsi3e5o-56istory atmos%6ere o- im%ar5 tiality. 46is %resume3 im%artiality is ma3e all t6e more %ossi8le to3ay 8ecause increasingl) >iolent states ha>e merge9 /ers/ecti>e an9 situation . :he 9e6initi>e re/resentation o6 stateC societyC %u8lic interestC an3 /eneral &el-are is Jmale /ursuit o6 control o>er 0omenSs seEualit).K3' "omen 3o not control &6at is 3one to usJ menSs seEualit) is inse/arable 6rom coercion an9 >iolence.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


102 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
&a0 cannot re9ress >iolence against 0omen or /re>ent its occurrence ( it 0ill onl) continue to eEclu9e 0omen-s interests Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 12()I0
;or "estC 0hate>er /rotection Rule o6 &a0 /ro>i9es the in9i>i9ual manD bent on se/arationD 6rom threat o6 annihilationiMt6is %rotection is a %rimary t6rust o- Rule o- La&iMit 0ill not re9ress harms eE/erience9 b) 0omen an9 /re>ent their 6uture occurrence. or is /rotection 6orthcoming 6rom Rule o6 &a0C in t6e name o- sel-5/o9ernanceC &ort6&6ile to &omen in t6eir 6istorical connecte3ness. 4o /i9e one 6istorical eDam%le= t6e National "omanNs ,arty resiste3 t6e %rotection o- &orkin/ &omen t6rou/6 in3us5 trial le/islation t6at &as sou/6t 8y 9irtually all ma:or &omenNs or/aniBa5 tions a-ter 1920. In 1923C in %re-erence to %rotectionC t6e "omanNs ,arty (N",) intro3uce3 an eIual ri/6ts amen3ment in or3er toC in Crystal $ast5 manNs &or3sC Kesta8lis6 t6e %rinci%le t6at in3ustrial le/islation s6oul3 a%%ly to all &orkers ... in any /i9en occu%ation an3 not to &omen &orkers alone.K22 N", 8elie9e3 t6at /rotecti>e legislation 9iscriminate9 against 0omen in the /ai9 0or'6orceC23 &6ile /rou%s suc6 as t6e National "omenNs 4ra3e nion Lea/ue %lace3 t6e 8lame on &omanNs 3e-icient or/aniBation an3 s%ecial nee3s as 0ot6er o- t6e Race.2! <lthough ,P 6oun9 0omen to be analogous to menC23 it recognize9 that 0omenSs legal 9isabilit) in earning their 0a) 2( ha9 substantial e66ect on the stan9ar9 o6 li>ing &it6 &6ic6 many &omen an3 t6eir -amilies 6a3 to /et 8y.2) (7ccor3in/ to "estC the JconstitutionJ or a basic legal 9ocument o6 /atriarch) is %orno/ra%6yC &6ic6 is &6y %orno/ra%6y is not seriously %rose5 cute332iMto the eEclusion o6 0omenSs interests an9 9enial o6 an) /otential 6or balancing.#

:he a66-s insistance that rights must be gi>en us b) the state is central to /atriarch) Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 129)I0
Co%elon ar/ues t6at an et6ical sine Iua non is nee3e3 to 3e-eat t6e se/aration o6 /ublic an9 /ri>ate s/heres o6 human acti>it) t6at is central to /atriarchal /ers/ecti>e. In t6e &estern &orl3C t6e %ositi9ist treatment o- /ublic an9 /ri>ate s/heres o6 human acti>it) as se/arate an9 9istinct constitutes a -orm o- or3er an3 also a set o6 means 6or /atriarchs to try to or9er an9 maintain relationshi/s among /eo/le. 46is or3er inclu3es 8ot6 t6e emotional an3 t6e rational an3 se%arates t6em -rom one anot6er. In a &orl3 so or3ere3C 0omen are /lace9 in /ri>ate an9 men in /ublic s/heres. $9en t6ou/6 ineIuities eDist amon/ men in %u8lic an3 &omen in %ri9ate s/heresD to 0omen 6all Jthe

Semotional laborS o6 house0or' an9 chil9renDJ to menD Jthe Sintellectual an9 manual laborS o6 science an9 /ublic li6e.K100 Rationality attac6es to t6e scienti-icC t6e essentialC t6e masculine. $motion is nonscien5 ti-icC 3is%ensa8leC an3
-eminine.101 >y se%aratin/ t6emsel9es -rom o8:ects t6ey seek to classi-y an3 measureC %ositi9ists try to maintain 8oun3aries t6ey 6a9e set. :he /ositi>ist bi6urcation o6 human acti>it) into se/arate9 s/heres o6 /ublic an9 /ri>ate /ro9uces sets o6 9ual stan9ar9s102 t6at /o9ern social relations an3 rely on lo/ic 3e%en3ent on 6ierarc6ical 3eri9ations -rom 3i--erence.103 .S. menC likely &6ite an3 7n/lo5SaDonC mostly %ro%ertie3C a8le58o3ie3C in t6eir mi33le yearsC $n/lis65s%eakin/C an3 6eteroseDualC may %artici%ate in %u8lic %rocessesC t6e mainstreamJ &omen/ot6ers %ole3 out o- t6e mainstream or %re9ente3 -rom enterin/ it 3es%ite &6at t6ey may 6a9e 8een le3 to eD%ectC are assi/ne3C to t6e eDtent %ossi8leC to %ri9ate %lacesC to 8y&ays seen as antit6etical to 8ar/ainin/ an3 accommo3ation in %u8lic realms.10! ,omen/ ot6ers are assume9 unHuali6ie9 6or or treate9 as 9isHuali6ie9 6rom the 0or' o6 su/eror9inate re/resentation.10'

:he basis o6 the rights gi>en to us b) the state is /atriarchal Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 129)I0
R6on3a Co%elon -in3s the

*.S. !onstitution"is# a 'e) organizing 9e>ice in 9eterminations o6 autonom)/9e/en9ence an3 material in3e%en3ence/ser9i5 tu3e. 46ere-oreC 6er &ork is essential rea3in/ -or .S. le/al 6istorians . :he /remises o6 the FramersS /atriarchal Jun9erstan9ingJ /resent a /o0er6ul set o6 limitations t6at
o%erate at 8ot6 institutional an3 i3eolo/ical le9els. 7s 3i3 A. 0ars6all in 6is &i3ely %u8liciBe3 s%eec6 3urin/ t6e 19+) >icentennial ot6e ConstitutionC!2 Co%elon %oints out t6at the Framers sought to /reser>e the /ri>ilege o6 their classC raceC an3 seE.!3 7lt6ou/6 our i9eas about 0hat constitutes eHualit) 6a9e c6an/e3 across timeC t6ey are accommo3ate3C to t6e eDtent the) areD in a 6rame0or' not con9uci>e to change or 6eminist historical anal)sis . Neit6er eIuality oo%%ortunityC in3i9i3ual &ort6C nor %ri9ate %ro%erty &ill ser9e to 3is/uise t6e c6aracter o- t6e ori/inal Constitu5 tion an3 >ill o- Ri/6ts.

:he Reagan a9ministrationSs attac' on unenumer; ate9 rights that has e>ol>e9 re>eals the lac' o6 legitimac) %olitical actors &ill likely assi/n to %ro/ressi9e constitutional inter%retation.!! <n unenumerate9 right to /ri>ac) 9oes not %er se threaten 9istinctions bet0een /ublic an9 /ri>ate 9omains o6 li6e . Rat6erC in Co%elonNs
un3er5 stan3in/ o- t6emC :u3icial 3ecisions a8out %ri9acy o- a li8eral castC %resent Ka 6i/6ly truncate3C socially re/ressi9e conce%t oautonomy.K!' 4ranslitera5 tion o- t6is ne/ati9e into %ositi9eC ra3ical conce%t 6as 8ecome a tar/et on t6e contem%orary ri/6t5&in/ a/en3a. 46is transliteration is t6reatenin/ to t6ose &6o 3eclaim Kori/inalismK an3 3enounce seDual sel-53etermination 8ecause it carries &it6 it an i3ea t6at society 6as an a--irmati9e res%onsi8ility to in3i9i3uals. 46is is not a %atriarc6al un3erstan3in/ nor an ori/inal com%onent o- t6e .S. Constitution.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


10% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


10+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( State
:he 9elineation o6 rights b) the rule o6 la0 9enies 0omen-s 0orth an9 lea9s to brutalization Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 123)I0
Ro8in "estNs i3ea is t6at Rule o- &a0

9oes not ac'no0le9ge the 0orth o6 0omenSs connecte9ness to other human beings or real /otential -or tan/i8le connection. >y connecte3nessC "est means &omenNs eDistential eD%eriences. S6e
relies u%on em%irically 8ase3 -in3in/s a8out t6e 3e9elo%5 ment o- sel- an3 morality in &omenC 8y -eminist sc6olars suc6 as Carol 2illi/an an3 Nancy C6o3oro&C to c6aracteriBe structurally Kt6e 3i9i3e 8et&een ra3ical an3 cultural -eminism.K13 .er %oint also is t6at brutalization ma) be the result o6 6ailure 8y Rule o6 &a0 to recognize 0omenSs humanit). "est -in3s Rule oLa& Kco6erentK in its ackno&le3/ement o- t6e t6reat to men o- t6eir %6ysical eDistenceC an3 its %rotection o- t6e 9alue attac6e3 to autonomy 8y li8erals.1! 46e %6rase Krule o- la0J re6ers to classical organization o6 rights as im%artially an3 con9entionally sti/ulate9 in the /ositi>ist tra9ition.1S Rule o- &a0 is base9 in an i9ea that J0e are each /h)sicall) Sboun9arie9.N K1( :hisD "est in3icatesC is a masculinist a//roach that 9enies 0omenSs essential or materially %otential connecte9ness. In 6er critiIueC "est connects &it6 t6e -reIuent ar/ument o- contem%orary &omen %oets in t6e .S.C t6at t6e i3ea o- an in6leEibl) con6ine9 sel6 is 6ictionD1) an3 t6e %ost5structuralist ar/ument t6at t6e classi-icationC &omanC is -iction. &a0 is re/lete 0ith J6iction.K 7ccor3in/ to Roman la&C -ictio is an assum%tion or su%%osition o- t6e la&. >lackNs La& 1ictionary 3e-ines a -iction o- la& as somet6in/ &6ic6 is or may 8e -alse 8ut is assume3 or su%%ose3 trueC sayin/ -ictio le/is neminem lae3ilJ i.e. -iction o- la& in:ures no one. 7 le/al -iction may assume or su%%ose t6e eDistence o- a state o- -acts t6at 3oes not really eDist. It is a rule o6 la0 that assumes as trueD an9 0ill not allo0 to be 9is/ro>e9D something that is 6alse but not /ercei>e9 as im/ossible. >lackNs 1ictionary claims t6at t6ese assum%tions are o- an innocent or e9en 8ene-icial c6aracter an3 t6at t6ey are ma3e -or t6e a39ancement o- :ustice.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


101 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Justice
:he a66-s >ie0 o6 ?ustice is 9ominate9 b) male /o0er an9 /re>ents an) semblance o6 eHualit) Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 12+)I0
0ac<innon states t6at muc6 o- 0omenSs eE/erience in the 0orl9 is treate9 as lac'ing e66icac) or moti>e /o0er an3 t6at -eminismNs 3esi/n is to make 9ali3 &omenNs Kstru//le -or &orl3.K3+ nmo3i-ie3 8y marDism or li8eralismC ra3ical -eminists un3erstan3 t6atC %resentlyC the measure o6 truth is the interestD b) men 0ith /o0erD in a uni9ersal 8ut 6istorically s/eci6ic /erce/tion o6 realit). In t6is re/ar3C %ri9ate an3 %u8lic 3omains are inse%ara8le. Stru//le 8y &omen -or a&areness &ill make a%%arent t6e 3ynamic t6at constructs &omen an3 men on &6olly relational /roun3sJ it &ill -ee3 &omenNs %o&er an3 analyBe our /rie9ances in a &orl3 &e claim an3 also re:ect. Comin/ to kno& t6e %olitics an3 la& o- t6e 6istorical con3itions to &6ic6 &omen are su8:ect is comin/ to kno& our o&n li9es. In raisin/ our -eminist consciousnessC -eministsN re?ection o6 the

ob?ecti6ication o6 9esire turns on a com/rehension o6 social li6e at once critical an9 sel6;encom/assing .
7lt6ou/6 some &omen may not re:ect eit6er t6e o8:ec5 ti9e or su8:ecti9e con3itions o- t6eir li9esC t6ey 3o not contra3ict -eminismNs 3esi/n &6ere t6eir ran/e o- c6oices is constraine3 an3 t6eir -ree3om to c6oose is limite3. Instea3C accor3in/ to 0ac<innonC Kt6e man/&oman 3i--erence an3 t6e 3ominance/su8mission 3ynamic 3e-ine eac6 ot6er. 46is is t6e social meanin/ o- seD an3 t6e 3istincti9ely -eminist account o- /en3er eIuality.K39 Contem%orary marDists 6a9e seen society as 3etermine3 8y class &it6 state %o&er accruin/ in a state5s%eci-ic -orm. 7s 0ac<innon commentsC in t6is rea3in/ t6e matter o- a/ency /oes 8e//in/. Li8eralism is no more concrete in its notion o- sel-5containe3 or sel-5su--icient in3i9i3uals in t6e a8stract &it6 a8struse claims en-orcea8le 8y a%%lication ot6e reasona8le man stan3ar3. 46inkers on t6e le-t may recommen3 a8an3onin/ t6e state 8ecause it is a tool o- o%%ressionC &6ere li8erals &ill see it as im%artial an3 ca%a8le o- 3eci3in/ con-licts t6at un3erlie interest 3omains. &a0 6unctions 6or marEists as

an i9eolog) o6 legitimizationD 6or liberals as /rinci/le9 stra; teg)I neither 6unction 0ill change 0omenSs sub?ection to institutions o- ra%eC 8atteryC an3 /eneral seDual 6arassment in 0hich state an9 la0 /artici/ate.
It is /oin/ to take an on/oin/ re9olution o- %oliticsC an3 relations6i%s -oun3e3 in &ork!0 rat6er t6an /en3erC to %ro3uce an eIualiBation o- &omenNs status 9is jk 9is men un3er t6e la&. ;or 0ac<innonC t6is eEertion o6 /o0er cannot be ma9e in com/an) 0ith liberals an9 marEists. Rat6erC -eminists nee3 to s6o& t6e comin/ to/et6er o- critical consciousness in an analysis o%ri9atiBation. In t6e %ri9ate s%6ereC men 3emonstrate most com%ellin/ly &6at t6ey 6a9e t6at &omen 3o not. "omen &ill come to kno& &6at &e &ill kno&C it seems to me 0ac<innon is sayin/C &6en &e are least neutral an3 most in touc6 &it6 our o&n eD%eriences o- t6e &orl3. ;or 0ac<innonC 6eminists stan9 the greatest chance o6 com/rehen9ing that male /o0er eEists C un:usti-ia8lyC an9 that eHualit) bet0een 0omen an9 men has ne>er eEiste9 an9 0ill not come into eEistence until the construction o6 the masculine is seen 6or 0hat it isC Kits :u3/ments . . . re9eale3 in %rocess an3 %roce3ureC as &ell as a3:u3ication an3 le/islation. . . . Justice 0ill reHuire ... a ne0 ?uris/ru9ence C a ne& relation 8et&een li-e an3 la&.K!1

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


102 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 7uman Rights


!once/tions o6 human rights are 6un9amentall) /atriarchal in that the) 9on-t recognize abuse 0ithin the 6amil) as an assault on autonom) <mirthalingam 1 (<umaralin/amC 7ssociate ,ro-essor an3 1irector o- International ,ro/ramsC ;aculty o- La&
an3 7ssociateC 7sia Researc6 InstituteC National ni9ersity o- Sin/a%oreC E"omen#s Ri/6tsC International NormsC an3 1omestic Liolence= 7sian ,ers%ecti9esF) ;rom a human rights %ers%ecti9eC t6e omission o6 6orce9 seE 6rom the 9e6inition o6 6amil) >iolence is regrettable. Forcing a 0oman to ha>e seE against her 0ill is the most blatant 6orm o6 en6orcing male 9ominance.'+ It is a 8rutal statement t6at she has a8solutely no autonom) or rights. 7rticle 9.2 o- t6e 7sian .uman Ri/6ts C6arter reco/niBes t6e %articular si/ni-icance o- seDual 9iolence a/ainst &omen an3 3ra&s a link to %atriarc6y an3 7sian 9alues= 4he roots o6 /atriarch) are s)stemic an9 its structures 9ominate all institutionsC attitu3esC social norms an3 customary la0sC reli/ions an9 >alues in 7sian societiesC crossing the boun9aries o6 classC cultureC caste an9 ethnicit). 4//ression takes many -ormsC 8ut is most e>i9ent in seEual sla>er)D 9omestic >iolenceD tra66ic'ing in 0omen an9 ra/e . . . s)stematic ra/e is a 0ar crime an9 a crime against humanit).'9 4o re-use to reco/niBe marital ra%e as a crime on t6e 8asis t6at suc6 matters are consi3ere3 %ri9ate is no lon/er tena8le un3er international 6uman ri/6ts o8li/ations. 46e o--icial %olicy o- %rioritiBin/ t6e -amily o9er &omen nee3s to 8e reconsi3ere3. 46e conclu3in/ remarks o- t6e "omen#s Crisis Centre in its memoran3um re9ie&in/ t6e 0alaysian 1L7 are %ertinent= Some o- t6e reser9ations t6at 6a9e 8een 3irecte3 a/ainst t6e 1L7 stem -rom t6e concern t6at t6e 7ct &oul3 encoura/e t6e 3isinte/ration o- t6e -amily unit. 46is conce%tualiBation o- 3omestic 9iolence is -un3amentally -la&e3. In %ro9i3in/ %rotection to an a8use3 %ersonC t6e 1L7 is assistin/ someone &6ose -amily is alrea3y attacke3 8y 3omestic 9iolence. In ot6er &or3sC a 9ictim &6o seeks t6e assistance o- t6e 1L7 isC 8y 3e-initionC seekin/ re-u/e -rom a 8roken -amily.(0 46e ar/ument t6at t6e 0alaysian 1L7 is not anti5-amily is si/ni-icant an3 9ali3C 8ut more im%ortantlyC t6e /ui3in/ %rinci%le ou/6t to 8e t6at &omen &6o are 9ictims o- 3omestic a8use 3eser9e %rotection re/ar3less o- t6eir marital status. 46is is one instance &6ere <antianism is im%erati9eJ 0omen are in9i>i9uals in their o0n right an9 not merel) constituent elements o6 a 6amil) unit. :his is not to 9e>alue the 6amil) unitD merel) to sa) that at the en9 o6 the 9a) 0hen a choice has to be ma9eD the sa6et) o6 the 0oman shoul9 /re>ail o>er the sanctit) o6 the 6amil) unit.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


103 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 7uman Rights/International &a0


7uman rights an9 international la0 are /ro9ucts o6 colonialist an9 masculine 0orl9 >ie0s Fellmeth 2' (7aron ga9ierC >.7. in Social Sciences -rom t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E;eminism an3
International La&= 46eoryC 0et6o3olo/yC an3 Su8stanti9e Re-ormF) ,A 7lt6ou/6 a -e& -eminists 6a9e a%%lie3 t6ese tec6niIues to t6e stu3y o- international la& since 1991C t6e only -eminist aut6ors &6o 6a9e eD%ressly attem%te3 to a39ance a 8roa3 -eminist t6eory o- international la& are C6arles&ort6C C6inkinC an3 "ri/6t.30 Since t6e %u8lication o- t6eir critiIueC? 6eminists ha>e increasingl) challenge9 the conce/tualD /roce9uralD an9 substanti>e as/ects o6 international la0. 0ost -eminists &6o 6a9e c6allen/e3 international la& 6a9e claime3 t6at international la0 is biase9 against 0omen in its >er) conce/tion. .o&e9erC 3i--erent sc6ools o- -eminism may claim 8ias on 3i--erent /roun3s. Ra3ical -eminists attack t6e 9ery eDistence o- states as su8:ects an3 o8:ects o- international la&C claimin/ t6at the conce/t o6 the state results 6rom a 6alse 9ichotom) bet0een G/ublicF an9 G/ri>ateF realms o6 li6e that /ri>ileges men an9 /er/etuates their /o0er o>er 0omen. Li8eral -eminists may :oin in t6is criticismC 8ut t6ey may also claim t6at international la0 es/ouses a masculine Gethic o6 ?usticeF that 9e>alues 0omen-s a//roaches to the same /roblems through an Gethic o6 care .F In t6is 9ie&C international la& is in its conce%tion a %ro3uct o- male t6inkin/ t6at 3oes not s%eak -or &omen. ;inallyC %ostmo3ern -eminists claim t6at international human rights la0 is a /ro9uct o6 colonialist thin'ing that 6ails to account 6or the 9i>ersit) o6 0omen-s eE/eriences.%1 In t6is sectionC I &ill eDamine eac6 o- t6ese ar/uments in turn.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


105 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 7uman Rights/Rights Discourse


7uman rights 9iscourse is roote9 in a h)/er masculineD ,estern mentalit) that see's to im/ose its hegemonic conce/tions on the conHuere9 Fellmeth 2' (7aron ga9ierC >.7. in Social Sciences -rom t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E;eminism an3
International La&= 46eoryC 0et6o3olo/yC an3 Su8stanti9e Re-ormF) ,A <lthough t6e 9ast ma:ority o- states seem to acce/t t6e %ro%osition that 0omen nee9 an9 shoul9 ha>e human rights /rotection 8eyon3 t6at accor3e3 to menC the) o6ten 9isagree 8itterly about the sco/e o6 the rights. Cultural an3 reli/ious 8elie-s in many states 3is-a9or -ormal entitlements t6at most 6uman ri/6ts acti9ists take -or /rante3C suc6 as t6e ri/6ts to seek e3ucation an3 em%loymentC to o&n %ro%ertyC to -ree s%eec6C to marital c6oice an3 eIualityC an3 to reli/ious -ree3om. Re%resentati9es o- t6ese states o-ten claim t6at C$17" an3 t6e similar 0omen-s rights instruments re/resent G,esternF conce/tions o6 0omen-s rights that are ethnocentric an9 ina//licable to their cultures. 46ey may in3ee3 -eel t6is &ay a8out 6uman ri/6ts /enerallyC alt6ou/6 t6ey may nonet6eless ackno&le3/e 6uman ri/6ts a/ainst lar/e5scale atrocities suc6 as sla9ery or /enoci3e. In t6is 9ie&C G,esternF conce/tions o6 human rights (inclu3in/ &omen#s ri/6ts) constitute a hegemonic or neocolonialist 9iscourse.11( Some claim t6at 6uman ri/6ts 3iscourse is innocent 8ut i/norant et6nocentrismJ ot6ers 3eclare t6at it is a c)nical seizing o6 moral high groun9 to obscure an attem/t to eEercise international in6luence or im/erialism. 46at et6nocentric %6iloso%6ical 8elie-s are at t6e root o- C$17" an3 ot6er 6uman ri/6ts instruments cannot 8e 3enie3. :he conce/t o6 in9i>i9ual human rights is roote9 in the thought o6 such .uro/ean /hiloso/hers as Immanuel Kant an9 John &oc'e. 8ost o6 the earliest human rights instruments C inclu3in/ t6e N C6arter an3 t6e ni9ersal 1eclaration o- .uman Ri/6ts ( 1.R)C11) 0ere 9ra6te9 0ithout the /artici/ation o6 the colonize9 cultures in <6ricaD the 8i99le .astD an9 <sia. :he /re/on9erant in6luence o6 .uro/ean thought an9 belie6 in human rights la0 has le9 some human rights a9>ocates to assume /erha/s too much about the uni>ersalit) o6 the current international la0 o6 human rights. $9en non5"estern a39ocates o- 6uman ri/6ts sometimes crin/e at t6e occasional 3is%lays o- cultural insensiti9ity 8y t6eir "estern counter%arts.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


10$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( 7uman Rights/In9i>i9ual Rights


:he notion o6 Ghuman rightsF is inherentl) masculine in that it eEclu9es 0omen !harles0orth $1 (.ilaryC ,ro-essor o- La& at t6e ni9ersity o- 73elai3eC E.uman Ri/6ts as 0en#s Ri/6tsFC %.
103) ,A 7lt6ou/6 t6ere is no 3ou8t t6at the a/arthei9 o6 gen9er is consi3era8ly more /er>asi>e t6an t6e a%art6ei3 o- raceC it 6as ne9er %ro9oke3 t6e same 3e/ree o- international concern or o%%ro8rium. :he international communit) usually couc6es 3iscussion o- t6e a39ancement o- &omen in terms o- t6e acIuisition an3 im%lementation o- ri/6ts %articular to &omen. "6ile t6is is certainly an im%ortant an3 9alua8le %ro:ectC it can also obscure some basic elements contributing to the o//ression o6 0omen. 0y central ar/ument is t6at the current international human rights structure itsel- an9 the su8stance o- many norms o6 human rights la0 create obstacles to the a9>ancement o6 0omen. Aecause the la0;ma'ing institutions o- t6e international le/al or3er ha>e al&ays beenC an3 continue to 8eC 9ominate9 b) menD international human rights la0 has 9e>elo/e9 to re6lect the eE/eriences o6 men an9 largel) to eEclu9e those o6 0omenD ren9ering sus/ect the claim o6 the ob?ecti>it) an9 uni>ersalit) o6 international human rights la0 . ntil t6e /en3ere3 nature o- t6e 6uman ri/6ts system itsel- is reco/niBe3 an3 trans-orme3C no real %ro/ress -or &omen can 8e ac6ie9e3.

Feminist ?uris/ru9ence recognizes that notions o6 Ghuman rightsF marginalize man) /o/ulations ( the alternati>e sol>es all o//ression Ainion $1 (2ayleC ,ro-essor o- ,olitical Science at t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E.uman Ri/6ts= 7 ;eminist
,ers%ecti9eFC 0use) ,A Feminist ?uris/ru9ence /ro>i9es 9ery su8stantial c6allen/es to 6uman ri/6ts la& as it is institutionally un3erstoo3. 46ese inclu3e 8ot6 6un9amental Huestions about the /rocesses b) 0hich human rights are 9e6ine9D a9?u9icate9D an9 en6orce9D as 0ell as Huestions about t6e su8stance o- 0hat is t6ere8y J/rotecte9.K 7n3C &6ile t6e -ocus o- analysis is on &omenNs eD%erienceD a 6eminist a//roach might ha>e imme9iate im/lications 6or the rights o6 all 9isem/o0ere9 /eo/les an9 raise Huestions about social organization generall). I- it &ere necessary to o--er one &or3 to ca%ture t6e essence o- -eminist :uris%ru3enceC in /eneral an3 in its si/ni-icance -or 6uman ri/6ts analysisC it is inclusion. 46e enter%rise critiIues t6e eD%erience o- 0omen as /ersons eEclu9e9 6rom legal /rotection an9 6rom /ro/ortionate /olitical an9 economic /o0er. Feminist critics o- le/al institutions Huestion 0hether t6ese institutions are ca/able o6 /rotecting 0omen. Le/al institutions are 9ie&e3 as 6ierarc6icalC a39ersarialC eDclusionaryC an3
unlikely to res%ect claims ma3e 8y &omen. 1) In a%%arently stark contrastC eD%onents o- t6e %rotection o- 6uman ri/6ts ar/ue t6at 6uman ri/6ts must 8e seen as a legal %6enomenon. I- %rinci%les o- :ustice are not legali1edC t6en t6ey are su8:ect to t6e unilateral control o- nation statesC an3 t6eir a8use can 8e su8:ecte3 to not6in/ more t6an t6e ad !oc eD%ression o- moral outra/e 8y t6ose &6o 3isa/ree &it6 t6e c6allen/e3 8e6a9ior. "6ile t6e 3omestic or international co3i-ication o- %olicyC like con9entional or common la&C %ro9i3es no /uarantee t6at t6e la& &ill 8e res%ecte3C 6uman ri/6ts a39ocates maintain ne9ert6eless t6at Kla&K is a critically im%ortant arro& in t6eir Iui9er. $9en in situations in &6ic6 liti/ation is eit6er im%ossi8le or im%racticalC t6is 9ie& rests on t6e assum%tion t6at most states 3o not e9en &ant to appear to 8e in 9iolation o- G$n3 ,a/e '13H international la&. 1+ 1es%ite t6e &i3ely 6el3 9ie& t6at all international la& is sim%ly international %oliticsC 8ein/ a8le to %ortray a claim as 6a9in/ t6e 8ackin/ o- Kla&K remo9es t6e 3ialo/ue -rom t6e realm o- 8ein/ not6in/ more t6an sel-5intereste3 ne/otiation. 7 -eminist analysisC in contrastC mi/6t &ell ar/ue -rom eD%erience t6at human rights la0 has been a miserable 6ailure in /rotecting /eo/les 6rom o//ression.

1es%ite t6is imme3iately a%%arent con-lict o9er &6et6er la& is im%ortant in t6e %rotection o- 6uman ri/6tsC in a senseC the 6eminist concern an9 the classic human rights /ers/ecti>e ma) not be in 6un9amental 9isagreement o>er the Huestion o6 reliance on la0. 46is is 8ecause t6e ma:or concern eD%resse3 8y -eminist
critics o- le/al institutionsC %reeminently 8y Carole SmartC is t6at litigation as a process 3oes not ser9e &omen. 19 .uman ri/6ts a39ocates also kno& only too &ell t6at liti/ation is an eDtremely limite3 tool in t6is en3ea9or. 20 46usC &6ile &omenNs eD%erience &oul3 su//est t6at reliance on courtsC :u3/esC an3 la&yers to trans-orm society is -ollyC -eminists an3 tra3itional 6uman ri/6ts acti9ists are 8ot6 a8le to a%%reciateC an3 %er6a%s a/reeC t6at 3e9elo%in/ law as principle and rule is not an enter%rise to 8e :ettisone3. 46e %oints o- 3isa/reement t6at are -ar more -un3amental re-lect on t6e %olitical %o&er t6at is re%resente3 in t6e %rocess o- 3e-inin/ t6ese Kle/alK ri/6tsC t6e limitations on Kri/6tsK analysisC an3 t6e li-e eD%erience t6at s6oul3 un3erlie t6e su8stanti9e %rinci%les o- 6uman ri/6ts la& to &6ic6 t6e &orl3 ou/6t to 8e committe3 .

,here human rights a9>ocates s/ar 0ith the go>ernmental /o0ers;that;be largel) o>er ho0 the) are treating /olitical 9issi9entsD 6eminist critics maintain that the 9iameter o6 the circle o6 inclusion in the realm o6 human rights la0 is entirel) too narro0.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


110 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


111 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( International &a0


International la0 inherentl) 6a>ors male norms an9 marginalizes 6eminist >ie0/oints Fellmeth 2' (7aron ga9ierC >.7. in Social Sciences -rom t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E;eminism an3
International La&= 46eoryC 0et6o3olo/yC an3 Su8stanti9e Re-ormF) ,A ntil recentlyC international la& &ent uneDamine3 8y -eminist le/al sc6olars. 1 "6ile -eminists 6a9e a%%lie3 mani-ol3 t6eories o- :uris%ru3ence to t6e -ormal an3 in-ormal le/al systems o- t6e nite3 States an3 many ot6er countries -rom Ne& 2uinea to Sau3i 7ra8iaC rarely 6a9e t6ey 3irecte3 t6eir attention to t6e %roce3ures an3 su8stance o- t6e international le/al system. 7mon/ t6ose aut6ors &6o 6a9e stu3ie3 t6e su8:ectC most ten3 to concentrate solely on &omen#s ri/6ts as an as%ect o- international 6uman ri/6ts la&C alt6ou/6 a -e&C suc6 as Au3it6 2ar3am an3 Ro8in 4eskeC 6a9e 9enture3 into international 6umanitarian la& an3 t6e la& /o9ernin/ t6e con3uct o- arme3 con-lict (ius in 8ello). Oet t6e 8roa3est treatment o- t6e su8:ect remains t6e -irst. In 1991C .ilary C6arles&ort6C C6ristine C6inkinC an3 S6elley "ri/6t :ointly attem%te3 a /eneral -eminist critiIue o- international la& in 46e 7merican Aournal o- International La&.2 46eir %ur%ose &as to s6o& t6at Ethe structures o6 international la0ma'ing an9 the content o6 the rules o6 international la0 /ri>ilege menI i6 0omen-s interests are ac'no0le9ge9 at allD the) are marginalize9. International la0 is a thoroughl) gen9ere9 s)stem.F3 46eir ar/ument %osits t6at international la0 is /er>asi>el) E/en3ere3F orC more s%eci-icallyC Emale gen9ere9CF conce%tuallyC %roce3urallyC an3 su8stanti9elyMassertions t6at 6a9e 8een re%eate3 8y -eminists many times since. I take -or /rante3 t6at 0omen e>er)0here su66er 6rom some 9egree o6 gen9er o//ression in one 6orm or anotherD that the 9istribution o6 /o0er an9 economic resources 0orl90i9e enormousl) 6a>ors menD an9 that the la0s o6 most states are strongl) gen9er biase9 in both substance an9 en6orcement. 46ese in:ustices are so o9ert an3 &i3es%rea3 t6at it is 3i--icult to %eruse any con9entional ne&s source &it6out -in3in/ e9i3ence o- t6em. .o&e9erC /en3er ineIualities 3o not necessarily s%eak to a si/ni-icant /en3er 8ias in international la&. 46e %ur%oses o- t6is article are to analyBe t6e claimsC a39ance3 8y -eministsC t6at international la0 9is6a>ors 0omen-s interests an9 >ie0/oints conce/tuall)D /roce9urall)D an9 substanti>el)I to i9enti6) the obstacles to international la0 recognizing 0omen-s >oices an9 /rotecting their interestsI an9 to suggest /ossible solutions .

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


112 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( Rights Discourse


Rights 9iscourse is too abstract an9 is 6un9amentall) masculine Fellmeth 2' (7aron ga9ierC >.7. in Social Sciences -rom t6e ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC E;eminism an3
International La&= 46eoryC 0et6o3olo/yC an3 Su8stanti9e Re-ormF) ,A *n t6e ot6er 6an3C international la0 a-ter 19!' is still characterize9 b) the language o6 rightsC 0hich some 6eministsC inclu3in/ C6arles&ort6C C6inkinC an3 "ri/6tC seem to thin' are at least %artly 9etrimental to 0omen.112 :hese authors ha>e 9escribe9 rights 9iscourse as characterize9 b) a masculine >oice that is too abstract an9 absolute to re/resent 0omen-s a//roaches to com/eting nee9s. Se9eral ar/uments im%u/n t6e 9alue o- t6e conce%t o- ri/6ts. 7ccor3in/ to oneC E0omen-s rightsF are an ina9eHuate solution to 6emale o//ression because 0omen-s rights sometimes com/ete 0ith the GrightsF o6 menD 0hich means that 0omen-s nee9s or 9esires ma) not al0a)s /re>ail o>er men-s. ;or eDam%leC reli/ious ri/6ts or cultural 8elie-s may lea3 to continue3 o%%ression o- &omen in -un3amentalist societiesC an3 %rotection o- -amily ri/6ts mi/6t %reser9e t6e uneIual %o&er structure &it6in t6e -amily in tra3itional societies. 7not6erC 8roa3er ar/ument is t6at rights 9iscourse is sim/listic an9 6ails to sol>e the 6un9amental societal imbalances that gi>e rise to the nee9 6or rights in the 6irst /lace . 7-ter allC rights are onl) necessar) 0hen the rights hol9er 9oes not ha>e enough /o0er (economicC %oliticalC or ot6er&ise) to /rotect 6er o&n interests &it6out %u8lic inter9ention.113

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( &a0/In9i>i9ual Rights


:he conce/t o6 Gin9i>i9ual rightsF is inherentl) masculine in that is suggests a se/arateness b) 0hich 0omen 9o not a//l) Smith $% (,atriciaC e3itor an3 aut6orC E;eminist Auris%ru3enceFC %. !935!93C Astor) ,A
46e -irst %ur%ose o- t6is c6a%ter is to %ut -or&ar3 t6e /lo8al an3 critical claim t6at 8y 9irtue o- t6eir s6are3 em8race o- t6e se%aration t6esisC all o- our mo9ern legal theor)58y &6ic6 I mean Kli8eral le/alismK an3 Kcritical le/al t6eoryK collecti9ely55is essentially an3 irretrie>abl) masculine. 0y use o- KIK a8o9e &as inaut6enticC :ust as t6e mo3ernC increasin/ use o- t6e -emale %ronoun in li8eral an3 critical le/al t6eoryC alt6ou/6 &ell inten3e3C is em%irically an3 eD%erientially -alse. For the cluster o- claims that :ointly con; stitute the Jse/aration thesisJ;;the claim that human beings are C 3e-initionallyC 9istinct 6rom one anotherC t6e claim t6at t6e re-erent o- KIK is sin/ular an3 unam8i/uousC the claim that the 0or9 in9i>i9ual has an unconteste9 biological meaningC namelyD that 0e are each /h)sicall) in9i>i9uate9 6rom e>er) otherD the claim that 0e are in9i>i9uals J6irstDJ an9 the claim that 0hat se/arates us is e/istemologicall) an9 morall) /rior to 0hat connects us55&6ile Ktri9ially trueK o- menC are %atently untrue o- &omen. In3ee3C %er6a%s t6e central insi/6t o- 6eminist theor) o- t6e last 3eca3e has been that 0oman are Jessentiall) connecte9DJ not Kessentially se/arateDJ 6rom the rest o6 human li6eC 8ot6 materiallyC t6rou/6 %re/nancyC intercourseC an3 8reast -ee3in/C an3 eDistentiallyC t6rou/6 t6e moral an3 %ractical li-e. Ib) human beings legal theorists mean 0omen as 0ell as men then the se/aration thesis is clearl) 6alse. I6D alternati>el)C 8y 6uman 8ein/s t6ey mean t6ose -or &6om t6e se%aration t6esis is trueC then 0omen are not human beings. ItNs not 6ar3 to /uess &6ic6 is meant.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

&in' ( &a0
:he la0 0ill en9lessl) subor9inate 0omen b) classi6)ing G/ro/erF beha>ior Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 12!)I0
*ne conseIuence o- la& in t6e .S. is 3iscrimination a/ainst /rou%s o- %eo%le in t6e 3istri8ution o- 8ene-its an3 8ur3ens. &a0 must en9lessl) 9iscriminateD or classi6)D in /ro>i9ing the stan9ar9s b) 0hich /eo/le &it6 a la&5an35or3er maintainin/ %ers%ecti9e ma) /re9ict t6eir beha>ior. 0ost %eo%le 6a9e a la&5an35or3er maintainin/ %ers%ecti9e. 46ey are eD%ecte3 to 8ecause this stabilizes the regime.2 ,omen are one social /rou% subor9inate9 b) this en9less 9iscrimination an9 allocation o6 >alue9 things. In t6e &or3s o- 2aya tri C6akra9orty S%i9akC a 3enial 8y la& o- &omen to t6emsel9es eD%un/es Kt6e clitoris as t6e si/ni-ier o- t6e seDe3 su8:ect.K3 4o se%arate outC consistentlyC seDuality an3 re%ro3uction in 3e-inin/ &omenNs le/al status &oul3 intro3uce to seD5 an3 /en3er58ase3 classi-ications a res%onsi9eness not currently %resent. &egal re6orms ten3 instea3 to ?usti6) 9is/ossessionC maintainin/ to t6e eDtent %ossi8le su%eror3inate male59alue5linke3 le/al %racticesC inclu3in/ em%6asis on &omenNs re%ro3ucti9e -unction an3 3e5em%6asis o- seDuality as social construct. Re6orms 6ail to re/resent 0omenSs >oices orC as .elene CiDous 6as &rittenC Kson/ 8e-ore la&.K! In t6is conteDtC it seems 6utile to eD%ect to reco>er re/resentations o6 9amage sustaine9 b) 0omenC in our many cultural communitiesC an3 o- &6atC as a matter o- 6istoryC &e 6a9e lost.' In t6is re/ar3C la0 as an embo9iment o6 collecti>e 9ecisionC as means to sur>i>al an3 sel-5 3estructionC seems insu66icient 6or our nee9s.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


111 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ( 4//ression/4therization
Patriarch) is a sel6;6ul6illing /ro/hec) ( the more uneHuall) 0omen are treate9D the more the) are sub?ugate9 Fellmeth 2' (7aronC Int. Rel. S OaleC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 22(3)C %. ('+5)33)I0
,rior to t6e recent -eminist -ocus on international la&C -eminists a%%roac6e3 3omestic le/al systems &it6 t6e 8asic assum%tion t6at the

un9erl)ing /ur/ose o6 6eminist acti>ism shoul9 be eHual treatment o6 men an9 0omen un9er la0 an9 in the la0. 46e seminal court case &as Ree3 9. Ree3C ) in &6ic6 t6e S Su%reme Court annulle3 a state la& /rantin/ males
automatic %re-erence o9er -emales in t6e a%%ointment o- estate a3ministrators. 7-ter t6eir 9ictory in Ree3C -eminists 8e/an to c6allen/e a &i3e 9ariety o- la&s t6at e9ince3 3irect an3 in3irect 3iscrimination a/ainst &omen. :heir metho9 anal)ze9 ho0 substanti>e legal theories a//lie9 to 6act scenarios to 9isa9>antage 0omen . ;rances *lsenC -or eDam%leC a39ocate3 9ery %ra/matically t6at -eminists s6oul3 c6allen/e t6ose la&s t6at currently 6a9e t6e most %ernicious e--ects on &omen. + 7t t6e core o- t6is mo3e o- -eminist critiIue is an attack on s%eci-ic le/al -ictions 3ra&in/ a 8oun3ary 8et&een men an3 &omen. &egal rules

/re9icate9 on male/6emale 9i66erences are 6oun9e9 u/on sel6;6ul6illing /ro/hecies. ,hen the la0 treats men an9 0omen uneHuall)D the) become uneHual b) that >er) 6act. 0ore recentlyC certain ra3ical 6eminists ha>e come to attac' the /atriarchal state an9 its legal a//aratus altogether as /ro9ucts an9 /er/etuaters o6 male o//ression. 9 46is &as in some cases a %er6a%s ni6ilistic res%onse to t6e -rustratin/ im%ossi8ility o- true
neutral le/ality in t6e -ace o- certain 8iolo/ical 3i--erences 8et&een men an3 &omenC suc6 as %re/nancy an3 t6e 3is%arity in /eneral %6ysical siBe an3 stren/t6. ;or eDam%leC in 19)!C -eminists c6allen/e3 t6e -act t6at Cali-ornia 3isa8ility la& co9ere3 9irtually e9ery me3ical con3itionC inclu3in/ se9eral 9oluntary me3ical %roce3uresC 8ut 3i3 not co9er %re/nancy. 10 46e Su%reme Court u%6el3 t6e la& as non3iscriminatoryC 6o&e9erC 8ecauseC on its -aceC it 3i3 not 3iscriminate a/ainst &omen. 11 7ccor3in/ to t6e CourtNs reasonin/C t6e la& eDclu3e3 t6e con3ition o- %re/nancyJ 8ot6 men an3 &omen can 8e non5%re/nantJ er/oC t6e la& 3oes not 3iscriminate 8et&een men an3 &omen. 46e -act t6at only &omen 3o in -act 8ecome %re/nant a%%arently 3i3 not in-luence t6e Court. 46is reasonin/ o%ene3 t6e a8sur3 %ossi8ility o- lu%us or 8reast cancer 8ein/ eDclu3e3 &it6out raisin/ an issue o- 3iscriminationC as 8ot6 men an3 &omen can 8e -ree -rom lu%us an3 8reast cancer. I- one i/nores t6e e--ects o- t6e la& an3 assumes t6at men an3 &omen are eIual in e9ery &ayC t6e Court &as un3ou8te3ly correct. .o&e9erC eIuality 3oes not mean Ki3enticality.K 46ere is an un8reaka8le link 8et&een /en3er an3 suc6 con3itions as %re/nancy an3 lu%us. 12 In res%onse to t6ese set8acksC some -eminists 3etermine3 t6at t6e eIuality t6at &omen 6a3 ac6ie9e3 in some countries resulte3 in an eIuality on menNs terms. "omen 8ein/ treate3 as eIual to men too o-ten meant &omen con-ormin/ to menNs stan3ar3s o- co/nition an3 8e6a9iorC 6ealt6 an3 illnessC ac6ie9ement an3 -ailure. 4o t6e eDtent t6at 3i--erence &as reco/niBe3C %ercei9e3 -emale traitsC suc6 as %uttin/ -amily 8e-ore &orkC 6umanity 8e-ore %o&erC ecolo/y 8e-ore %ro-itC or coo%eration 8e-ore :usticeC &ere consi3ere3 &eaknesses in &omen rat6er t6an le/itimate 3i--erences in %ers%ecti9e. Feminists realize9 that

JeHualit)J meant that 0omen 9o not bene6it 0hen their nee9s are less than menSsD but that the) su66er 0hen their nee9s are greater. 0ost -eminists no& reco/niBe t6at &omen 6a9e at least some 3i--erent G$n3 ,a/e ((3H nee3s
t6an men an3 t6at eIuality o- treatment 3oes not necessarily mean eIuality in t6e ty%es or amounts o- resources t6at a society allocates to %ro/rams an3 causes t6at 8ene-it one /en3er more t6an t6e ot6er. 13 It is not :ust 8iolo/ical 3i--erences t6at man3ate 3i--erent treatment. ,ell;'no0n 6acts o6 social ineHualit)55suc6 as t6e 6i/6er inci3ence o- -emale %o9ertyC t6e &a/e 3i--erentialC t6e cor%orate K/lass ceilin/CK t6e ten3ency -or 6us8an3s to 8eat t6eir &i9es more o-ten an3 more se9erely t6an &i9es 8eat t6eir 6us8an3s55

all mean that eHual la0s in the boo's 9o not necessaril) lea9 to eHual results. For eEam/leD la0s that man9ate a minimum 0age ma) raise general 0age le>elsD but the) 9o not 6ull) re9ress the 6act that 0omen are generall) /ai9 less 6or eHual 0or'.

Patriarch) results in unchec'e9 hegemon) that see's to 9ominate an9 cause >iolence !lar' + (0ary $C ,ro-essor o- >iolo/y at ni9ersity o- Cali-orniaC
6tt%=//mail.k&u.e3u=2092/citation.as...C3;'X-n?1Xrn?1) ,A :o9a)Ss "estern /atriarchal 0orl9 >ie0 no& 9ominates /lo8al&i3e 9ialogue among the Jlea9ersJ o6 .arthSs nearly t&o 6un3re3 nation5states. Its 0ac6ia9ellian/Real%olitik assum/tions about the necessit) o6 militar) /o0er to /reser>e or9er &it6in an3 8et&een /rou%s o- 6umans trum%s 5 an3 sti6les ; other %otential >ie0/oints. ;oun3e3 on t6e 8elie- t6at Ke9ilK is innateD it 9ictates that human con6lict must be Jcontrolle9J@ global Jla0J bac'e9 b) coerci>e 6orce . :his >ie0C &6en cross5culturally im%ose3C becomes a sel66ul6illing /ro/hec)D thus JlegitimatingJ an escalating use o6 6orce . ,estern lea9ers (male an3 -emale) use a rhetoric couche9 in a Jhegemonic masculinit)J to ?usti6) their rea9) use o6 militar) 6orce to coerce Jthose 0ho are against usJ into com/liance.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


112 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Im/act ( uclear 7olocaust


:he terminal im/act to /atriarch) is nuclear holocaust S/retna' 5$ (C6arleneC 07 in $n/lis6 at >erkeleyC E$D%osin/ Nuclear ,6allaciesC %. (0)
0ost men in our /atriarchal culture are still acting out ol3 /atterns that are ra9icall) ina//ro/riate 6or the nuclear age. :o /ro>e 9ominance an9 controlC to 3istance one#s c6aracter -rom t6at o- &omenC to sur9i9e t6e tou/6est 9iolent initiationC to s6e3 t6e sacre3 8loo3 o- t6e 6eroC to colla8orate &it6 3eat6 in or3er to 6ol3 it at 8ay all o- t6ese %atriarc6al %ressures on men ha>e tra3itionally reache9 resolution in a ritual 6ashion on the battle6iel9. >ut t6ere is no lon/er any 8attle-iel3. 1oes anyone seriously 8elie9e t6at i- a nuclear %o&er &ere losin/ a crucialC lar/e5scale con9entional &ar it &oul3 re-rain -rom usin/ its multi%le5 &ar6ea3 nuclear missiles 8ecause o- some 3i%lomatic a/reementV :he militar) theater o6 a nuclear eEchange to9a) 0oul9 eEten9C instantly or e9entuallyD to all li>ing thingsC all t6e airC all t6e soilC all t6e &ater. I6 0e belie>e that 0ar is a Gnecessar) e>ilDF that /atriarchal assum/tions are sim/l) Ghuman natureDF then 0e are loc'e9 into a lieD /aral)ze9. :he ultimate result o6 unchec'e9 terminal /atriarch) 0ill be nuclear holocaust.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


113 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lternati>e ( Gen9er <nal)sis


Gen9er anal)sis /ro>i9es the means b) 0hich to Huestion the 9ee/erD e/istemological reasoning 6or to9a)-s /er>asi>e /atriarchal >iolence <mirthalingam 1 (<umaralin/amC 7ssociate ,ro-essor an3 1irector o- International ,ro/ramsC ;aculty o- La&
an3 7ssociateC 7sia Researc6 InstituteC National ni9ersity o- Sin/a%oreC E"omen#s Ri/6tsC International NormsC an3 1omestic Liolence= 7sian ,ers%ecti9esF) Feminist constructions o6 3omestic >iolence /ro>i9e an alternati>e lens t6rou/6 &6ic6 to a//raise the issue. ;rom a -eminist %ers%ecti9eC 3omestic >iolence is not an a8errationJ rat6erC it is t6e norm because it is culturall) an9 legall) acce/te9 or tolerate3. Feminism also shi6ts t6e -ocus 6rom 0omen to men b) eE/laining 0h) the male /artner-s beha>ior tra/s 0omen in >iolent relationshi/s. Social %syc6olo/ists 6a9e eD%laine3 t6is %6enomenon as a conseIuence o- 8ein/ eD%ose3 to a cycle o- 9iolence.)2 7ccor3in/ to t6is t6eoryC 3omestic a8use occurs in a re%eate3 cycle o- t6ree sta/es. 46e -irst is t6e tension58uil3in/ sta/eC &6ere t6e man 8ecomes an/ry an3 t6e &oman tries to calm 6im 3o&n to a9oi3 8ein/ 8attere3. 46is is -ollo&e3 8y t6e actual 9iolenceC &6ic6 in turn is -ollo&e3 8y a lo9in/ %6aseC &6ere t6e man tries to reconcile &it6 t6e &oman 8y assurin/ 6er t6at 6e still lo9es 6er &6ile at t6e same time makin/ 6er -eel /uilty. 46is creates a -alse 6o%e in t6e relations6i% an3 t6e &oman staysC t6us %er%etuatin/ t6e cycle. 7-ter a &6ileC t6e &oman is sim%ly una8le to lea9eJ &6at 6as 8een terme3 a con3ition o- Elearne3 6el%lessnessF sets in.)3 46rou/6 t6ese cyclesC t6e 9ictim 8elie9es or resi/ns 6ersel- to t6e -act t6at s6e cannot 6el% 6ersel-.)! .a9in/ eD%laine3 &6y &omen are una8le to lea9eC t6e more im%ortant Iuestion 8ecomes &6y men 8atter. ,er6a%sC most im%ortantlyC 6eminist theorists re>eal the hegemonic nature o6 3omestic >iolence. "6ile 6eminists ha>e constructe9 their theories 6rom a gen9er /ers/ecti>eD the central thesis reall) is about a /o0er 9i66erential or ineHualit)J 3omestic >iolence results 0hen those 0ho are in a /osition o6 /o0er eEercise control an9 9ominance o>er others. .o&e9erC on closer re-lectionC t6ere may &ell 8e a %ara3oD. Is it %o&er or t6e yearnin/ -or %o&er t6at causes 9iolenceV EIt 6as 8een sai3 t6at it is not %o&er t6at corru%tsC 8ut lack oit t6at 3oes.F)' ,o&er 6as 8een cate/oriBe3 into -i9e 8asic ty%es= eD%loitati9eC mani%ulati9eC com%etiti9eC nutrientC an3 inte/rati9e. )( 46e -irst t&o ty%es are clearly ne/ati9e -orms o- %o&er an3 t6e -irst is ar/ua8ly 9iolence sim%ly con-use3 -or %o&erJ in ot6er &or3sC it in9ol9es a %erson &6o nee3s to 8e 9iolent to o9ercome a sense o- insecurityC real or %ercei9e3. n-ortunatelyC 9iolence 6as 8ecome synonymous &it6 %o&er an3 is t6us le/itimiBe3. $9en to3ayC &ar is t6e %re-erre3 o%tion to resol9e con-lict. ;ailure to carry out a t6reat o- &ar is seen as a si/n o- &eaknessJ)) 9iolence t6us eIuals %o&erM-rom t6e 8ar room 8ra&l t6rou/6 -amily 9iolence to international con-lict.)+ Uiolence is a tool to /er/etuate 9ominance an9 G>iolence in the 6amil) shoul9 be un9erstoo9 /rimaril) as coerci>e control.F )9 46e gen9er anal)sis sho0s t6at 3omestic >iolence is locate9 in an uneHual /o0er relationshi/ an9 there6ore the legal res/onse to 3omestic >iolence cannot al0a)s be base9 on /roce9ural eHualit)I ratherC it 6as to %romote substanti>e eHualit). :he gen9er /ers/ecti>e is essential in or9er to relocate the center o6 eHuilibriumD as 0ell as to gi>e the 9isem/o0ere9 a greater >oice in the legal s)stem. Suc6 an a%%roac6 is %articularly im%ortant in t6e 7sian conteDtC &6ere t6e %atriarc6al an3 6ierarc6ical structures 6a9e not -acilitate3 an a3eIuate a%%reciation o- -eminist %ers%ecti9es in la& an3 society. 46e N S%ecial Ra%%orteur on Liolence 7/ainst "omen un3erscore3 t6e 6istorical eDclusion o- &omen#s 9oice in t6e %u8lic 3e8ate in 7sia 8y recitin/ t6is -amous Iuote= "6y 6a9e you a%%eare3 8e-ore t6is /at6erin/V "6y 3o you 8ello& like a co& in la8ourV Oour time must 8e near. S6ameless &omen &it6 no sense o- 3ecorum >ello& in /at6erin/s ores%ecta8le men.+0

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


115 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lternati>e ( !onsciousness Raising


:he alternati>e is to >ote negati>e. Re?ection o6 masculine 6orms o6 legal inter/retation o/ens u/ 0a)s to change e/istemologies an9 ontologies o6 9omination through consciousness raising 8acKinnon $% (Cat6arineC 7.C ,ro-essor o- La& at t6e ni9ersity o- 0ic6i/anC E7 ;eminist Lie& o- t6e StateFC
23952!0) ,A &a0 6rom the male /oint o6 >ie0 combines coercion 0ith authorit)D /olicing societ) 0here its e9ges are eE/ose9@ at /oints o6 social resistanceD con6lictD an9 brea'9o0n. Since t6ere is no %lace outsi3e t6is system -rom a -eminist stan3%ointC i- its soli%sistic lock coul3 8e 8rokenC suc6 moments coul3 %ro9i3e %oints o- con-rontationC %er6a%s e9en o%enin/s -or c6an/e. 46e %oint o- 9ie& o- a total system emer/es as %articular only &6en con-ronte3C in a &ay it cannot i/noreC 8y a 3eman3 -rom anot6er %oint o- 9ie&. 46is is &6y e/istemolog) must be controlle9 6or ontological 9ominance to succee9D an9 0h) consciousness raising is sub>ersi>e. It is also &6yC 0hen la0 si9es 0ith the /o0erlessC as it occasionally 6asC2 it is sai9 to engage in something other than la0 ( /olitics or /olic) or /ersonal o/inion ( an9 to 9elegitimate itsel6.3 ,hen seemingl) ontological con9itions are challenge9 6rom the collecti>e stan9/oint o6 a 9issi9ent realit)D the) become >isible as e/istemological. Dominance su99enl) a//ears no longer ine>itable. ,hen it loses its groun9 it loosens its gri/.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


11$ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lternati>e ; Re?ection Ke)


:he eEclusion o6 0omen 6rom the human rights s/here can-t be en9e9 b) sim/l) a99ing 0omen ( the entire s)stem nee9s to be bro'en 9o0n Arems $3 ( $9aC La& S o- Leu9enC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 19(1)C %. 13))I0
7uman rights are not &6at t6ey claim to 8eC -eminists say. 46ey are a /ro9uct o6 the 9ominant male hal6 o6 the 0orl9C -rame3 in t6eir lan/ua/eC re6lecting their nee9s an9 as/irations. "6ereas t6e Kri/6ts o- manK as ori/inally
concei9e3 8y t6e /reat li8eral t6inkers &ere not inten3e3 to inclu3e &omenC to3ayNs Kuni9ersal 6uman ri/6tsK still o9erlook t6em as a matter o- -act. 46e -eminist critiIue o- 6uman ri/6ts t6us 8asically ar/ues -or t6e inclusion o- &omen in t6e 6uman ri/6ts %rotection system. ;eminists o- all stran3s 1 a39ance 9arious means to realiBe t6is aim. 0ost at ease in t6e %resent 6uman ri/6ts system are t6e Kli8eral -eminists.K 2 46eir ma:or concernC eIual treatment o- men an3 &omenC un3erlies t6e non3iscrimination %ro9isions o- most 6uman ri/6ts treaties. 3 Li8eral -eminists stay &it6in t6e eDistin/ 6uman ri/6ts -rame&orkC usin/ its lan/ua/e an3 lo/ic to ar/ue -or an increase3 concern -or &omenNs nee3s. <aren $n/le 3istin/uis6es 8et&een 3octrinalists an3 institutionalists. ! 46e -irst concentrate on 8rin/in/ situations &6ere t6ey consi3er &omenNs ri/6ts to 8e 9iolate3 un3er t6e %rotection o- s%eci-ic eDistin/ 6uman ri/6ts %ro9isions. G$n3 ,a/e 13)H 46e latter -ocus on im%ro9in/ t6e %resent institutional structure -or t6e en-orcement o- t6e 6uman ri/6ts o- &omen. In t6e eyes o- many -eminists to3ayC a li8eral Ja99 0oman an9 stirJ a//roach 9oes not go 6ar enough. Cultural -eminists as &ell as ra3ical -eminists are con9ince3 t6at a real inclusion o6 0omen in the human rights s)stem reHuires a trans6ormation o6 that s)stem. ' :he human rights conce/t must get ri9 o6 the JmalenessJ 0ith 0hich its conce/ts an9 structure are imbue9. Ra3ical -eminists maintain that all theories base9 on eHualit) or 9i66erence ma'e the same mista'e o6 using a Jmale )ar9stic'.K :he) 0arn against >aluing 9i66erences 0hich are a /ro9uct o6 a /atriarchal societ) &6ic6 nee3s to 8e 3ismantle3. 20 :he 'e) Jgi>ensJ are male 9ominance an9 6emale subor9inationD the central locus o6 0hich is the seEual s/here . 21 46e -act t6at many &omen 3o not %ercei9e t6eir li9es in t6is &ay is eD%laine3 8y a t6eory o- K-alse consciousness.K 22 7lt6ou/6 ra3ical -eminists are strin/ent in t6eir critiIue o- la& an3 ri/6ts as instruments -or t6e %er%etuation o- male 3ominanceC 23 researc6 -or t6is %a%er 3i3 not unco9er any eD%licit re:ection o- 6uman ri/6ts as suc6. Rat6erC like t6e cultural -eministsC t6ey reco/niBe t6e strate/ic &ort6 o- G$n3 ,a/e 1!0H 6uman ri/6ts. 2! ;rom a com%letely 3i--erent %ers%ecti9eC ra3ical -eminists come to some o- t6e same conclusions as cultural -eminists &it6 re/ar3 to 6uman ri/6ts. :he /ublic//ri>ate an9 other 9ichotomies ha>e to be bro'en 9o0n

because the) are a co>er;u/ 6or the maintenance o6 male 9ominance in the s/heres that are subseHuentl) 'e/t outsi9e human rights scrutin). 2' 46e creation o- ne& K&omenNs 6uman ri/6tsK an3 t6e
rec6aracteriBation o- eDistin/ ri/6ts are t&o means a39ocate3 to i3enti-y instances o- &omenNs su8or3ination an3 o- 9iolence a/ainst &omen as 6uman ri/6ts 9iolations. 2(

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


120 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lternati>e ; In9i>i9ual <ction Ke)


:he in9i>i9ual is the 'e) starting /oint ( to use grou/ rights causes essentialism an9 eliminates in9i>i9ual cultural choices Arems $3 ( $9aC La& S o- Leu9enC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 19(1)C %. 1(2)I0
46e t6ir3 /ui3eline -or 6an3lin/ con-licts 8et&een -eminism an3 cultural relati9ism is to ta'e as a starting /oint the in9i>i9ual. Not t6e li8eral conce%t o- an a8stract in3i9i3ual &6ic6 is re:ecte3 8y cultural relati9ists an3 -eminists alikeC 8ut a conteEtualize9 in9i>i9ualC &6o con-orms to our Ks%eci-icityK /ui3eline. :o aban9on the in9i>i9ual in 6a>or o6 an a//roach through grou/ rights 0oul9C 6o&e9erC 9en) the 6eminist concern about the o//ressi>eness o6

grou/s. I6 the >ie0/oint o6 the grou/ is ta'enD there is a ris' o6 essentialismD because it becomes 9i66icult to ta'e internal 9i66erences G$n3 ,a/e 1(2H an3 e9olutions insi3e t6e /rou% into account. 2rou% ri/6ts are not t6e only &ay to eD%ress t6e Kconnecte3nessK or Kem8e33e3nessK o- 6uman 8ein/s in terms o- 6uman ri/6ts. In9i>i9ual rights can ha>e an im/ortant communal as/ect. 46is is clear -or -amily ri/6tsC reli/ious ri/6tsC an3 associational ri/6ts. >ut alsoC i- a
certain &ay o- s%eakin/ is c6aracteristic -or a %articular community a communal 3imension may 8e inte/rate3 into t6e -ree3om os%eec6. 7n3 some cultural or communal as%ects o- someoneNs &ay o- li-e may 8e 8rou/6t un3er t6e ri/6t to %ri9acy. 13! 0any ot6er eDam%les coul3 8e /i9enC 8ut t6e main %oint is t6at intro9ucing s/eci6icit) in an in9i>i9ual rights a//roach ma'es

it

/ossible to >alue a concrete /ersonSs communal tiesD not those that the 9ominant 6orces insi9e the communit) 0oul9 li'e to attribute to him or her. .ach in9i>i9ual shoul9 ha>e the right to /ractice his or her culture an9 tra9itionsD but li'e0iseD each in9i>i9ual shoul9 ha>e the right to re?ect them C -or
instance 8ecause 6e or s6e 6as 8een in-luence3 8y contact &it6 anot6er culture or &it6 international -eminism. 46ese in-luences are as muc6 a %art o- reality as tra3itional culture is. 46e international 6uman ri/6ts system s6oul3 3e-en3 t6is Ko%t5outK %ossi8ility 13' an3 take u% res%onsi8ility -or t6e &omen &6o use it. 13(

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


121 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<lternati>e ; In9i>i9ual Re?ection Sol>enc)


:o sto/ the entra/ment o6 gen9er eHualit) la0s 0e shoul9 re>ise our 9e6inition o6 eHualit)D beginning on an in9i>i9ual le>el Sn)9er % (0oseC La& S o- ConnecticutC -e.uconn.e3u/3ocuments/$ssayP20Connections/20035
200(/Sny3er.%3-)I0 7lt6ou/6 t6is use o6 language has tra//e9 0omenC 0ackinnon in3icates t6at it ma) ha>e the /o0er to liberate as 0ell. 46e -inal ste% o- Ric6Ns re59ision al/orit6m takes t6e &ork (in t6is caseC our le/al co3es) 7s Ka clue to G YH ho0 0e can begin to see an9 name;an9 there6ore li>e ( a6reshK (Ric6 (29). 0ac<innon sees t6is clue in t6e %romise o- eIuality
ma3e 8y our /en3er eIuality la&s= *n t6e le9el o- t6e stateC le/al /uarantees o- eIuality in li8eral re/imes %ro9i3e an o%enin/. G...H ;rom a %ers%ecti9e t6at un3erstan3s t6at &omen 3o not 6a9e seD eIualityC t6is la& means t6atC once eHualit) is meaning6ull) 9e6me9D the la0 cannot be a//lie9 0ithout changing societ). (2!2) 7ccor3in/ to 0ac<innonC a re9e6inition o6 the term JeHualit)J 0ill sol>e the /roblem o6 our legal s)stemSs inherent bias . 4nce this renaming is achie>e9D the la0 0ill 0or' to remo>e the 9ominant;subor9inate tra/ C rat6er t6an merely -reein/ &omen to %artici%ate in it. . In K4o&ar3 a ;eminist Auris%ru3enceCK 0ac<innon s6o&s us t6e %o&er t6at an act o6 re;>ision can 6a9e. 46e e--ect ma) begin 0ith but nee9 not be limite9 to one /ersonSs li6eD i9entit)D or >oice an9 it nee9 not be limite9 to the abstract. .. .ereC 8acKinnon urges a change that 0oul9 a66ect all the 0omen un9er our legal s)stem in concrete 0a)s. 46e met6o3 Ric6 %ro%oses -or suc6 a conce%tual re59ision is sur%risin/ly rele9antC as 0ac<innon incor%orates all o- t6e ste%s Ric6 %ro%oses in 6er sc6ema -or t6e re9ision o- literature. It is a tri8ute to t6e -leDi8ility an3 e--ecti9eness o- Ric6Ns system t6at 0ac<innon is a8le to incor%orate it 6ereC in a critiIue o- la&.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


122 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<2@ Perm
:he a66-s attem/t at critical la0 is still masculinist ( com/lete reconce/tualization is nee9e9 Sla>in $0 (Sara6C ,oli Sci S >u--alo State Colle/eC "inter 1990C Aournal o- "omen#s .istory 1(3)C %. 12!)I0
7ccor3in/ to "estC Rule o- &a0 is masculinist regar9less o6 0hether a//roache9 through legal liberalism or critical legal theor). ;eminist t6eory can 6a9e not6in/ in common &it6 eit6er le/al t6eory 8ecause 6eminist theor) is out to 9escribe the Jsub?ecti>it) o6 human eEistence.K1N 46is 3escri%tion or re%resentation inclu3es &6at it is like to 8e %ossesse3 8y anot6eriMone -unction o- %atriarc6y. 46e a%%lication o- -eminist t6eory to Rule o- La& &orks to tell &omenNs stories20 a8out &6at &oul3 8e t6e si/ni-icance o- lo9e to Ka &ell le3 %u8lic li-e.K21 Feminist theor)Ss a//lication re>eals 0omenSs construction b) Rule o6 &a0 as /ersons un0orth) o6 >alorization . Feminist theor) 0or's to 9econstruct this authoritati>e imager). In "estNs 9ie&C a KAuris%ru3ence nmo3i-ie3K 8y le/al li8eralism or critical le/al t6eory &ill 8e a reconstructi9e -eminist :uris%ru3ence. It &ill /i9e 9oice to t6e su8:ecti9ity o- &omenNs eD%erience an3 &omenNs %oint o9ie& a8out our li9es. Le/al re-orms t6at -eminists may alrea3y 6a9e ac6ie9e3 &ill 8e instrumental to t6is 9oicin/ o- eD%eriences an3 9ie&%oints. .o&e9erC t6ese re6orms 0ill nee9 to be reconce/tualize9 becauseD in t6eir ori/inal -ormC the)

analogize9 harms 9one to 0omen an9 0omenSs nee9s to harms 9one to men an9 to menSs nee9s .

Incor/orating 6eminist >ie0s into a masculine logic co;o/ts our mo>ement Scales $% (7nn CC ,ro-essor o- La& at t6e ni9ersity o- 0eDicoC E;eminist Auris%ru3enceFC %. 9+599)
0ale an3 -emale %erce%tions o- 9alue are not s6are3 an3C are %er6a%s not e9en %erce%ti8le to eac6 ot6er. 2) In our current /en3eriBe3 realmC t6ere-oreC t6e Kri/6ts58ase3K an3 Kcare58ase3K et6ics cannot 8e 8len3e3. ,atriarc6al %syc6olo/y sees 9alue as 3i--erently 3istri8ute3 8et&een men an3 &omen= 0en are rationalJ &omen are not. ;eminist %syc6olo/y su//ests 3i--erent conce%tions o- 9alue= "omen are entirely rationalC 8ut society cannot accommo3ate t6em 8ecause t6e male stan3ar3 6as 3e-ine3 into o8li9ion any 9ersion orationality 8ut its o&n. 2+ ,ara3i/matic male 9alues like o8:ecti9ityC are 3e-ine3 as eDclusi9eC i3enti-ie3 8y t6eir %resume3 o%%osites. 46ose 9aluesC cannot 8e content &it6 multi%licityJ t6ey create t6e ot6er an3 t6en 3e9our it. *8:ecti9ity i/nores conteDtJ reason is t6e o%%osite o- emotionJ ri/6ts %reclu3e care. 7s lon/ as t6e rulin/ i3eolo/y is a -unction o- t6is 3ic6otomiBationC incor/orationism threatens to be mere coo/tationD a more subtle >ersion o6 6emale in>isibilit). A) tr)ing to ma'e e>er)thing too niceD incor/orationism re/resses contra9ictions. It usur/s 0omenSs language in or9er to 6urther 9e6ine the 0orl9 in the male imageI it thus 9e/ri>es 0omen o6 the /o0er o6 naming. 2$ Incor/orationism means to gi>e o>er the 0orl9D because it means to sa) to those in /o0er@ J,e 0ill use )our language an9 0e 0ill let )ou inter/ret it.J

:he /ermutation incor/orates the masculine logic ( assuring seEism rearticulates itsel6 Scales $% (7nn CC ,ro-essor o- La& at t6e ni9ersity o- 0eDicoC E;eminist Auris%ru3enceFC %. 9+)
Incor/orationism %resumes t6at &e can &6i% t6e %ro8lem o- social ineIuality 8y a33in/ yet anot6er %ron/ to t6e alrea3y multi%ron/e3 le/al tests my stu3ents -eel t6ey must memoriBe. Incor%orationism su--ers -rom t6e same lack o- 9ision as t6e KeIual ri/6ts/ s%ecial ri/6tsK 3e8ate. >ot6 /resumeD that male su/remac) is sim/l) a ran9om collection o6 irrationalities in an other0ise rational coeEistence . >ot6 %resume t6at instances o- ineIuality are mere le/al mistakes55a series o- -ailures to treat eIuals as eIuals &6ic6 &e can -iD i- &e can :ust s%ot t6e irrationality in enou/6 cases. 7s ,ro-essor 0ac<innon 6as 3emonstrate3C 6o&e9erC -rom suc6 9ie&%oints &e cannot see t6at male su%remacy is a com%lete social system -or t6e a39anta/e oone seD o9er anot6er. 2! :he in?ustice o6 seEism is not irrationalit)I it is 9omination. &a0 must 6ocus on the latterD an9 that 6ocus cannot be achie>e9 through a 6ormal lens. Ain9ing oursel>es to rules 0oul9 hel/ us onl) i6 seEism 0ere a legal error.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12% Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Frame0or' ; Discourse First


Discourse /ermeates all 'no0le9ge ; to 9econstruct it 0e must /ro9uce 6eminine 0a)s o6 seeing the 0orl9 :uc'er 5 (Au3it6C La& S 2eor/eto&nC *cto8er 200+C "omenC ;amily an3 2en3er in Islamic La&C %. ))I0
46e ma:or 3i--iculty &it6 &oman5centere3 a%%roac6esC accor3in/ to a le/al t6eorist like 1rucilla CornellC is t6at t6ey rest on t6e %remise t6at t6ere is a kno&a8le &oman#s Enature.F >ut 6o& 3o &e come to kno& t6is natureV t6e 3econstructi9e %ro:ect resists t6e reinstatement o- a t6eory o- -emale nature or essence as a %6iloso%6ically mis/ui3e3 8olsterin/ o- ri/i3 /en3er i3entity &6ic6 cannot sur9i9e t6e reco/nition o- t6e %er-ormati9e role o- lan/ua/eC an3 more s%eci-ically t6e meta%6or. 46us 9econstruction also

9emonstrates that there is no essence o6 ,oman that can be e66ecti>el) abstracte9 6rom the linguistic re/resen; tations o6 ,oman. :he re6erent ,oman is 9e/en9ent u/on the s)stems o6 re/resentation in 0hich she is gi>en meaning.10 46us the ,oman an9 6or that matter the 8an o6 legal 9iscourse are 9iscursi>e constructsC only t&o o- many contri8utions -rom 9arious -iel3s o- kno&le3/e t6at /en3er society. Since this 9iscursi>e /ro?ect /ermeates all /ro9uction o6 'no0le9geD 0e are not able to ste/ outsi9e language to ascertain the true nature o6 either the 6eminine or the masculine. 7t its most restricti9eC t6e -ocus on
3econstruction can lea3 a&ay -rom /i9in/ any attention at all to &omen#s li9e3 eD%erience t6e 3an/er 6ere is t6at -eminists &ill %osit la& as a E/en3erin/ %racticeF an3 concentrate only on un9eilin/ its E/en3ere3 narrati9esF &it6out any re-erence to &omen#s li9e3 eD%eriencesC an3 t6ere-ore &it6out any sense o- %ros%ects -or c6an/e in t6e system.11 In -airness to CornellC t6is is not 6er %osition. *n t6e contraryC s6e t6inks t6at the /ro?ect o6 9econstructing le/al (or ot6er) 9iscourse can be 9one using

imagination an9 meta/hor to /ro9uce alternate >isionsD 6emi; nine 0a)s o6 seeing a 0orl9 in 0hich gen9er /la)s out >er) 9i66erentl) s6e 8elie9es in t6e %o&er o- uto%ian t6inkin/. In this more acti>ist 9econstruc; ti>e mo9eD an eE/loration o6 the 0a)s in 0hich la0 an9 legal institutions construct gen9er ta'es its /lace as /art o6 the larger /ro?ect o6 eEamining gen9ering /ractices in t6e societ) as a &6ole &it6 an eye to
c6an/e. 46e la& is :ust one small site o- %ossi8le contest o9er /en3ere3 %o&er relationsC o- courseC an3 /en3er5neutral la&C or rat6er la& t6at realiBes t6e -ull %otential o- 8ot6 t6e masculine an3 t6e -eminineC coul3 only emer/e in t6e conteDt o- a trans-ormation o- t6e entire society.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12+ Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

Frame0or' ( Re?ection First


4ur im/act 6rame0or' is to /rioritize the 9ismantling o6 /atriarch) ( this change in im/act calculus is critical to o/en the 9oor to ne0 structures an9 a>oi9 eEtinction French $2 (0arilynC ,61 -rom .ar9ar3C E>eyon3 ,o&er= *n "omenC 0enC an3 0oralsFC %.!9!5!9') ,A
Aust as our %resent morality o--ers us no ima/ina8le alternati9e to t6e 3omination o- %o&erC to %o&er as t6e 6i/6est /oo3C so our /resent social an3 %olitical situation /ro>i9es us 0ith no imaginable alternati>e to the three G0orstF scenarios@ global nuclear 0arI global totalitarianismI or 9esiccation o6 the /lanet . "e cannot s%rea3 our min3s into a 3istant -utureJ like alco6olicsC &e take li-e one 3ay at a timeC %lo33in/ onC 6o%in/ t6e &orst can 8e a9erte3 until &e oursel9es are 3ea3. ,e choose the status HuoC not in -ree3om 8ut in 3es%airJ 0e 6ear actionC since any act may entail somet6in/ &orse t6an t6e %resent situation. >ut i6 0e 9eci9e acti>el) to o//ose /atriarchal >aluesC an3 try to create a ne& systemC 0e 6in9 no clear 9irection. ;or our system incarnates %atriarc6al 9aluesJ our institutions are in9aria8ly 6ierarc6ical. .ierarc6y is a structure 3esi/ne3 to retain an3 transmit %o&erJ t6us as lon/ as our institutions are 6ierarc6icalC %o&er remains su%reme. OetC 8ecause %o&er is in3ee3 su%remeC no alternati9e structure is as success-ul in our &orl3. $D%eriments &it6 more 3emocratic arran/ementsC con3ucte3 in classroomsC 8usinessesC an3 e3itorial o--ices 3urin/ t6e 19)0sC en3e3 in rancor an3 non%ro3ucti9eness. 7/ain &e con-ront a close3 an3 9icious circle. e0 structures can emerge success6ull) onl) in res/onse to a ne0 or 9i66erent set o6 en9s. ,hen 0e >alue %leasure human 0ell;being ( as much as /ro6it "/o0er#D ne0 structures 0ill seem to generate themsel>es. 7n3 in3ee3C eDam%les o- -orms ot6er t6an 6ierarc6y a8oun3 in t6e scienti-ic 3isci%lines at %resentC a9aila8le to ser9e as meta%6ors -or social an3 %olitical arran/ements. 0any t6inkers 6a9e su//este3 t6at our mo9els o- t6e uni9erse are essentially meta%6orsC images that ma'e concrete our >ision o6 the relationshi/s among 6orces in our 0orl9. Im/ortant shi6ts in scienti-ic thin'ing are al0a)s 6ollo0e9 b) shi6ts in socio/olitical structuresC &6et6er 8ecause a s6i-t in t6ou/6t in one 3isci%line e9entually %ermeates culture as a &6oleC or 8ecause a s6i-t in cultural attitu3es is most easily %erce%ti8le in its most ri/orous t6inkin/ scienti-ic t6inkin/. In any caseC alt6ou/6 &e may 6a9e 3i--iculty ima/inin/ a 8usinessC sayC structure3 ot6er t6an 6ierarc6icallyC &e can stretc6 our ima/inations 8y consi3erin/ t6e ne& meta%6ors t6at 6a9e arisen in astronomy an3 su85atomic t6eoryC in 6uman %ortrayal o- t6e macro5 an3 microcosmMan3 in 8iolo/y an3 ecolo/y.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


121 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

==<66 <ns0ers==

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


122 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ o <lternati>e Sol>enc)


o Sol>enc) ( 6ocus on the state allo0s non;state actors to eli9e scrutin)D acti>ists su//ort go>ernmental res/onsibilit) an9 G4s are 0orse than the state Ainion $1 (2ayleC ,oli Sci S C Santa >ar8araC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 1)(3)C %. '1))I0
It mi/6t 8e ar/ue3 t6at the

state is not the onl) /o0er6ul actor that 0ants to limit the reach o6 human rights to onl) the J/ublicJ 9omain. :he /ressure to 9o so might come as 0ell 6rom the J/ri>ateJ realm. Religious institutions an9 cor/orationsD 6or eEam/leC 6a9e muc6 to /ain in t6e %reser9ation o- t6eir autonomy -rom t6e illusion o- in9isi8ility t6at t6e t&o5s%6eres t6eory %ro9i3es. I6 human rights concerns are 6ocuse9 solel) on the state
8ecause o- a t6eory o- t6e insulation o- t6e -amily as K%ri9ateCK t6e -alse illusion o- a G$n3 ,a/e '1)H 3ual5institution society is rein-orce3. .Ece/tionall) /o0er6ul bo9ies be)on9 the 6amilial /atriarch) thereb) esca/e scrutin) . $m%loyers (o- &omen an3 men) &6o %ay unconsciona8ly lo& &a/es -or &ork un3er in6umane con3itions &oul3 8e unlikely to &ant international 6uman ri/6ts la& 8rou/6t to 8ear a/ainst t6em. Reli/ious or3ers &it6 /en3erC raceC or caste 3isIuali-ication %olicies &oul3 similarly not &elcome suc6 attention. n3er t6e t&o5s%6eres t6eory o- society t6ese institutions 3o not eDistC an3 t6eir %ractices are e--ecti9ely s6iel3e3 -rom international 6uman ri/6ts re9ie&. "ere &omenNs eD%erience t6e -ocus o- 6uman ri/6ts la&C attention to t6e non/o9ernmental s%6ere &oul3 8e 6ei/6tene3C an3 %atterns o- social or/aniBation an3 %ractices t6at are eD%loitati9eC not :ust o- &omen an3 not :ust 8y -amilial %atriarc6sC 8ut also 8y ot6er %o&er-ul 8o3iesC &oul3 8e 8rou/6t into 8ol3 relie-. 29 46e 3enial o- t6e eDistence o- a K%ri9ateK realm o- 6uman ri/6ts 9iolations is not limite3 to t6ose &it6 an a%%arent 9este3 interest in t6e status Iuo. .uman ri/6ts t6eoristsC suc6 as 7lstonC not uncommonly -ear t6e 3ilution o- 6uman ri/6ts %rinci%les i- t6e realms are eD%an3e3 8eyon3 t6e tra3itional. 30 <cti>ist 6rien9s o6 human rightsD such as <mnest) InternationalD slo0 to >ie0 0omen as >ictims o6

9enials o6 human rightsD ha>e hel9 6irm in their >ie0 that go>ernment must be seen as the /er/etrator o6 the >iolations in or9er 6or their organization to act. 31 ,rominent -eminist t6eorists o-ten 6a9e ar/ue3 -or only a 9ery circumscri8e3 realm o- %ri9ate 6uman ri/6ts a8uses. 32 :he stan9ar9 <nglo;<merican Aill o6 Rights >ie0 o6 go>ernment as the uniHuel) /o0er6ul /otential e>il;9oer is as en9emic in the tra9itional human rights nongo>ernmental " G4# communit) as it is among go>ernments themsel>es . G$n3 ,a/e '1+H

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


123 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)


Feminist ob?ecti>es can be achie>e9 success6ull) through state action &o>en9us'i 1 (AoniC ,ro-essor o- ,olitics at >irk8eck colle/eC ni9ersity o- Lon3onC aut6or o- "omen an3
$uro%ean ,olitics an3 ;eminiBin/ %oliticsJ Cam8ri3/e uni9ersity %ress) Since the last Huarter o6 the t0entieth centur) there has been a /roli6eration o6 state agencies establishe9 to /romost 0omens rightsD o-ten calle3 &omenNs %olicy a/encies. ",7s are sometimes terme3 state -eminist. State -eminism is a conteste3 term. 4o some it is an oDymoron. It 6as 8een 9ariously 3e-ine3 as t6e acti9ities o- -eminists or -emocrats in /o9ernment an3 a3ministration (.emes 19+)J Sa&er 1990)C institutionalise3 -eminism in %u8lic a/encies ($isenstein 1990J *uts6oom 199!)C an3 t6e ca%acity o- t6e state to contri8ute to t6e -ul-ilment o- a -eminist a/en3a (Sa&er 1990J Stetson 19+)). In t6is 8ook 0e 9e6ine state 6eminism as the a9>ocac) o6 0omenSs mo>ement 9eman9s insi9e the state . :he establishment o- ",7s change9 the setting in 0hich the 0omenSs mo>ement an9 other 6eminists coul9 a9>ance their aimsD as the) o66ere9D in /rinci/leD the /ossibilit) to in6luence the agen9a an9 to 6urther 6eminist goals t6rou/6 %u8lic %olicies -rom insi3e t6e state a%%aratus. ",7s coul3 increase &omenNs access to t6e state 8y -urt6erin/ &omenNs %artici%ation in %olitical 3ecision5makin/C an3 8y insertin/ -eminist /oals into %u8lic %olicy. 46us ",7s may en6ance t6e %olitical re%resentation o- &omen. ",7s 9ary consi3era8ly in t6eir ca%acityC resources an3 e--ecti9enessC raisin/ Iuestions a8out t6e circumstances un3er &6ic6 t6ey are most likely to en6ance &omenNs %olitical re%resentation. :o un9erstan9 them 0e nee9 to consi9er in 9etail the /art the) /la) in /rocesses o6 incor/orating 0omenSs interests (su8stanti9e re%resentation) into /olic); ma'ingD a reHuirement that is /articularl) im/ortant 0hen the 9ecisions are about /olitical re/resentation itsel6.

Perm sol>es ( the /o0er o6 the state nee9s to 0or' in con?unction 0ith /o0er hierarchiesD to be un9erstoo9 in the /ro/er conteEt Sch0artzman $$ (LisaC ,6iloso%6y S o- NO Stony >rookC .y%atia 1!(2)C %. 33)I0
In res%onse to t6isC a li8eral mi/6t ar/ue t6at 8ecause there

are la0sM8ot6 criminal an3 ci9ilM/re>enting harms /er/etrate9 b) either the go>ernment or b) in9i>i9ualsC %rotection alrea3y eDists a/ainst t6e systemic 6arms oracismC G$n3 ,a/e 33H seDismC classismC etc. "6et6er an in3i9i3ualC /rou%C or /o9ernment commits t6ese sorts o- 6armsC la&s alrea3y eDist to a33ress t6em. ;ocusin/ on ci9il la&C an3 on constitutional la& in %articularC 0ac<innon 3oes not 3eny t6at t6e la& %ro9i3es a -ormal /uarantee to res%ect an3 %rotect t6e ri/6ts o- in3i9i3uals to 8e treate3 KeIually.K Nonet6elessC the 0a) that liberal theorists inter/ret an9 em/lo) these rights o6ten ren9ers them ine66ecti>e in 8rin/in/ :ustice to %eo%le &6ose o%%ression is constitute3 t6rou/6 t6e o%eration o- racialC seDualC an3 economic %o&er structures. "it6out a33ressin/ an3 alterin/ t6ese %o&er structuresC 0ac<innon ar/uesC t6e -ormal /rantin/ o- t6e ri/6ts to -ree s%eec6C %ri9acyC -ree3omC an3 eIuality are not /oin/ to succee3 in 8rin/in/ a8out :ustice an3 eIuality -or &omenC or -or ot6er mem8ers o- o%%resse3 /rou%s. 11 7lt6ou/6 recent la&s t6at reco/niBe seDual 6arassment as a %ro8lem o- seD eIuality are one eDce%tion to t6isC -or t6e most %art t6e la& 3oes not ackno&le3/e eD%licitly t6e o%%ression o- &omen an3 attem%t to reme3y it. Rat6erC the rights o6 0omen an9 members o6 other

o//resse9 grou/s are recognize9 to the eEtent that the /ersons in these /ositions resemble 0hiteD u//er;mi99le;class men. Note t6at 8acKinnon is not suggesting that these structures o6 /o0er are 0holl) in9e/en9ent o6 the state or t6at t6ey &ill not c6an/e unless structures outsi3e t6e realm o- t6e state c6an/e -irst. 8acKinnon sees the /o0er o6 the state 0or'ing in con?unction 0ith these s/eci6ic hierarchiesKin both o>ert an9 co>ert 0a)s. 46usC rat6er t6an inter%retin/ these liberal rights an9 6ree9oms as sim%ly ri/6ts a/ainst /o9ernment inter9entionC 0ac<innon ar/ues t6at t6ey must be un9erstoo9 in the conteEt o6 ineHualit) an9 o//ressionI the) must be inter/rete9 in such a 0a) that the) can begin to change these structures o6 o//ression an3 t6ere8y make it %ossi8le -or %eo%le to eDercise t6e -ormal ri/6ts t6at t6e Constitution le/ally /rants t6em.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


125 Scholars Feminist Juris/ru9ence K

<66@ Perm Sol>enc)


Pure re?ection o6 the state-s /ro>ision o6 rights 6ails ( 0or'ing 0ithin the state is 'e) Sch0artzman $$ (LisaC ,6iloso%6y S o- NO Stony >rookC .y%atia 1!(2)C %. !2)I0
ClearlyC it &oul3 8e easy to inter%ret 0ac<innonNs o8:ections to li8eral ri/6ts t6eory as a sim%le re:ection o- certain ri/6tsMlike t6e ri/6t to %ri9acy or t6e ri/6t to -ree s%eec6Mi- not all ri/6ts in /eneral. 1&orkin seems to inter%ret 0ac<innon in t6is &ay &6enC in 6is re9ie& o- *nly "or3sC 6e &rites= KS6e G8acKinnonO an9 her 6ollo0ers regar9 6ree9om o6 s/eech an9 thought as an elitistD inegalitarian i9eal that has been o6 almost no >alue to 0omen C 8lacksC an3 ot6ers &it6out %o&erJ t6ey say 7merica &oul3 8e 8etter o-- i- it 3emote3 t6at i3eal as many ot6er nations 6a9eK (1&orkin 1993C !2). $lse&6ere in t6is same articleC 1&orkin su//ests t6at 0ac<innon sees KeIualityK an3 Kli8ertyK as o%%ose3 to one anot6erC t6at s6e sees t6em as Kcom%etin/ constitutional 9alueGsHK (1993C 3(). *n t6e one 6an3C 1&orkin mi/6t 8e ri/6t= 0ac<innon G$n3 ,a/e !2H seems to 3ismiss many o- t6e ri/6ts t6at are currently 3iscusse3 in li8eral %olitical 3e8ates. S6e o--ers numerous ar/uments a8out t6e &ay t6at t6ese ri/6ts -unction to u%6ol3 t6e status IuoC to o8scure relations o- %o&erC an3 to %re9ent eIuality -rom 8ein/ ac6ie9e3. "6at I 6a9e su//este3C 6o&e9erC is t6at this 9oes not mean that she is re?ecting JrightsJ /er seD nor 9oes it mean that one 0ho en9orses her criticisms o6 liberal rights theor) must re?ect all use o6 rights. 7lt6ou/6 s6e &rites 6ars6ly a8out ri/6tsC 8acKinnon must be un9erstoo9 as criticizing the 0a) that these rights ha>e been 6ormulate9 Man3 e9en t6e &ay t6at t6ey currently -unctionMoutsi9e o6 a critical anal)sis o6 societ)Ss structures o6 /o0er an9 outsi9e o6 Huestions o6 eHualit). It is only 8y askin/ t6ese sorts o- Iuestions an3 8y analyBin/ t6e social relations o- %o&er (in &ays t6at /o &ell 8eyon3 t6e sim%listic in3i9i3ual//o9ernment 3ic6otomy) t6at one coul3 come u% &it6 a ne& conce%tion o- ri/6ts t6at &oul3 not su--er -rom t6e %ro8lems o- li8eralism. 46e criticisms o- li8eral ri/6ts t6eory t6at I 6a9e culle3 -rom 0ac<innonNs &ork 3o %oint to t6e nee3 -or an alternati9e t6eory o- ri/6ts. 7lt6ou/6 I 6a9e not eD%laine3 &6at a ne0 conce/tion o6 rights mi/6t look likeC I 6a9e su//este3 t6at it 0oul9 s/eci6) concretel) the nee9s an9 interests o6 grou/s o6 o//resse9 /eo/le . >ecause li8erals 3e-ine ri/6ts a8stractly (an3 8ecause t6ey ten3 to -ocus on in3i9i3ualC ne/ati9e ri/6ts)C t6ey o-ten take -or /rante3 social relations o- %o&er. 7s a resultC t6e ri/6ts o- %eo%le o- colorC &omenC &orkin/5class %eo%leC an3 ot6er mem8ers o- o%%resse3 /rou%s ten3 to 8e o9erlooke3. 46e alle/e3ly a8stract &ay t6at li8eral t6eory -ormulates an3 3escri8es t6e ri/6ts to &6ic6 in3i9i3uals are sai3 to 8e entitle3 o-ten conceals t6e more concrete content t6at t6ese ri/6ts 6a9e come to 6a9e in our society. In t6is &ayC t6e ri/6ts t6at u%%er5mi33le5 class &6ite men 9alue an3 alrea3y en:oy are %rotecte3 un3er t6e /uise o- treatin/ in3i9i3ual %re-erences neutrally an3 %rotectin/ a8stract ri/6ts. :o change a s)stem in 0hich certain grou/s o6 /eo/le alrea9) ha>e /o0ers an9 6ree9oms that are Mat least in %racticeMuna>ailable to othersD an alternati>e theor) o6 rights 0oul9 ha>e to inclu9e an

anal)sis o6 0ho has /o0er o>er 0homD an9 it 0oul9 ha>e to concern itsel6 0ith attem/ting to reme9) these ineHualities through changing societ)Ss institutionsD /racticesD an9 structures o6 /o0erD not a re?ection o6 the institutions o6 societ)D or the /ro>ision o6 rights 6rom the go>ernment an9 Rule o6 &a0.

*sing the la0 to recognize 0omen-s rights is 'e) to sol>e Fellmeth 2' (7aronC Int. Rel. S OaleC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 22(3)C %. ('+5)33)I0
7s 3iscusse3 a8o9eC the

causes o6 gen9er bias in international la0 are lin'e9 to the economic an9 /olitical 9isem/o0erment o6 0omen 0ithin statesC an3 to t6e 3ominance o- -inancial %ro-it o9er 6uman ri/6ts in t6e international a/en3a. International la0 has slo0l) im/ro>e9 in recognizing 0omenSs human rights an3 is a3o%tin/ an Ket6ic
o- careK to 8alance t6e tra3itional Ket6ic o- :usticeCK 8ut t6e commitment o- states to 6uman ri/6ts concerns 6as not %ro/resse3 a3eIuately. 0any o- t6e %oor countries o- t6e &orl3 are /ettin/ %oorerC an3C in t6e 9ast ma:ority o- t6ese less in3ustrialiBe3 countriesC t6e socialC economicC an3 %olitical situation o- &omen 6as not si/ni-icantly im%ro9e3 relati9e to men since t6e en3 o- t6e Secon3 "orl3 "ar. "6ile attention to &omenNs interests 6as increase3 /reatly in in3ustrialiBe3 states (an3 continues to im%ro9e)C ra%eC t6e 3omestic assault o- &omenC an3 %olitical an3 economic ineIuality remain se9ere %ro8lems. 31! ,ealthier states shoul9 establish a

6un9 an9 o66er technical assistance to less 0ealth) states to ensure com/liance 0ith human rights normsD /articularl) 0ith res/ect to 0omen. *n t6e 3i%lomatic le9elC the richer an9 more /o0er6ul states 6ocus more on international economic matters /rimaril) bene6iting men than on /ressuring other states55%articularly 3ictators6i%s;;to res/ect 0omenSs rights an3 ot6er 6uman ri/6ts an3 %rotect t6eir citiBens -rom /en3er5
8ase3 3iscrimination. 46e -all o- communism seems to 6a9e s6i-te3 t6is -ocus sli/6tlyC 8ut t6ere 6as 8een no momentous c6an/eC 3es%ite t6e -act t6at t6e 3emocratic states no lon/er %ercei9e a nee3 to -un3 less economically 3e9elo%e3 states55re/ar3less o- t6eir 6uman ri/6ts recor3s55to %re9ent t6em -rom -allin/ un3er t6e s&ay o- t6e So9iet nion. :he solution to gen9er bias in international la0 isC t6ere-oreC not onl) to increase the re/resentation o6 0omen in international organizationsD but to augment their /olitical an9 economic re/resentation in the states that com/ose international societ). 7s lon/ as &omen are un3erre%resente3 in Ne%alese %olitics an3 8usinessC &omenNs ri/6ts &ill 8e un3eren-orce3 in Ne%al. CertainlyC any re6orm within states will be helpful. >ut on t6e international le9elC states s6oul3 esta8lis6 institutions -ocusin/ on com%liance &it6 6uman ri/6ts norms an3 &omenNs ri/6ts %articularly. StatesN tools G$n3 ,a/e )31H -or encoura/in/ &omenNs re%resentation in ot6er states are lar/ely limite3 to 3i%lomacy an3 lea3in/ 8y eDam%leC an3 to 3ra-tin/ an3 a36erin/ to t6eir o&n treaties co3i-yin/ t6e ri/6ts o- &omen un3er international la&. .o&e9erC t6ese treaties must be bin9ing un9er international la0D

shoul9 9isallo0 9erogationsD an9 shoul9 reHuire states to ta'e concrete ste/s to0ar9 im/lementing them.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


12$ Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Perm Sol>enc) <66@ State Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)


Feminism has historicall) ma9e /rogress through state action an9 /olic) ma'ing .90ar9s 2 (Re8eccaC assistant %ro-essor o- 6istory at Lassar Colle/e in ,ou/6kee%sieC Ne& Oork E1o ;eminist
.istorians Nee3 a 46eory o- t6e StateVF 0use) ,A It 6ar3ly 8ears re%eatin/ that 6eminism has ma9e the /ersonal /oliticalC an3 t6at a 3ecision to lea9e an a8usi9e 6us8an3 or re-er to 2o3 as S6e can 8e un3erstoo3 as a %olitical act. 46e liberating /o0er o6 this insight has been 0ell eE/lore9J &6at nee3s to 8e sai3 is t6at it 6as costs. 7mon/ t6em is its ten3ency to o8scure &omen#s relations6i%s to t6e state an3 t6e &ays in &6ic6 %ri9ateC culturalC or social acts 6a9e le3C or -aile3 to lea3C to c6an/es in /o9ernment %olicy. Re-errin/ to almost e9ery action as %olitical makes suc6 analysis more 3i--icult. In my 9ie& /olic) change is the result o6 /oliticsC &6ic6 I 3e-ine 6ereC in t6e conteDt o- "estern 3emocracies treate3 in t6e 8ooks un3er re9ie&C as the /rocess o6 electing an9 a//ointing re/resentati>es an9 ma'ing la0s an9 regulations. *- course there can be causal lin's bet0een in9i>i9ual consciousnessD social mo>ementsD an9 elections an9 /oliciesI 9e6ining /olitics more narro0l) can hel/ clari6) 0hat the) are.

:he /ersonal is /olitical ( 6eminists shoul9 engage in /olic) ma'ing to un9ermine /atriarch) &ee 3 (46eresa 0an Lin/C aut6orC ERet6inkin/ t6e ,ersonal an3 t6e ,olitical= ;eminist 7cti9ism an3 Ci9ic
$n/a/ementF 0use) ,recisely &6at is at stake in askin/ &6et6er -eminist %olitics is con/ruent &it6 ci9ic en/a/ementV 4o ans&er t6e IuestionC I 8e/in 8y %lacin/ t6e slo/an Gthe /ersonal is the /oliticalF in its 6istorical conteDt. 7merican -eminist acti9ist <at6ie Sarac6il3 -irst use3 t6e term Gconsciousness;raisingF to mean Gthe /rocess b) 0hich 0omen in small grou/s coul9 eE/lore the /olitical as/ects o6 /ersonal li6eF (Rosen 2000C 19)). 7not6er acti9istC ,amela 7llenC 3escri8e3 6o& consciousness5raisin/ /rou%s o%erate3= E46e /rou% is t6e -irst ste% in transcen3in/ t6e isolation. .ere sometimes -or t6e -irst time in 6er li-e a &oman is allo&e3 an i3entity in3e%en3ent o- a man#s. She is allowed to function intellectually as a thinker rat6er t6an as a seD o8:ectC ser9antC &i-e or mot6er. In s6ortC the group establishes the social worth of the women presentC a necessity if women are to take themselves seriouslyF (19)0/2000C 2+0J em%6asis a33e3). In %articularC 7llen em%6asiBe3 t6e nee3 -or &omen to teac6 t6emsel9es Eto t6ink in3e%en3entlyF it6e Eo%enin/ u%F an3 Es6arin/F &ere to /et %ast t6e sta/e o- sim%ly %ro9i3in/ t6era%eutic relie- -or t6e %artici%ants (2+0+1). ltimatelyC the goal o6 consciousness;raising 0as the generation o6 theor) that 0as Groote9 in concrete eE/erienceF (2))). 46eory &as im%ortant 8ecause it -acilitate3 t6e a%%re6ension o- t6e EtotalityF o- &omen#s con3itionC &it6out &6ic6 e--ecti9e c6an/e at 8ot6 %ersonal an3 social le9els coul3 not 8e initiate3 (2+0). Cana3ian -eminist acti9ist 7nne Crocker ec6oe3 a similar un3erstan3in/ o- consciousness5 raisin/ (19)'C 3+39). 7s a -ocal %oint o- secon35&a9e acti9ismC consciousness;raising 0as the 6irst ste/ to0ar9 0omen-s emanci/ation 6rom /atriarch)D 0hich 6eminists 9eeme9 ubiHuitous. n3erlyin/ t6is strate/ic 8reakt6rou/6 &as t6e t6eoretical insi/6tC ori/inally o--ere3 8y Simone 3e >eau9oirC t6at &oman6oo3 is a social an3 cultural construct= E*ne is not 8ornC 8ut rat6er 8ecomesC a &omanF (19)!C 301). ,er6a%s more %ro-oun3 &as >eau9oir#s use o- t6e .e/elian master5sla9e 3ialectic in un3erstan3in/ t6e 3ynamics o- /en3er i3entity. 7ccor3in/ to >eau9oirC G7umanit) is male an9 man 9e6ines 0oman not in hersel6 but as relati>e to himI she is not regar9e9 as an autonomous being. . . . She is 9e6ine9 an9 9i66erentiate9 0ith re6erence to man an9 not he 0ith re6erence to herI she is the inci9entalD the inessential as o//ose9 to the essential. 7e is the Sub?ectD he is the <bsoluteKshe is the 4ther F (D9iii DiD). >eau9oir#s analysis 6el%e3 -acilitate t6e secon3 &a9e 8y %ointin/ to t6e nee3 -or t6e -eminist cause to /o 8eyon3 %rocurement o- -ormal eIuality (;rie3an 19)!C +9J >eau9oir 19)(). Rat6erC -eminism is a8out &omen#s li9in/ as -ree an3 autonomous in3i9i3uals on &omen#s terms.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%0 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)


Feminist ob?ecti>es shoul9 be attaine9 through /olic) action &ee 3 (46eresa 0an Lin/C aut6orC ERet6inkin/ t6e ,ersonal an3 t6e ,olitical= ;eminist 7cti9ism an3 Ci9ic
$n/a/ementF 0use) I 8e/an t6is essay as an attem%t to un3erstan3 t6e le/acy o- t6e secon3 &a9e 8y &ay o- eDaminin/ t6e kin3 o%olitics Et6e %ersonal is %oliticalF im%lies. I conclu3e t6at t6ere 6as to 8e some kin3 o- 8oun3ary 8et&een t6e %olitical an3 t6e %ersonal 8ecause li-e &6en totally %oliticiBe3 can only resem8le an *r&ellian ni/6tmare. In ot6er &or3sC it matters that 6eminist acti>ism be 9e/lo)e9 as ci>ic engagement. Some ma) consi9er this /osition as a regressi>e act o6 co;o/ting an other0ise ra9ical /osition 0ithin a liberal 6eminist 6rame0or'. >ut t6e case %ut -ort6 6ere regar9ing the /olitics o6 the /ersonal 9oes not in an) 0a) 9iminish its /olitical im/ortD 0hich is that em/o0erment through the /oliticization o6 one-s li6e can onl) be achie>e9 un9er one con9ition an9 that isD 9emocrac). I- anyt6in/C suc6 an un3erstan3in/ -acilitates t6e enric6ment o- -eminism as a -orce o- 3emocracy rat6er t6an o- li8eralismC alon/ &it6 its 8a//a/e as t6e eDclusi9e %olitical encla9e o- &6iteC mi33le5class &omen in t6e "est.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%1 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


Focus on the in9i>i9ual 6ails ( institutions are 'e) 8orris $$ (7l3onC Sociolo/y S Nort6&esternC 7nnual Re9ie& o- Sociolo/y 9ol. 2'C %. '29)I0
46e 7merican ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement 6as 6a3 an im%act 8eyon3 t6e s6ores o- 7merica. 8an)

o6 the same reasons the ci>il rights mo>ement in6luence9 <merican social mo>ementsD a//ear to also be the source o6 its in6luence on in; ternational mo>ements. 46e ma:or eDce%tion is t6at t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement 3i3 not ser9e as t6e trainin/ /roun3 -or
many o- t6e acti9ists &6o initiate3 mo9ements outsi3e t6e nite3 States. "6at is clearC 6o&e9erC is t6at numerous international mo9ements &ere in-luence3 8y t6e S ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement. 7 similarity t6at mo9ements s6are across t6e &orl3 is t6at the) usuall) must con6ront authorities 0ho ha>e su/erior /o0er. :he ma?or challenge 6or such

mo>ements is that the) must 9e>elo/ a collecti>e action strateg) that 0ill generate le>erage enabling them to engage in /o0er struggles 0ith /o0er6ul o//onents. 46e strate/y o- non9iolent 3irect action &as -irst 3e9elo%e3 8y 2an36i in Sout6 7-rica an3 t6en use9 b) Gan9hi in the mass mo>ement that o>erthre0 Aritish colonialism in In9ia. 26an3iNs use o- non9iolence &as im5 %ortant to t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement 8ecause some key lea3ers o- t6e
ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement5Aames ;armerC >ayar3 RustinC Aames La&son an3 2lenn Smiley56a3 stu3ie3 2an36iNs mo9ement an3 8ecame con9ince3 t6at non9io5 lence coul3 8e use3 8y 7-rican 7mericans. 733itionallyC Gan9hi became a hero an9 a source o6 ins/iration 6or 8artin &uther King Jr. It &as t6e 7merican ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement t6at %er-ecte3 an3 mo3erniBe3 non9iolent 3irect action. >ecause o- t6is ac6ie9ementC t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement &as t6e ma:or 9e6icle t6rou/6 &6ic6 non9iolent 3irect action &as s%rea3 to ot6er mo9ements inter5 nationally. on>iolent 9irect action has enable9 o//resse9 grou/s

as 9i>erse as Alac' South <6ricansD <rabs o6 the 8i99le .astD an9 /ro;9emocrac) 9em; onstrators in !hina to en/a/e in collecti9e action. Lea3ers o- t6ese mo9ements 6a9e ackno&le3/e3 t6e 9alua8le lessons t6ey 6a9e learne3 -rom t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement (see 0orris 1993). 7s 4arro& (199!) 6as %ointe3 outC non>iolent 9irect action is a /otent tool o6 collecti>e action because it generates 9isru/tion an9 uncertaint) that authorities must a99ress .
4arro& ca%ture3 6o& non9iolent 3irect action 6as s%rea3 3omestically an3 internationally -ollo&in/ t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement &6en 6e &rote= >ecause the ci>il rights mo>ement 3e9elo%e3 a %o&er-ul tacticalC i3eolo/i5 calC an3 cultural re%ertoire o- collecti9e action a9aila8le to a &orl3&i3e au3i5 ence t6rou/6 mass me3ia an3 an eDtensi9e literatureC it has ser>e9 as a mo9el o6 collecti>e action nationally an3 internationally. 7&areness o- t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement is so &i3es%rea3 /lo8ally t6at

o//resse9 /eo/le in 9istant lan9s see' out 'no0le9ge o6 its lessons so the) can em/lo) it in their o0n struggles. 1i--usion %rocesses are im%ortant in t6is re/ar3C 8ut t6ey merely com%lement t6e acti9e %ursuit o- in-ormation %ertainin/
to t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement 8y t6ose &is6in/ to en/a/e in collecti9e action 6ere an3 a8roa3. 46e national ant6em o- t6e ci9il ri/6ts mo9ementC K"e S6all *9ercomeCK con5 tinues to ener/iBe an3 stren/t6en t6e resol9e o- social mo9ements &orl3&i3e.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%2 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


8ust use institutions o6 the 9ominant or9er to ma'e change. !harles0orth $$(.ilaryC %ro- an3 3ir o- t6e Centre -or International an3 ,u8lic La&C ;aculty o- La&C 7ustralian
National C 7%rilC %!e merican 'ournal International 2aw 93 7.A.I.L. %.3+0)A0 Ge3+0H 46e %6iloso%6er $liBa8et6 2rosB 6as %ointe3 out t6at 6eminist theorizing ty%ically reHuires an unarticulate3 8alance 8et&een t&o /oals. ;eminist analysis is at once a reaction to t6e Ko9er&6elmin/ masculinit) o6 /ri>ilege9 an3 6istorically 3ominant 'no0le9gesC actin/ as a kin3 o- counter&ei/6t to t6e im8alances resultin/ -rom t6e male mono%oly o- t6e %ro3uction an3 rece%tion o- kno&le3/esK an9 a res/onse to the /olitical goals o6 6eminist struggles. n2 :he 9ual commitments o- -eminist met6o3s are in com%leD an3 uneas) coeEistence. :he 6irst 9eman9s Jintellectual rigorCK in9esti/atin/ t6e 6i33en /en3er o- t6e tra3itional canon. :he secon9 reHuires 9e9ication to /olitical change. :he tension 8et&een t6e t&o lea9s to criticism o- -eminist t6eorists 8ot6 6rom the masculine aca9em) 6or lac' o6 3isintereste3 sc6olars6i% an3 ob?ecti>e anal)sis an9 6rom 6eminist acti>ists 6or co;o/tion b) /atriarchal 6orces t6rou/6 %artici%ation in male5structure3 3e8ates. n3 ;eminist met6o3olo/ies c6allen/e many acce%te3 sc6olarly tra3itions. ;or
eDam%leC t6ey may clearly re-lect a %olitical a/en3a rat6er t6an stri9e to attain an o8:ecti9e trut6 on a neutral 8asis an3 t6ey may a%%ear %ersonal rat6er t6an 3etac6e3. ;or t6is reasonC 6eminist metho9ologies are regularl) seen as unscholarl)D

9isru/ti>e or ma9. :he) are the techniHues o6 outsi9ers an3 stran/ers. Aust as nineteent65century &omen &riters use3 ma3ness to sym8oliBe esca%e -rom limite3 an3 enclose3 li9esC n! so t&entiet65century 6eminist scholars ha>e 9e>elo/e9 9issonant metho9s to sha'e the com/lacent an9 boun9e9 9isci/lines in 0hich the) 0or'. 7t t6e same timeC most 6eminists are constraine9 b) their en>ironment. I6 0e 0ant to achie>e changeD 0e must learn an9 use the language an9 metho9s o6 the 9ominant or9er.

:he state can a9>ance /rogress ( human rights are an eEam/le. Aur'e;,hite + ("illiam ".C Lecturer o- ,u8lic an3 International 7--airs at ,rinceton .C %!e 0arvard
$nvironmental 2aw (eview 9. 1)C S%rin/C %. 2((52())A0
46e social 8elie-s eD%lanation 8e/ins -rom t6e %ro%osition t6at in3i9i3uals &it6in 6uman ri/6ts %rotectin/ states s6are a %re-erence -or a minimum set o- %rotections o- 6uman ri/6ts. 46is assum%tion is a%%ro%riate -or t&o reasons. ;irstC accor3in/ to li8eral %olitical

science t6eoryC state /olic) re/resents the /re6erences o6 some subset o6 the 9omestic /olic). n100 I6 t6e o8ser9e3 state /olic) is to /rotect human rightsD then at least some su8set o- t6e 9omestic /olic) must share that /re6erence. Secon3C e9en i6 in9i>i9uals 0ithin a 9omestic /olit) see' a >ariet) o6 9i66erentiate9 en9sD basic res/ect 6or human rights allo0s in9i>i9uals to /ursue 55to some 3e/ree at least55t6ose en9s as t6ey 3e-ine t6em. Li8eral t6eory t6us su//ests t6at in3i9i3uals &it6in a 6uman ri/6ts res%ectin/ state ten3
to su%%ort 8asic 6uman ri/6ts %ro9isions. 46e neDt ste% in t6e social 8elie-s ar/ument is to reco/niBe t6at res%ect -or 6uman ri/6ts 6as an in6erently uni9ersalist ten3ency. n101 nlike cultural or national ri/6tsC 6uman ri/6ts are :ust t6at556uman. 46ey a%%ly as muc6 Ge2()H to t6ose in3i9i3uals &it6in a 3omestic %olity as to t6ose outsi3e t6e %olity. Suc6 cosmo/olitan liberalism in9icates that

Jthe more /eo/le are 6reeD the better o66 all are.J n102 46e net result is t6at in9i>i9uals 0ithin a human rights res/ecting state ten9C on t6e a9era/eC to su//ort the human rights o6 in9i>i9uals in other states as 0ell. 2i9en a set o- uni9ersalist 6uman ri/6ts >alues in states t6at res%ect 6uman ri/6tsC t6e %olicy articulate3 8y t6e /o9ernment may 8e one &6ic6 res%ects 6uman ri/6ts at 6ome an3 9eman9s their /rotection a8roa3. 46is belie6 in a t6in set o- uni9ersal 6uman ri/6ts ma) cause the lea9ershi/ o6 the state to 6rame its securit) /olic) aroun9 that belie6 structure an9 to re6rain 6rom aggressi>e acts t6at &oul3 9iolate t6e 6uman ri/6ts o- citiBens at 6ome or a8roa3. 7s ,eter <atBenstein ar/uesC Ksecurit) interests are 9e6ine9 b) actors 0ho res/on9 to cultural 6actors .K n103 7cts o- international a//ression ten3 to im%in/e on t6e 6uman
ri/6ts o- in3i9i3uals in t6e tar/et state an3C at least tem%orarilyC limit t6eir -ree3om. 7-ter allC 8om8sC 8ulletsC 3eat6 an3 3estruction are not consistent &it6 res%ect -or 8asic 6uman ri/6ts. n10! ;rame3 in t6e li8eral international relations t6eory terms o- %olicy inter3e%en3enceC international a//ression 8y State < im/oses costs on State AD 0hose citizensS human rights 0ill be in6ringe9 u/on b) the act o6 aggression. 46is in-rin/ement in turn im%oses costs on citiBens in State 7C &6ose citiBens 6a9e a %re-erence -or t6e %rotection o- t6e 6uman ri/6ts o- citiBens in 8ot6 states. :his share9 >alue o6 res/ect 6or human

rights thus ma) restrain State < 6rom /ursuing international aggression. n10' >y contrastC a state 0hich commits gross human rights 9iolations a/ainst its o&n %eo%le 0ill not be sub?ect to this restraint. Suc6 9iolations o-ten occur &6en t6e /o9ernment 6as 8een Kca%ture3K 8y a select minority t6at c6ooses to 9iolate 6uman ri/6ts. I- t6e citiBens t6emsel9es are not in -a9or o- 6uman ri/6ts at 6omeC t6ey are unlikely to 8e committe3 to t6e
en-orcement o- 6uman ri/6ts a8roa3. "6ere ca%ture occursC t6e /o9ernment is not res%onsi9e to t6e %re-erences o- t6e 3omestic %olity.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%% Scholars Feminist IR K
In suc6 casesC e9en i- t6ere is a stron/ %re-erence amon/ citiBens to %rotect 6uman ri/6ts at 6ome an3 a8roa3C t6e /o9ernment is unlikely to res%on3 to t6ose interests an3 its %olicies &ill not 8e constraine3 8y t6em.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%+ Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


:he state is 'e) to change ; ,ithout itD 6eminism is >acuous theorizing. Qoung $0(Iris 0arionC %ro- o- ,u8lic an3 International 7--airs at t6e
o- ,itts8ur/6C %!rowing 2ike a Girl and /t!er $ssa+s in )eminist P!ilosop!+ and *ocial %!eor+C %. +9590)A0 "it6in t6e conteDt o- anti-eminist 8acklas6C t6e e--ect o- /ynocentric 6eminism ma) be accommo9ating to the eEisting structure. 2ynocentric -eminism relies on an3 rein-orces /en3er stereoty%es at :ust t6e time &6en t6e 3ominant
culture 6as %ut ne& em%6asis on marks o- /en3er 3i--erence. It 3oes soC moreo9erC 8y relyin/ on many o- t6ose as%ects o- &omenNs tra3itional s%6ere t6at tra3itional %atriarc6al i3eolo/y 6as most eD%loite3 an3 t6at 6umanist -eminists suc6 as >eau9oir -oun3 most o%%ressi9e55re%ro3ucti9e 8iolo/yC mot6er6oo3C s 3omestic concerns. $9en t6ou/6 its intentions are su89ersi9eC suc6 rene&e3 attention to tra3itional -emininity can 6a9e a reactionary e--ect on 8ot6 oursel9es an3 our listeners 8ecause it may ec6o t6e 3ominant claim t6at &omen 8elon/ in a se%arate s%6ere. .umanist -eminism calls u%on %atriarc6al society to o%en %laces -or &omen &it6in t6ose s%6eres o6uman acti9ity t6at 6a9e 8een consi3ere3 t6e most creati9eC %o&er-ulC an3 %resti/ious. 2ynocentric -eminism re%lies t6at &antin/ suc6 t6in/s -or &omen im%lies a reco/nition t6at suc6 acti9ities are t6e most 6umanly 9alua8le. It ar/ues t6at in -actC militarismC 8ureaucratic 6ierarc6yC com%etition -or reco/nitionC an3 t6e instrumentaliBation o- nature an3 %eo%le entaile3 8y t6ese acti9ities are 8asic 3is9alues.2! Oet in contem%orary societyC men still ha>e most institutionalize9 /o0erD an9 g)nocentric

6eminism sho0s 0h) the) 9o not use it 0ell. I6 6eminism turns its bac' on t6e centers o- /o0erD /ri>ilegeD an9 in9i>i9ual achie>ement t6at men 6a9e mono%oliBe3C t6ose men 0ill continue to mono/olize themD an9 nothing si/ni-icant 0ill change. Feminists cannot un9ermine masculinist >alues 0ithout entering some o- t6e centers o- /o0er t6at -oster t6emC 8ut t6e attainment o- suc6 %o&er itselreIuires at least a%%earin/ to -oster t6ose 9alues. StillC 0ithout being 0illing to ris' such co o/tationD 6eminism can be onl) a moral /osition o6 critiHue rather than a 6orce 6or institutional change . 1es%ite its
intentionC I -ear t6at /ynocentric -eminism may 6a9e t6e same conseIuence as t6e stance o- moral mot6er6oo3 t6at /re& out onineteent6 century -eminism a rese/re/ation o- &omen to a s%eci-ically &omenNs s%6ereC outsi3e t6e sites o- %o&erC %ri9ile/eC an3 reco/nition. ;or me t6e sym%tom 6ere is &6at t6e 3ominant culture -in3s more t6reatenin/. "it6in t6e 3ominant culture a mi33le a/e3 asserti9e &omanNs claim to coanc6or t6e ne&s alon/si3e a man a%%ears consi3era8ly more t6reatenin/ t6an &omenNs claim to 6a9e a 3i--erent 9oice t6at eD%oses masculinist 9alues as 8o3y 3enyin/ an3 sel-is6. 46e claim o- &omen to 6a9e a ri/6t to t6e %ositions an3 8ene-its t6at 6a9e 6it6erto 8een reser9e3 -or menC an3 t6at male 3ominate3 institutions s6oul3 ser9e &omenNs nee3sC is a 3irect t6reat to male %ri9ile/e. "6ile t6e claim t6at t6ese %ositions o- %o&er t6emsel9es s6oul3 8e eliminate3 an3 t6e institutions eliminate3 or restructure3 is in3ee3 more ra3icalC &6en asserte3 -rom t6e /ynocentric -eminist %osition it can 8e an o8:ecti9e retreat.

G)nocentrism-s 6ocus on >alues an9 language as the /rimar) target o6 its critiHue contributes to this blunting o6 its /olitical 6orce. "it6out 3ou8tC social change reHuires changing the sub?ectD 0hich in turn means 9e>elo/ing ne0 0a)s o6 s/ea'ingC &ritin/C an3 ima/inin/. $Iually in3u8ita8le is t6e /ynocentric -eminist
claim t6at masculinist 9alues in "estern culture 3eny t6e 8o3yC sensualityC an3 roote3ness in nature an3 t6at suc6 3enial nurtures -ascismC %ollutionC an3 nuclear /ames. 2i9en t6ese -actsC 6o&e9erC &6at s6all &e 3oV 4o t6is g)nocentrism has little

concrete ans0er. Aecause its criticism o6 eEisting societ) is so global an9 abstractD g)nocentric critiHue o- 9aluesC lan/ua/eC an3 culture o6 masculinism can remo>e 6eminist theor) 6rom anal)sis o6 s/eci6ic institutions an9 /racticesD an9 ho0 the) might be concretel) structurall) change9 in 9irections more consonant 0ith our >isions.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%1 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


Sim/le theor) 6ails ( 0e must use institutions. !harles0orth $$(.ilaryC %ro- an3 3ir o- t6e Centre -or International an3 ,u8lic La&C ;aculty o- La&C 7ustralian
National C 7%rilC %!e merican 'ournal International 2aw 93 7.A.I.L. %.3)9)A0
Ge3)9H I 6a9e miDe3 -eelin/s a8out %artici%atin/ in t6is sym%osium as t6e -eminist 9oice. *n t6e one 6an3C I &ant to su%%ort t6e sym%osium e3itorsN attem%t to 8roa3en t6e stan3ar3 cate/ories o- international le/al met6o3olo/ies 8y inclu3in/ -eminism in t6is un3ertakin/. *n t6e ot6er 6an3C I am conscious o6 the limits o6 my anal)sis an9 its unre/resentati>eness 55 t6e %articularity o- my nationalityC raceC classC seDualityC e3ucation an3 %ro-ession s6a%es my outlook an3 i3eas on international la&. I clearly cannot s%eak -or all &omen %artici%ants in an3 o8ser9ers o- t6e international le/al system. I also 6o%e t6at one 3ay I &ill sto% 8ein/ %ositione3 al&ays as a -eminist an3 &ill Iuali-y as a -ully -le3/e3 international la&yer. 0y reser9ations are also more /eneral 8ecause %resentin/ -eminism as one o- se9en ri9al met6o3olo/ical tra3itions may /i9e a -alse sense o- its nature. 46e sym%osium e3itorsN memoran3um to t6e %artici%ants encoura/e3 a certain com%etiti9eness= &e &ere aske3C K"6y is your met6o3 8etter t6an ot6ersVK I cannot ans&er t6is Iuestion. I 9o not see 6eminist metho9s as rea9) alternati>es to an) o6 the other metho9s

re%resente3 in t6is sym%osium. Feminist metho9s em/hasize con>ersations an9 9ialogue rather than the /ro9uction o6 a singleD trium/hant truth. n1 :he) 0ill not lea9 to neat JlegalJ ans0ers because the) are challenging the >er) categories o6 Jla0J an3 Knonla&.K Feminist metho9s see' to eE/ose an9 Huestion t6e limite3 8ases o- international la&Ns claim to ob?ecti>it) an3 im%artiality an3 insist on t6e im%ortance o- /en3er relations as a cate/ory o- analysis. 46e term K/en3erK 6ere re-ers to t6e social construction o3i--erences 8et&een &omen an3 men an3 i3eas o- K-emininityK an3 KmasculinityK 55 t6e eDcess cultural 8a//a/e associate3 &it6 8iolo/ical seD.

,e can use the state to 6ight against o//ression an9 >iolence. Derri9a 2K (AacIuesC ;renc6 ,6iloso%6erC
G6tt%=//culturemac6ine.tees.ac.uk/Cmac6/>ackissues/:002/articles/artQ3err.6tmH 71= (/2+/10)A0
U= 4&o essential %ro8lems o- /lo8alisation are t6e 3issolution o- t6e state an3 t6e im%otence o- %olitics. In your recently %u8lis6e3 teDt NCosmo%olites 3e tous les %aysC encore un e--ort]NC you 3e9elo% certain i3eas concernin/ a ne& ri/6t to asylum an3 a ne& 8alance o%o&er 8et&een t6e 3i--erent %laces o- t6e %olitical in 9ie& o- a %ossi8le ne& role o- t6e city. .o& 3o you t6ink %6iloso%6y coul3 an3 s6oul3 react to t6e %ro8lems mentione3 &it6 a kin3 o- institutional -antasyV A1= I am not sure I un3erstan3 &6at you call Ninstitutional -antasyN. 7ll %olitical eD%erimentation like t6e initiati9e o- t6e Nre-u/ee cityNC 3es%ite its limits an3 its ine9ita8ly %reliminary c6aracterC 6as in it a %6iloso%6ical 3imension. It reIuires us to interro/ate t6e essence an3 t6e 6istory o- t6e state. 7ll %olitical inno9ation touc6es on %6iloso%6y. 46e NtrueN %olitical action al&ays en/a/es &it6 a %6iloso%6y . 7ll actionC all /olitical 9ecision ma'ingD must

in>ent its norm or rule. Such a gesture tra>erses or im/lies /hiloso/h). 0ean&6ileC at t6e risk oa%%earin/ sel-5contra3ictoryC I 8elie9e t6at one must 6ight against that 0hich )ou call the S9issolution o6 the stateS "6or the state can in turn limit the /ri>ate 6orces o6 a//ro/riationD the concentrations o6 economic /o0erD it can retar9 a >iolent 9e/oliticisation that acts in the name o6 the Smar'etS )C an3 a8o9e
all resist t6e state &6ere it /i9es in too easily to t6e nationalism o- t6e nation state or to t6e re%resentation o- socio5economic 6e/emony. $ac6 time one must analyseC in9ent a ne& rule= 6ere to contest t6e stateC t6ere to consoli3ate it. :he realm o6 /olitics is not co;

eEtensi>e 0ith the stateC contrary to &6at one 8elie9es no&a3ays. :he necessar) re/oliticisation 9oes not nee9 to ser>e a ne0 cult o6 the state. *ne ou/6t to o%erate &it6 ne& 3issociations an3 acce%t com%leD an3 3i--erentiate3 %ractices.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%2 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


!ritiHue groun9e9 in 9iscourse 6ails ( it can-t un9ermine larger /o0er structures. Aro0n 1("en3yC %ro- ,olitical Science C >erkeleyC Politics /ut of 0istor+C %. 3'53))A0
>ut 6ere t6e %ro8lem /oes &ell 8eyon3 su%er-iciality o- %olitical analysis or com%ensatory /estures in t6e -ace o- -elt im%otence. < moralisticC /estural /olitics o-ten ina9>ertentl) becomes a regressi>e /olitics. 8oralizing con9emnation o- t6e National $n3o&ment -or t6e 7rts 6or not 6un9ing /oliticall) ra9ical artC o6 the *.S. militar) or t6e "6ite .ouse 6or not embracing o%en homoseEualit) or sanctionin/ /ay marria/eC or e9en o- t6e National Institutes o- .ealt6 -or not treating as a /olitical /riorit) the li>es o6 7IU tar/et /o/ulations (/ay menC %rostitutesC an3 3ru/ a33icts) con>e)s at 8est nai>e %olitical eE/ectations an3 at &orstC %atently con-use3 ones. ;or this con9emnation im%licitly 6igures the state (an3 ot6er mainstream institutions) as i6 it 9i9 not ha>e s/eci6ic /olitical an9 economic in>estmentsD as i6 it 0ere not the co9i6ication o6 >arious 9ominant social /o0ersC but 0asC rat6erC a momentaril) misgui9e9 /arent 0ho 6orgot her /romise to treat all her chil9ren the same 0a). 46ese eE/ressions o- moralistic outra/e im%licitly cast the state as i- it &ere or coul3 8e a 3ee%ly 9emocratic an9 non>iolent institutionJ con9erselyC it ren9ers ra3ical artC ra3ical social mo>ementsC an3 9arious -rin/e %o%ulations as i6 the) 0ere not /otentiall) sub>ersi>eC re%resentin/ a si/ni-icant %olitical c6allen/e to t6e norms o- t6e re/imeC 8ut rat6er &ere 8eni/n entities an3 %o%ulations entirely a%%ro%riate -or t6e state to eIually %rotectC -un3C an3 %romote. .ereC moralism#s o8:ection to %olitics as a 3omain o- %o&er an3 6istory rat6er t6an %rinci%le is not sim%ly irritatin/= it results in a trou8lin/ an3 con-use3 %olitical stance. It mislea9s about the nature o6 /o0erD the stateD an9 ca/italismJ it mislea3s a8out t6e nature o- o%%ressi9e social -orcesC an3 a8out t6e sco%e o- t6e %ro:ect o- trans-ormation reIuire3 8y serious am8itions -or :ustice. Such ob6uscation is not t6e aim o- t6e moralists 8ut 6alls 0ithin that more general /ac'age o6 9is/lace9 e66ects conseHuent to a 6elt )et unac'no0le9ge9 im/otence. It signals 9isa>o0e9 9es/air o>er the /ros/ects 6or more 6ar;reaching trans6ormations.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%3 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ State Goo9


Aene6its 6or 0omen ha>e long been achie>e9 through the normati>e 9iscourse o6 /olitical structures Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % )0)I0
"omen 6a9e not 8een stran/ers to cam%ai/ns -or an3 stru//les &it6 li8eral state 3emocracies. FeministsC es%ecially -eminist le/al acti9istsC ha>e long /artici/ate9 in an9 sought bene6its 6or all 0omen 0ithin the /olitical an9 ?u9icial structures o- t6e nite3 StateC Cana3a an3 t6e li8eral states o- "estern $uro%e. 46e recent cele8ration o- t6e )'t6 anni9ersary o- t6e -e3eral -emale su--ra/e in t6e nite3 States is a remin3er o- t6e lon/e9ity an3 %ersistence o- &omen#s 3eman3s -or -ull %olitical ri/6ts in t6is countryC &6ile t6e re%eate3 3e-eat o- a -e3eral constitutional $Iual Ri/6ts 7men3ment ins%ires continue3 acti9ism. Success6ul

cam/aigns 6or anti;9iscrimination legislation an9 litigation o6 gen9er;eHuit) claims 0ere signi6icant a9>ances 6or 0omen achie>e9 through the normati>e 9iscourses an3 %u8lic institutions c6aracteristic o6 liberal 9emocracies. "omen also 6a9e stru//le3 in Sout6 7-rica an3 in t6e -ormer So9iet 8loc to secure 8asic 3emocratic /uarantees. :he continue9 integrit) o6 the state s)stems through 0hich these aims ha>e been met is a matter to0ar9 0hich 0omen cannot be in9i66erentC t6eoretically or ot6er&ise.

Greater engagementD not re?ectionD o6 the mo9ern state is 'e) to sol>e Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % 9+)I0 Feminist /olitical theorists a9>ocate stronger mo9els o6 grou/ re/resentation an3 %artici%ation as a structural
res%onse to t6is %ro8lem. 46ese %ro%osals 3ra& si/ni-icant ins%iration -rom t6e role o- consciousness5raisin/ in -eminist %olitical %ractice. :he intense in>ol>ement these /ro/osals reHuire o6 citizens C to/et6er &it6 t6e locally 8ase3 institutions u%on &6ic6 t6ey 3e%en3C challenge the 3istance3C 6ormalize9 9ecision;ma'ing that 6lattens 0omen-s /artici/ation an9 6urthers the 6alse uni>ersalism o6 the interests re/resente9 in the /ublic s/here . 4o t6at eDtentC

6eminists ha>e /artici/ate9 in the localizing 9iscourse characteristic o6 man) mo9ern attac's on the liberal state. ;urt6erD 6eminists o6ten theorize G0omenF as a 9istinct /olitical classC 8ot6 &it6in eDistin/ state 8or3ers an3 irres%ecti9e o- state citiBens6i%sD thus a9>ocating a 6orm o6 nationalist i9entit) in9e/en9ent o6 territorial a66iliation. ,omen-s interestsC an3 &omen#s commitments an3 con-lictsC t6en are alrea9) 9ee/l) 0o>en into the 0eb o6 contem/orar) contests o>er the nature an9 6uture o6 the liberal state .

,or'ing 0ithin 9ominant institutions sub>erts 9escri/ti>e 9ichotomiesD to inclu9e 0omen Aal90in $3 (0ar/aretC 7ssoc. ,ro- La& S ;S C S%rin/ 199)C E,u8lic "omen an3 t6e ;eminist StateCF 20 .ar9.
"omen#s L.A. !)C % 102)I0
46is &i3e5an/le %resentation ine9ita8ly -or-eits t6e com%leDity an3 nuance o- a more ti/6tly -ocuse3 an3 t6orou/6ly ren3ere3 account o- a sin/le as%ect o- &omen#s %u8lic or %ri9ate eD%erience. Oet I 6o%e to recou% t6at loss 8y t6e /ain in t6eoretical %ers%ecti9e accesse3 8y t6e 8roa3er 9ie&. 7s Carole ,ateman 6as su//este3C such a 6rame0or' ma) also be able to 9econstruct the 9escri/ti>e 9ichotomies that ensnare our theoretical imaginations an9 tell lies about the con9itions o6 0omen-s real li>es . 46e reco/nition that 0omen are situate9 in one 6orm or another Gas 0omenF in 8ot6 %ri9ate an3 %u8lic s%6eres alrea9) begins to

un9ermine 6eminism-s t)/ical un9erstan9ing o6 0omen-s central /olitical challenge as the mo>ement 6rom 0holesale eEclusion to /ublic inclusion. Carole ,ateman eD%lains= E7 -eminist strate/y t6at calls -or t6e inte/ration into citiBens6i% o&omen#s 3istincti9e contri8ution Y rests on t6e assum%tion t6at R&omen# an3 R3i--erence# nee3 to 8e 8rou/6t into t6e %olitical or3er. :he /ertinent Huestion is assume9 to be 0hether seEual 9i66erence is /oliticall) rele>antD or ho0 P9i66erence- coul9 be rele>ant. :hus the >ital Huestion is o>erloo'e9 o6 ho0 to sub>ert an9 change the manner in 0hich 0omen ha>e alrea9) been incor/orate9C an3 so to trans-orm t6e relation 8et&een ReIuality# (men) an3 R3i--erence# (&omen).F 46e -act that the /ublic s/here alrea9) inclu9es 0omenC e9en i- not as -ullC sel-53eterminin/ citiBensC suggests that the matter o6 inclusion is alrea9) more com/licate9 than a single 6ocus on 0omen-s relegation to the /ri>ate s/here might im/l). ConseIuentlyC to t6e eDtent t6at a &i3e5an/le %ers%ecti9e can account -or t6e 3i--erential treatment o- &omen &it6in an3 across t6e
%u8lic an3 %ri9ate s%6eresC t6e more com%re6ensi9e t6e analysis o- &omen#s %olitical situation.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%5 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ &a0 Goo9/Perm Sol>enc)


&a0s shoul9 be use9 to /romote e66ecti>e /romotion o6 0omen-s rights Fellmeth 2' (7aronC Int. Rel. S OaleC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 22(3)C %. ('+5)33)I0
46e criticism o- international la& t6eory itsel- o--ere3 8y C6arles&ort6 an3 6er collea/ues in t6e 7merican Aournal o- International La& is 6el%-ul inso-ar as it i3enti-ies a serious systemic %roce3ural ineIuity t6at &omen are si/ni-icantly (t6ou/6 not entirely) eDclu3e3 -rom state %artici%ation in t6e -ormation o- international la&. .o&e9erC t6is criticism 9oes not o66er an alternati>e theor) o6

la0. or 9oes it challenge la0 /er seI it merel) challenges the eHuit) o6 the com/osition o6 its organs as 0ell as some o6 the substanti>e results o6 the 0orl9 /ublic or9er . 7-ter allC 6uman ri/6ts are only one %art ointernational la&. In any caseC t6is criticism is 0ea'ene9 b) the 6act that most 6eminists ha>eD so 6arD largel) ignore9 the /rogress o6 the international legal s)stem in its substanti>e stan9ar9s /rotecting 0omenSs rights. 46e ar/ument t6at international la& is really :ust Kinternational menNs la&K &oul3 6a9e 8een muc6 more con9incin/ %rior to
19!'. C6arles&ort6C C6inkinC an3 "ri/6t really 3o not take issue 3irectly &it6 t6e international le/al system eDce%t inso-ar as it re-lects t6e %attern o- male 3ominance at t6e state le9el. G$n3 ,a/e )30H < critiHue o6 the international legal s)stem must also assess the eEtent to 0hich international la0 has incor/orate9 a J0omanSs >oice K re-lecti9e o- &omenNs eD%eriences an3 6asC in -actC %rotecte3 t6e ri/6ts it %romises t6em on %a%er. Suc6 a critiIue must conclu3e t6atC since the Secon9 ,orl9 ,arD international la0 has increasingl) em/hasize9 eIualityC inclusi9enessC coo%erationC carin/ a8out in3i9i3ualsC an3 ot6er as%ects o- the ethic o6 careC 8ut t6at %ro/ress remains ina3eIuate. It isC 6o&e9erC a9eHuate to /ro>e

that 6eminists shoul9 not 9iscount re6orm o6 eEisting la0sD instea9 o6 re?ection o6 themD as a means o6 /rogress.

.m/iricall) /ro>en ( re9istribution o6 rights is e66ecti>el) initiate9 through the stateD the 6eminist mo>ement hasn-t 6oun9 its me9ium )et 8orris $$ (7l3onC Sociolo/y S Nort6&esternC 7nnual Re9ie& o- Sociolo/y 9ol. 2'C %. '29)I0
46e most 3istincti9e as%ect o- t6e mo3em ci9il ri/6ts mo9ement &as its 3emonstration t6at an

o//resse9D relati>el) /o0erless grou/D can generate so; cial changeD through the o//ressi>e stateD 0ith the 0i9es/rea9 use o6 social /rotest. ;or nearly t&o 3ec5 a3esD this mo>ement /er6ecte9 the art o6 social /rotest. 46e -ar ran/in/ an3 com%leD social %rotest it /enerate3 3i3 not emer/e imme3iately. Rat6er it e>ol>e9 through time ma'ing use o6 trial an9 error. >y t6e mi3 19'0s Sout6ern >lack lea3ers 6a3 not yet -ully /ras%e3 t6e i3ea t6at t6e -ate o- Aim Cro& reste3 in t6e 6an3s ot6e >lack masses. $9en t6ou/6 %rotest a/ainst racial ineIuality occurre3 t6rou/6out t6e -irst 6al- o- t6e cen5 turyC it ten3e3 to 8e localiBe3 an3 limite3 in sco%e. "it6 t6e eDce%tion o- t6e 2ar9ey 0o9ement an3 7 ,6ili% Ran3ol%6Ns 0arc6 *n "as6in/ton 0o9e5 ment (0*"0)C t6e mass 8ase o- t6e %rior %rotests &as too restricte3 to t6reaten t6e Aim Cro& or3er. >ot6 t6e 2ar9ey an3 0*"0 mo9ements 6a3 limite3 /oals an3 &ere relati9ely s6ort li9e3. >y 19'0 the legal metho9 0as the 9ominant 0ea/on o6

Alac' /rotestD an9 it reHuire9 s'ille9 la0)ers rather than mass action. :he legal metho9 9e/en9e9 on the actions o6 elites eDternal to t6e >lack community &6ere8y >lacks 6a3 to 6o%e t6at &6ite :u3/es an3 Su%reme Court
:ustices &oul3 issue -a9ora8le rulin/s in res%onse to &ell5reasone3 an3 &ell5ar/ue3 court cases. 46e 19'' 0ont/omeryC 7la8amaC year5lon/ mass58ase3 8us 8oycott an3 t6e un-ol3in/ 3eca3e o- >lack %rotest c6an/e3 all t6is. 46ese 9e>elo/ments thrust the /o0er ca/able o6 o>erthro0ing Jim !ro0 into the han9s o6 the Alac' communit). 4utsi9e elitesD inclu9ing the courtsD the Fe9eral Go>ernmentD an3 sym%at6etic &6itesC 0oul9 still ha>e roles to /la). .o&e9erC massi9e >lack %rotest 3ictate3 t6at those roles 0oul9 be in res/onse to Alac' collecti>e action rat6er t6an as catalysts -or c6an/e in t6e racial or3er. 7 3ecisi9e s6i-t in t6e %o&er eIuation 8et&een &6ites an3 >lacks /re& out o- t6e stru//le to 3ese/re5 /ate 7la8ama 8uses.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1%$ Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ <lternati>e !auses


:he /roblem is en6orcement o6 la0sD not the eEistence o6 la0s in the 6irst /lace Fellmeth 2' (7aronC Int. Rel. S OaleC .uman Ri/6ts Uuarterly 22(3)C %. ('+5)33)I0
0ost im%ortantlyC re6orm shoul9 be 9irecte9 to the ina9eHuate en6orcement o6 human rights la0. ,omen su66er 9is/ro/ortionatel) 0hen human rights la0s go un9eren6orce9D 0hich ma) contribute to the /erce/tion o6 /atriarchal legal s)stems. In contrastC t6e 3is%ro%ortionate em%6asis on economic la& en-orcement 8ene-its men 3is%ro%ortionatelyC /i9en t6eir control o9er t6e &orl3Ns economic assets. "6ile t6e international community 6as not a/ree3 u%on t6e creation o- a 6uman ri/6ts en-orcement aut6ority &it6 3irect %olice %o&ersC la0 can le>erage im/ro>ement in state attention to 0omenSs interests through a >ariet) o6 mechanismsD 6rom economic sanctions to /ublic o/inion. International -ora %ro9i3e &omen &it6 t6e o%%ortunity to 8roa3cast t6eir concerns &orl3&i3eC esta8lis6 &omenNs interests on t6e international a/en3aC an3 en/a/e in a multilo/ue t6at may lea3 to a/reement u%on 6uman ri/6ts norms t6at transcen3 cultural 3i--erencesC as Na3er 6as o%ine3. 31' G$n3 ,a/e )32H 7n eD%an3in/ core o- 6uman ri/6tsC inclu3in/ t6e ri/6ts o- &omenC 6as tra9ele3 -rom su%%ort in %u8lic o%inion to t6e r6etoric o- elites to international le/al instruments an3 t6e -ormation o- some monitorin/ an3 re%ortin/ institutions. It is time -or a tellin/ a33itional ste% o- 6ol3in/ states accounta8le -or t6e realiBation o- t6e stan3ar3s t6ey es%ouse. Feminists shoul9 not gratuitousl) re?ect la0 an9 its /rocesses. eglect o6 the eEisting tools o6 la0 su//orting the a9>ancement o6 0omenD re?ection o6 JmasculineJ institutions an9 social control techniHuesD or categorical re?ection o6 assistance base9 u/on its source in the J0rongJ gen9er or ethnicit) 0aste a ma?or asset 6or the a9>ancement o6 the 6eminist /olitical an9 social agen9as.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+0 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit)


Discussions o6 theoretical aca9emics 9on-t actuall) in6luence /olic)ma'ing. :uathail $2(2earli3C ,ro-essor o- 2o9ernment an3 International 7--airs atLir/inia 4ec6C E46e %atterne3 mess o6istory an3 t6e &ritin/ o- critical /eo%olitics= a re%ly to 1al8yC ,olitical 2eo/ra%6yFC 7U>) ,hile theoretical 9ebates at aca3emic con-erences are im/ortant to aca9emicsD the 9iscourse an9 concerns o6 -orei/n5 %olicy 9ecisionma'ers are Iuite 3i--erentC so 9i66erent that the) constitute a 9istincti>e %ro8lemsol9in/C t6eory5a9erseC /olic); ma'ing subculture. :here is a 9anger that aca9emics assume that the 9iscourses the) engage are more signi6icant in t6e %ractice o- -orei/n %olicy an3 t6e eDercise o- %o&er than the) reall) are. 46is is notC 6o&e9erC to minimiBe t6e o89ious im%ortance oaca3emia as a /eneral institutional structure amon/ many t6at sustain certain e%istemic communities in %articular states. In /eneralC I 3o not 3isa/ree &it6 1al8y#s -ourt6 %oint a8out %olitics an3 3iscourse eDce%t to note t6at 6is statement5R,recisely 8ecause reality coul3 8e re%resente3 in %articular &ays %olitical 3ecisions coul3 8e takenC troo%s an3 material mo9e3 an3 &ar -ou/6t#5e9a3es t6e im%ortant Iuestion o- a/ency t6at I note3 in my re9ie& essay. :he

assum/tion that it is re/resentations that ma'e action /ossible is ina9eHuate 8y itsel-. PoliticalD militar) an9 economic structuresC institutionsC 3iscursi9e net&orks an3 lea3ers6i% are all crucial in eD%lainin/ social action an3 s6oul3 8e t6eoriBe3 to/et6er &it6 re%resentational %ractices.
>ot6 6ere an3 earlierC 1al8y#s reasonin/ inclines to&ar3s a -orm o- i3ealism. In res%onse to 1al8y#s -i-t6 %oint (&it6 its t6ree su8%oints)C it is &ort6 notin/C -irstC t6at 6is 8ook is a8out t6e C,1C not t6e Rea/an a3ministration. .e analyBes certain C,1 3iscoursesC root t6e /eo/ra%6ical reasonin/ %ractices o- t6e Rea/an a3ministration nor its %u8lic5%olicy reasonin/ on national security. 1al8y#s 8ook is narro&ly teDtualJ t6e /eneral conteDtuality o- t6e Rea/an a3ministration is not 3ealt &it6. Secon3C let me sim%ly note t6at I -in3 t6at t6e 3istinction 8et&een critical t6eorists an3 %oststructuralists is a little too ri/i3ly an3 6eroically 3ra&n 8y 1al8y an3 ot6ers. 46ir3C 1al8y#s inter%retation o- t6e reconce%tualiBation o- national security in 0osco& as 6ea9ily in-luence3 8y 3issi3ent %eace researc6ers in $uro%e is 6i/6ly i3ealistC an inter%retation t6at i/nores t6e structural an3 i3eolo/ical crises -acin/ t6e So9iet elite at t6at time. 2or8ac6e9#s re-orms an3 6is ne& security 3iscourse &ere also stron/ly sel-intereste3C an ultimately -utile attem%t to sa9e t6e Communist ,arty an3 a 3iscre3ite3 re/ime o- %o&er -rom 3isinte/ration. 46e issues raise3 8y Simon 1al8y in 6is comment are im%ortant ones -or all t6ose intereste3 in t6e %ractice o- critical /eo%olitics. "6ile I a/ree &it6 1al8y t6at Iuestions o- 3iscourse are eDtremely im%ortant ones -or %olitical /eo/ra%6ers to en/a/eC t6ere is a 3an/er o- 6etishizing t6is concern

0ith 9iscourse so t6at &e neglect t6e institutional an3 t6e sociologicalC t6e materialist an3 t6e culturalC t6e /olitical an9 t6e geogra/hical conteEts 0ithin 0hich %articular 9iscursi>e strategies become signi6icant. Critical /eo%oliticsC in ot6er &or3sC s6oul3 not 8e a %risoner o- t6e s&ee%in/ a6istorical cant
t6at sometimes accom%anies R%oststructuralism nor con9enient rea3in/ strate/ies like t6e i3entity %olitics narrati9eJ it nee3s to al&ays 8e o%en to t6e %atterne3 mess t6at is 6uman 6istory.

:here is nothing outsi9e o6 9iscourseD it is sim/l) 9iscourse. Kau6man $1(AillC %ro-essorC 1e%artment o- S%eec6 Communication 7n3 1ramatic 7rtsC Central 0ic6i/an
ni9ersity E*t6er &ays= ,ostmo3ernism an3 %er-ormance %raDisF 46e Sout6ern Communication Aournal Lol. (0C Iss. 3J %/. 222C 11 %/s %roIuest)7U> I- t6e lack o- consistency 8et&een %ostmo3ernismNs sel-5style3 alle/iance to t6e o%%ositional an3 its colla8oration &it6 t6e eDistin/ state o- aca3emic %ractice &ere its only s6ortcomin/C it s6oul3 8e enou/6 to %re9ent us -rom unIuestionin/ly em8racin/ it as a t6eory. 0ore 3isIuietin/ stillC 6o&e9erC is its /ostulation o6 the 0a) the 0orl9 aroun9 us 0or's. :heor) t6at %resumes to talk a8out culture must stan9 the test o6 realit). *rC as 7n3re& <in/ statesC Kculture is 0here 0e li>e an9 are sustaine9. <n) 9octrine that stri'es at its root ought to be care6ull) scrutinize9K (%ersonal communicationC ;e8ruary 11C 199!). I- one su8:ects t6e %remise o- %ostmo3ernism to scrutinyC t6e conseIuences are 8ot6 untena8le an3 3istur8in/. In its ele>ation o6 language to the /rimar) anal)sis o6 social li6e an9 its relegation o6 the 9e;centere9 sub?ect to a set o6 language /ositionsD /ostmo9ernism ignores the 0a) real /eo/le ma'e their 0a) in the 0orl9. "6ile t6e notion o- 3ecenterin/ 3oes muc6 to reme3y t6e i3ea o- an essentialC unc6an/in/ sel-C it also %resents %ro8lems. 7ccor3in/ to Clarke (1991)= .a9in/ esta8lis6e3 t6e material Iuality o- i3eolo/yC e9eryt6in/ else &e 6a3 6it6erto t6ou/6t o- as material 6as 3isa%%eare3. :here is nothing outsi9e o6 i3eolo/y (or 9iscourse). "6ere 7lt6usser &as concerne3 &it6 i3eolo/y as the imaginar) relations o6 sub?ects to t6e real relations o- t6eir eDistenceC t6e connecti9e Iuality o- t6is 9ie& o- i3eolo/y has been 9issol>e9 because it la)s claim to an outsi9eC a realC an eDtra53iscursi9e 6or 0hich there eEists no e/istemological 0arrant 0ithout la/sing bac' into the ba9 ol9 0a)s o6 em/iricism or meta/h)sics . (%%. 2'52() Clarke eD%lains 6o& t6e same 3isconnection 8et&een t6e 3iscursi9e an3 t6e eDtra53iscursi9e 6as 8een %er-orme3 in semiolo/ical analysis= "6ere it use3 to contain a relation 8et&een t6e si/ni-ier (t6e re%resentation) an3 t6e si/ni-ie3 (t6e re-erent)C antiem%iricism 6as taken t6e -ormal ar8itrariness o- t6e connection 8et&een t6e si/ni-ier an3 si/ni-ie3 an3 re%lace3 it &it6 t6e a8olition o- t6e si/ni-ie3 (t6ere can 8e no real o8:ects out t6ereC 8ecause t6ere is no out t6ere -or real o8:ects to 8e). (%. 2()

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+1 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit)


Pre6er /olic) anal)sis ( 4nl) 0a) to Huestion social constructions. Kau6man $1(AillC %ro-essorC 1e%artment o- S%eec6 Communication 7n3 1ramatic 7rtsC Central 0ic6i/an
ni9ersity E*t6er &ays= ,ostmo3ernism an3 %er-ormance %raDisF 46e Sout6ern Communication Aournal Lol. (0C Iss. 3J %/. 222C 11 %/s %roIuest)7U> 46e -act t6at go>ernment an3 8i/ 8usiness 6un9 a//roEimatel) $0 /ercent o6 sociological stu9)D not to stu9) /eo/le in go>ernment an3 8i/ 8usinessC but to in>estigate others 0ho are not in /o0er (Reynol3sC 1990)C eE/lains ho0 9isci/linar) em/hases are sha/e9 b) those in authorit). ,er-ormin/ 3ominance &oul3 6el% to em%6asiBe t6e institutional
con3itions o- aut6ority an3 %o&er t6atC as 0ero3 (19+)) 3eclaresC Kse%arate %eo%le -rom t6e 3emocratic control o- t6eir en9ironmentK (%. 1++). Suc6 a stu9) 0ill /ro>e increasingl) im/ortant in the 6uture 0hen bureaucratic structures o6 /o0er 0ill

control more in6ormation about our /ersonal li>es. "illiams an3 S:8or/ maintain that /o0er6ul J4thersJ are the ones 0ho social scientists are reluctant to un9erstan9 because J'no0le9ge o6 such /ersons coul9 un9ermine the legitimac) o6 the u//er sectors o6 societ)K (1993C %. 190). ,er-ormance o- %o&er &oul3 inclu3e narrati9es ocor%orate eDecuti9esC %oliticiansC la&yersC teac6ersC :u3/esC 3octorsC researc6ersC military comman3ersC %u8lic a3ministratorsC sc6ool o--icialsC an3 la& en-orcement %ersonnel. :hese /eo/le are J4therJ to man) o6 usC 8ut 8ecause t6eir 9alues set t6e stan3ar3 -or our o&n com-orta8le mi33le class li9esC &e o-ten 3o not %ercei9e t6em as suc6.(+) ,er-ormance o- &6iteness %oses t6e %ro8lem o- intro3ucin/ still anot6er monolit6ic cate/ory to our %ractice an3 &oul3 t6us 6a9e to 8e a%%roac6e3 &it6 t6e kin3 o- caution reIuire3 -or all suc6 %er-ormances. La8elin/ it as suc6C 6o&e9erC &oul3 6ol3 t&o %otential a39anta/es. ,er-ormance o- &6iteness &oul3 eD%an3 t6e teDts no& un3er consi3eration to inclu3e &6ite su%remacy /rou%sC skin6ea3sC an3 ot6er or/aniBations &6ose rise in t6is country an3 t6rou/6out t6e &orl3 s6oul3 not 8e i/nore3. "6ile the) usuall) lac' the institutional /o0er o- t6e ot6er /rou%s mentione3C t6eir narrati9es 6ol3 an o89ious key to eD%lainin/ t6e 3enial an3 -ear t6at more su8tly moti9ate t6ose &it6 institutional %o&er. ,er-ormance o- &6iteness an3 %o&er also o--ers an o%%ortunity to &6ite %eo%le to %ercei9e oursel9es as K*t6er.K It enables us to 9econstruct &6at Connor (19+9) calls Kthe >er) structures o6 the 9ominant an9 marginalK b) critiHuing the 9ominant (%.233). 7s a corollary to %er-ormance o- &6itenessC &e mi/6t %er-orm t6e -ra/mente3 %rocess 8y &6ic6 &e 8uil3 %erce%tions o- someone &6o is 3i--erent -rom us. 46is %er-ormance o- our sense o- 3i--erence mi/6t -ocus u%on t6e %oliticalC economicC seDualC an3 et6nic s6ar3s t6at construct K*t6erness.K Suc6 a %rocess &oul3 6el% us res%on3 to 6ookNs (1992) %ro%osal to Kinterrogate the 0a) assuming the /osition o6 an outsi9er loo'ing inD as 0ell as inter/reterD canD an9 o6ten 9oesD /er>ert an9 9istort oneSs /ers/ecti>eK (%%. 1'25'3). 7s <oBol (1992) recommen3s= K0ore %eo%le 6a9e to concentrate on 6o& &e %er%etrate t6e 3istortionsK in9ol9e3 in %erce%tions o- %eo%le as K*t6ers.K

Discourse o6 the GotherF can create negati>e images that tri>ialize the other. Kau6man $1(AillC %ro-essorC 1e%artment o- S%eec6 Communication 7n3 1ramatic 7rtsC Central 0ic6i/an
ni9ersity E*t6er &ays= ,ostmo3ernism an3 %er-ormance %raDisF 46e Sout6ern Communication Aournal Lol. (0C Iss. 3J %/. 222C 11 %/s %roIuest)7U> I 3i3 not &ant to %artici%ate in creatin/ t6e illusion t6at i-C oneC sayC /oes to an au3itorium...an3 6ears someone s%eak a8out con3itions in one country or anot6er an3 t6en 6as &ine an3 c6eese a-ter&ar3 &it6 t6e %erson &6o is s%eakin/ an3 /oes 6ome to t6e li-e an3 t6e li-e 3oes not c6an/e at all...t6at one 6as 3one t6eir %art. (%%. (35(!) !onsuming au9iences ten9 to res/on9 0ell to the assurance that there is no threat o6 real 9i66erence that might reHuire change in thought or action. In t6e ser9ice o- t6is reassuranceC commo3i-ication o- ot6er cultures -osters stereoty%es. Sim%li-ie3C staticC easily accessi8le ima/es are %acka/e3 an3 %ro:ecte3C -ittin/ into %re5esta8lis6e3 -rames o- re-erence. :hese 6iEe9 6ormsC %resentin/ essentialist i9eas o6 a grou/ o6 /eo/leD ma) be %ositi9e as &ell as negati>e. 7s 6ooks (1990C 1992) %oints outC goo9 stereot)/es an9 imager) can also be 9amaging. Romantic an9 essentialize9 images o6 o//resse9 /eo/le can tri>ialize their struggle. &um/ing /eo/le to/et6er in categories o- K*t6erK can ha>e the same e66ect. 2rou%s are con-erre3 &it6 clusters o- common attri8utes 8ase3 %rimarily u%on t6eir relati9e lack o- %o&er &it6in t6e social 6ierarc6y. Im/osition o6 the J4therJ label mas's 9istinctions 0ithin a grou/D such as raceC classC seEC a/eC seDual %re-erenceC 9aluesC reli/ionC %oliticsC an3 /eo/ra%6ic /enealo/y. In9i>i9uals 6rom marginalize9 grou/s ob?ect to the 9ouble stan9ar9 b) 0hich in9i>i9uals 6rom the 9ominant culture can see themsel>es as uniHue but thrust u/on J4thersJ the bur9en o6 being a s/o'es/erson 6or the entire grou/ o6 0hich their /ercei>e9 J4thernessJ ma'es them a member (0ooreC 1992J "6iteC 1992). In 3iscourses o- su8:ecti9ityC 3etails a8out a %erson matter. 7s 0in656a (19+9) reasonsC 3etails a8out a %erson 6el% to re&rite t6em as su8:ect (!2).

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+2 Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit)


*sing 9iscourse as a logical mo9e o6 realities /ro9uction is im/ossible. Ro90ell 1(Aonat6anC Lecturer in ,olitics at 0anc6ester 0etro%olitan ni9ersity 1e%artment o- ,6iloso%6y an3
,oliticsC E4ren3y >ut $m%ty= 7 Res%onse to Ric6ar3 AacksonF )7U> NeDtC 9iscourse anal)sis as /ractice9 eEists 0ithin an enormous logical cul;9e;sac. >orn o- t6e ori/inal %remise t6at eac6 3iscourse an3 eD%lanation 6as it#s o&n realitiesC 0hat results is a theoretical a//roach in 0hich a critiHue is actuall) im/ossible because b) %ost5structural logic a critiHue can onl) o/erate 0ithin it-s o0n 9iscursi>e structure an9 on it-s o0n terms . I- t6in/s only eDist &it6in s%eci-ic lan/ua/es an3 3iscourse you must s6are t6e 8asic %remises o- t6at 3iscourse to 8e a8le to say anyt6in/ a8out it. >ut &6at use-ul criticisms can you make i- you s6are -un3amental assum%tionsV 0oreo9er remem8erin/ t6e muc6 ar/ue3 -or normati9e %ur%oses oAackson#s case 6e talks a8out t6e e--ects o- naturaliBin/ lan/ua/e an3 &it6out 8lus6in/ criticises t6e 3an/erous anti5 terror r6etoric o- 2eor/e ". >us6. 46e only %ro8lem is Aackson 6as attem%te3 to illustrate t6at &6at is moral or immoral 3e%en3s on t6e 9alues an3 structures o- eac6 3iscourse. 46ere-ore &6y s6oul3 a rea3er 8elie9e Ric6ar3 Aackson#s i3ea o- ri/6t an3 &ron/ any more t6an 2eor/e ". >us6#sV ;un3amentally i- 6e &is6es to maintain that each 9iscourse is s/eci6ic to each intellectual 6rame0or' Aackson cannot criticise at all. >y 6is o&n e%istemolo/ical rules i- 6e is insi3e t6ose 3iscourses 6e s6ares t6eir assum%tionsC outsi3e t6ey make no sense "6at actually occurs t6en is an a%oria 5 a logical contraction 0here a 0or's o0n state9 e/istemological /remises rob it o6 the abilit) to contain an) critical 6orce. Suc6 ar/uments are cau/6t 8et&een t6e 3esire to maintain t6at all 3iscursi9e %ractices construct t6eir o&n trut6sC in &6ic6 case critiHues are not /ossible as the) are merel) one o6 countless /ossible 9iscursi>e truths 0ith no actuall) reason to ta'e then seriousl)D or an a%%eal to material realityC 8ut a/ain t6e entire %remises o- %ost structural lin/uistics re:ects t6e i3ea o- a material reality. N>iiO In startin/ -rom a %remise t6at it is not %ossi8le to neutrally 3escri8e t6e real &orl3C t6e result is t6at &it6out t6at real &orl3C 3iscourse analysis actually 6as not6in/ to say.

7istor) is the 9ominant tool that sha/es realit). Ro90ell 1(Aonat6anC Lecturer in ,olitics at 0anc6ester 0etro%olitan ni9ersity 1e%artment o- ,6iloso%6y an3
,oliticsC E4ren3y >ut $m%ty= 7 Res%onse to Ric6ar3 AacksonF )7U> :he issue o6 the material real 0orl9D or Pe>i9ence- is actuall) the issue at the heart o6 the 0ea'ness o6 %ost5 structural 9iscourse anal)sisC t6ou/6 it 3oes 6ol3 t6e %otential to at least rescue some o- it#s use-ulness. 46e %ro8lem is sim%leC in t6at the onl) 0a) Aackson or any /ost;structuralist can o/erationalise their argument is 0ith an a//eal to material e>i9ence. >ut b) the logic o6 9iscourse anal)sis there is no such thing as neutral Pe>i9ence-. 4o sIuare t6is circle many %ost5struturalist &riters 3o seem to 6int at com%leDity an3 &6at %ost5 structural culturalists mi/6t call RinterteDtuality#C ar/uin/ -or R-a9ourin/ a com%leDity o- interactions# rat6er t6an Rlinear causality#N>iiiO. :he im/lication is that language is ?ust one o6 an en9less 0eb o6 6actors an9 surel) this /rom/ts one to /ursue an un9erstan9ing o6 these lin's. .o&e9erC to 3o so &oul3 3an/erously un3ermine t6e entire %ost5structural %ro:ect as a/ainC i- t6ere are 3isco9era8le links 8et&een -actorsC t6en t6ere are material -acts t6at are i3enti-ia8le re/ar3less o- lan/ua/e. ConseIuentlyC rather than see'ing to un9erstan9 the lin's bet0een 6actors 0hat seems to ha//en is han9s are thro0n u/ in 9es/air as the search 6or com/leEit) is 9ro//e9 as Huic'l) as it is /ic'e9 u/. 46e result is one53imensional ar/uments t6at a/ain can say little. 46is is e9i3ent in Aackson#s a%%roac6 as 6e 3etails 6o& &or3s 6a9e 6istories an3 moreo9er are %art o- a 3ialectic %rocess in &6ic6 Rt6ey not only s6a%e social structures 8ut are also s6a%e3 8y t6em#.GiDH .o&e9er &e 3o not t6en see any 3iscussion o- &6et6erC t6ere-oreD it is not 9iscourse that is the /o0er6ul tool but the e66ect o6 the histor) an3 t6e social structure itsel-. 46rou/6out Aackson#s ar/ument it is a to% 3o&n %rocess in &6ic6 3iscourse 3isci%lines society to -ollo& t6e 3esire o- t6e 3ominantC 8ut 6ere is an instance o- a 3ialectic %rocess &6ere society may actually 8e t6e ori/inatin/ -orceC allo&in/ t6e 3iscourse in turn to actually to 8e more %o&er-ul. .o&e9er 0e sim/l) see no eE/loration o6 this /otential 9ialectic /rocessD merel) the suggestion it eEists.

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1+% Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Discourse Doesn-t Sha/e Realit)


&anguage 9oesn-t change the material. Ro90ell 1(Aonat6anC Lecturer in ,olitics at 0anc6ester 0etro%olitan ni9ersity 1e%artment o- ,6iloso%6y an3
,oliticsC E4ren3y >ut $m%ty= 7 Res%onse to Ric6ar3 AacksonF )7U> ConseIuently because there is no interaction bet0een the language the culture an9 the material t6en there is not much that can actuall) be 9one. <ll that is 9one is to re/eate9l) 9etail t6e instances 0here t6e same tro/es occur time an9 time again an9 suggest the) ha>e an im/act.GDH "6at cannot 8e eD%laine3 6o&e9er is &6y t6ose tro%es eDist or 6o& t6ey 6a9e an in-luence. SoC -or eDam%leC Aackson is una8le to eD%lain 6o& t6e i3ea t6at t6e mem8ers o- t6e emer/ency ser9ices atten3in/ t6e scene at t6e "orl3 4ra3e Centre on 9/11 &ere 6eroes is a use-ul tro%e 3isci%linin/ t6e %o%ulace 9ia t6e tool o- .olly&oo3 8lock8usters an3 %o%ular entertainments 6eroes. 7ll 6e is a8le to claim is t6at lots o- -ilms 6a9e 6eroesC lots o- stories 6a9e 6eroes an3 %eo%le like 6eroes. 7ll mi/6t 8e true 8ut &6at eDactly is t6e %ointV 7n3 ho0 9o 0e actuall) 'no0 the language has the /rescribe9 e66ect V In3ee3 6o& 3o &e kno& %eo%le 3on#t su%%ort t6e 9illain in -ilms instea3 o- 6eroesV

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010


1++ Scholars Feminist IR K

<66@ Focus on D;!ourse Fails


Discourses ine>itable ( ,e 0on-t e>er be able to esca/e because language also acts as a barrier. .agleton $2(4erryC 1istin/uis6e3 ,ro-essor o- $n/lis6 Literature at t6e ni9ersity o- Lancaster E46e illusions o%ostmo3ernismF ,/. 12)7U> Gras/ing the sha/e o6 a totalit) reHuires some tiresomel) rigorous thoughtC &6ic6 is one reason &6y t6ose &6o 3onNt nee3 to 3o it can re9el in am8i/uity an3 in3eterminacy. 46ere are t6ose &6o nee3 to kno& rou/6ly 6o& t6in/s stan3 &it6 t6em in or3er to 8e -reeC an3 t6ose -or &6om %6rases like N6o& t6in/s stan3N smack o- o8:ecti9ismC scientismC %6allocentrismC transcen3entally 3isintereste3 su8:ects an3 a num8er o- ot6er cree%y a--airs. (46ere &oul3 also seem to 8e t6ose -or &6om utterances like NLor3 Ao6n Russell t6en 8ecame ,rime 0inisterN are insi3ious instances o- N%ositi9ismN.) In the imaginar) e/och 0e are /ostulatingC &e mi/6t eD%ect t6at a /oo3 3eal o- 8loo3 an3 ink &oul3 8e s%ilt o9er Iuestions o- e%istemolo/y 5 o33lyC in a &ayC since this is har9l) the most 0orl9; sha'ing area o6 /hiloso/hical inHuir). >ut t6ere &oul3 %resuma8ly 8e a nee3 to account -or 6o& an3 &6et6er &e can kno& t6e &orl3 in t6e -ace o- t6e a%%arent colla%se o- some classical e%istemolo/ical mo3elsC a colla%se closely relate3 to t6e loss o- a sense o- %olitical a/ency. ;or %ractice is o- course one o- t6e %rimary &ays in &6ic6 &e encounter t6e &orl3J an3 i- any 9ery am8itious -orms o- it are 3enie3 usC t6en it is not lon/ 8e-ore &e &ill catc6 oursel9es &on3erin/ &6et6er t6ere is really anyt6in/ out t6ereC or at least anyt6in/ Iuite so -ascinatin/ as oursel9es. ,er6a%s 0e are all sim/l) tra//e9 0ithin the /rison house o6 our 9iscourse . It is a re9ealin/ meta%6orC &6ic6 /ras%s language as obstacle rather than horizonC an3 one coul3 ima/ine a 8o3ily analo/y to it= I- onl) I coul9 get out o6 m) o0n hea9 I coul9 see 0hether there 0as an)thing out there. I6 onl) I coul9 esca/e 6rom behin9 the 0alls o6 m) bo9) I coul9 encounter the 0orl9 9irectl). <s it isD I 6a9e to o%erate u%on it in t6is lum8erin/C lon/5 ran/e -as6ion. >ut a bo9) o6 course ?ust is a 0a) o6 acting u/on the 0orl9D a mo9e o6 access to itD a /oint 6rom 0hich a 0orl9 is coherentl) organize9. e7 8o3y is &6ere t6ere is somet6in/ to 8e 3onea as 0aurice 0erleau5 ,onty once %ut it. Just the same is true o6 languageD the insi9e o6 0hich is also an outsi9eD 0hose SinteriorS is constitute9 as a ceaseless o/ening to an SeEteriorSD a constant sel6;sur/assing or surge to0ar9s ob?ects.