The Concept of Structural Power in Fundamental Problems and IR Gender Hierarchy - Brooke Wallace
It is hard to believe that 50 years ago women were still viewed as property of men. Take, for example, a woman who stands up to Congress to talk about domestic abuse in 1955. You can imagine how this would end up; She was probably either interrupted or shunned. It is a power move in itself saying that it happens elsewhere, and it is “not my problem”. At the time, home life was separate, so it did not have any place in Congress. Shrugging off such a rampant problem at home suggests more of a fundamental barrier for women, ones we still face today. There are many things left unsaid that should be in the forefront of the public's attention. I believe that not only is structural power to blame, but also productive power, as it is much more diffuse and something everyone does on a daily basis. Thus, it is hard to make change and break out of this. Even today, women are rarely found in positions of military leadership and in high-ranking roles in the political office. Although women’s rights have come a long way, there is still work to be done specifically in IR. IR Feminism is very much overlooked as critical theories are almost ‘gender-blind’ and privilege masculinity. Hans Morgenthau’s six principles of political realism prove that these gender inequality issues ensue. According to Tickner, his argument is centered on the domination of man over man; He constantly uses the word man while excluding women from the mainstream viewpoint. Tickner asserts that Morgenthau’s world view is by no means an objective and universal theory of international politics. The way he defines power coincides with that of power in international relations. As Loken touched upon in his article, the way in which IR is taught sustains the research and gender inequalities in society. It is tough to change the way in which we talk about things. Our in-class discussion relates to the resistance to change how we have become socialized and accustomed to a new place and group of people at Bucknell, for example. Therein lies a major problem in structural power: acting how you are supposed to. We are taught to make the best out of the cards we have been dealt. It is deeply ingrained in our American culture to make money to live rather than challenging how and why. As a society, we must work together to break down these barriers that shy many women away from giving their perspective and make this male-dominated realm more accessible to them. If the very foundation of IR theory grew its critical perspective, I think that it would lead us to consider new approaches and courses of action in terms of war and other pressing unresolved issues. Despite a masculine perspective being embedded in IR and core social institutions, we need to make room for a feminine voice. We need to better understand the perspectives of those marginalized and stand up for those who cannot. Only then will we have a deeper understanding of IR and the world around us.
This is a great read! I never really thought how IR education in the current world serves to uphold the status quo of a patriarchal society. The whole concept of "acting as we are supposed to" seems to liken people to robots, acting without free will. This concept only serves to further uphold the system that keeps women and even other ethnic groups down.
ReplyDeleteHarping on that, do you believe that this theory could extend to underrepresented racial groups as well?
You are definitely right. It is a concept that is overlooked because we rarely challenge why or how we are taught the way we are taught/we talk about things and simply accept it. The conversation needs to be opened up for those who are marginalized. This concept justifies how important race is to international relations and how we try to "westernize" everything because in our minds we are perceived as superior being that the US is a global superpower. Just as this IR theory of a gender hierarchy applies to women, it also applies to underrepresented minority groups (as presented in the Loken reading) and even children. The Melian Dialogue by Thucydides explains not only to this gender but also racial hierarchy because all of the women and children of Melos were enslaved. The strong will survive and do whatever they want even if the weak suffer. This relates to the exploitation and coercion culture mentioned in your post regarding hard power: aristocrats stigmatize the very ladder that got them to the top in the first place and they are power-hungry (ex> using the pandemic to control the public even more).
ReplyDeleteBrooke, I completely agree with your post and the fact that women are underrepresented due to the sexism engraved into the country today. Attempting to break barriers and be the change that elicits a response will allow women to prosper in a larger setting. I think your connection to Tickner is very important as she was so direct in correcting the “male-centered” approach Morganthau took in writing out his principles of political realism. Having more key actors in IR that are women would benefit society as a whole to get a more widespread view point and encourage a less male- dominated field. Women and men differ so much in aspects that we as a society fail to even mention especially in a work scenario, so it could help integrate perspectives and assimilate more women into the field.
ReplyDelete