Register to read the introduction…
Indeed, the feminist field, emerged as an academic discipline at the end of 80s, is at present marked by considerable diversity, which reflects the variety of approaches embraced in International Relations studies, such as realism, liberalism, constructivism, critical theory, post-colonialism and postmodernism (Sjoberg 2009, p. 2). What all these bodies of knowledge have in common, however, is the aims and methods of their research. First, feminist theorists seek to determine whether and how the dynamics of international politics are influenced by patterns of gendered inequalities, and whether there are specific consequences associated with them (Tessler and Warriner 1997, p. 250). As a matter of fact, they claim that a full understanding of the nature of international politics and economics must include the analysis of the gendered inequalities structures that shape them (Youngs 2004, p. 78). In doing so, scholars working in this area adopt what has been defined as “practical knowledge”, that is the study of international relations at the level of individual women’s lives (Tickner 2006, p. 45): ‘preferring bottom-up rather than top-down knowledge feminists believe that theory cannot be separated from political practice
…show more content…
36) observed that ‘wars, violent conflicts between people, as well as sexual attacks on women, are historical and social processes that are carried out collectively and, thus, must have a collective meaning’. Starting her analysis from the same historical period, the Yugoslav wars, Seifert examines various instances of sexual violence alongside the twentieth century, such as the Nanking massacre in 1937, the North-African campaign in Morocco in 1943, and the Bangladesh genocide in 1971, and concludes that rape and sexual violence against women are not just “side effects” of wars, regarded by many as ‘excesses of singular hordes run wild’, rather an integral part of warfare, a military strategy with a specific purpose (ibid. p. 37). Indeed, the traditional idea of “proper” war involved the confrontation between (male) soldiers, while civilian casualties are consider unintentional by-products of war. However, Seifert notices, since civilian casualties often outnumber military ones, the term “by-product” is inappropriate from a moral and analytical point of view (ibid. p. 38). In line with the conception of new wars formulate by Kaldor, she points out that one of the primary goals in war is in fact the destruction of the enemy’s identity as community, and not necessarily the defeat of its army, and sexual violence is a privileged tool to achieve it (ibid. p. 40). As a matter of fact, women are in times of war ‘those who hold the families and the community together’, and ‘the destruction of their integrity affects overall cultural cohesion’(ibid.). This is particularly patent in what happened in Yugoslavia wars, where camps explicitly intended for sexual torture were established. Seifert concludes by adding that another dimension of rape is that it converts the victims suffering into a display of power, and since it is perpetrated on women, it is translated into male power (ibid. p.
36) observed that ‘wars, violent conflicts between people, as well as sexual attacks on women, are historical and social processes that are carried out collectively and, thus, must have a collective meaning’. Starting her analysis from the same historical period, the Yugoslav wars, Seifert examines various instances of sexual violence alongside the twentieth century, such as the Nanking massacre in 1937, the North-African campaign in Morocco in 1943, and the Bangladesh genocide in 1971, and concludes that rape and sexual violence against women are not just “side effects” of wars, regarded by many as ‘excesses of singular hordes run wild’, rather an integral part of warfare, a military strategy with a specific purpose (ibid. p. 37). Indeed, the traditional idea of “proper” war involved the confrontation between (male) soldiers, while civilian casualties are consider unintentional by-products of war. However, Seifert notices, since civilian casualties often outnumber military ones, the term “by-product” is inappropriate from a moral and analytical point of view (ibid. p. 38). In line with the conception of new wars formulate by Kaldor, she points out that one of the primary goals in war is in fact the destruction of the enemy’s identity as community, and not necessarily the defeat of its army, and sexual violence is a privileged tool to achieve it (ibid. p. 40). As a matter of fact, women are in times of war ‘those who hold the families and the community together’, and ‘the destruction of their integrity affects overall cultural cohesion’(ibid.). This is particularly patent in what happened in Yugoslavia wars, where camps explicitly intended for sexual torture were established. Seifert concludes by adding that another dimension of rape is that it converts the victims suffering into a display of power, and since it is perpetrated on women, it is translated into male power (ibid. p.