 |
Gender Mainstreaming and Peace-building in War-torn Societies
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
1.0. Introduction
Most of the literature on civil wars has focused on “angry young men” and what forces drive
their mobilization and participation in often very brutal wars. Women are traditionally seen as
victims of wars, along with children and the elderly. However, many narratives and examples
from conflicts such as Chechnya, Sri Lanka, and even Bosnia reveal that women have often
played an active role as fighters, militants, or suicide bombers.
1
Even less is known about
women and peace. Nevertheless, women have been active agents in peacebuilding processes.
Despite their limited resources, women participate in peace movements and reconciliation
processes in areas such as Israel-Palestine, Afghanistan, and Nigeria (Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars and Women Waging Peace, 2003).
Traditional peacekeeping operations have emphasized the monitoring of cease-fires
and traditional concepts of security that did not incorporate existing social networks and civil
society in the peacebuilding process. Hence, the role of women has remained obscure in
peacekeeping operations. The end of Cold War and the mushrooming of integrated
peacekeeping operations that emphasize human rights, civil affairs, demobilization and
reintegration of militants and former combatants into the civilian life have opened new
opportunities to incorporate women in the peacebuilding process.
1
Most of the existing literature on gender and conflict is based on the premise that women are less inclined than
men to use violence. Socio-biological theories and social constructivism have been introduced in feminist literature to account for women’s presumed pacifist orientation. Women are genetically predisposed to be adverse to the use of violence, in part because of their reproductive roles (see Burris, 1992; Miller, 1988; Ruddick, 1989; Togeby, 1994; Mueller, 1973, 1994; Harrington, 1992; Tickner, 1992; Caprioli, 2000; Daly, 1984; Elstain, 1987). An opposite position is that behavioral differences between men and women are the result of social conditioning into stereotypical gender roles that affect attitudes and behavior in decision making (see Goldstein, 2001). Regardless of the source of gender differences in attitudes to conflict, societies that afford women greater equality and greater political representation are expected to be more likely to follow a more peaceful foreign policy and less likely to experience violent conflict with other states or at the domestic scene (Melander, 2005). Caprioli (2000) argues that countries where women enjoy a higher status have fewer international disputes. However, Caprioli does not offer an explanation as to whether the impact of women on foreign policy stems from gender differences in values or whether the traditional roles of male-aggressive and female-passive are weakened in less gendered societies (Caprioli, 2000: 53). In this paper I leave aside the question of whether women are inherently more peaceful or not.
2
|
| | Authors: Gizelis, Ismene. |
|
| |
|
|
1.0. Introduction
Most of the literature on civil wars has focused on “angry young men” and what forces drive
their mobilization and participation in often very brutal wars. Women are traditionally seen as
victims of wars, along with children and the elderly. However, many narratives and examples
from conflicts such as Chechnya, Sri Lanka, and even Bosnia reveal that women have often
played an active role as fighters, militants, or suicide bombers.
women and peace. Nevertheless, women have been active agents in peacebuilding processes.
Despite their limited resources, women participate in peace movements and reconciliation
processes in areas such as Israel-Palestine, Afghanistan, and Nigeria (Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars and Women Waging Peace, 2003).
Traditional peacekeeping operations have emphasized the monitoring of cease-fires
and traditional concepts of security that did not incorporate existing social networks and civil
society in the peacebuilding process. Hence, the role of women has remained obscure in
peacekeeping operations. The end of Cold War and the mushrooming of integrated
peacekeeping operations that emphasize human rights, civil affairs, demobilization and
reintegration of militants and former combatants into the civilian life have opened new
opportunities to incorporate women in the peacebuilding process.
1
Most of the existing literature on gender and conflict is based on the premise that women are less inclined than
men to use violence. Socio-biological theories and social constructivism have been introduced in feminist
literature to account for women’s presumed pacifist orientation. Women are genetically predisposed to be
adverse to the use of violence, in part because of their reproductive roles (see Burris, 1992; Miller, 1988;
Ruddick, 1989; Togeby, 1994; Mueller, 1973, 1994; Harrington, 1992; Tickner, 1992; Caprioli, 2000; Daly,
1984; Elstain, 1987). An opposite position is that behavioral differences between men and women are the result
of social conditioning into stereotypical gender roles that affect attitudes and behavior in decision making (see
Goldstein, 2001). Regardless of the source of gender differences in attitudes to conflict, societies that afford
women greater equality and greater political representation are expected to be more likely to follow a more
peaceful foreign policy and less likely to experience violent conflict with other states or at the domestic scene
(Melander, 2005). Caprioli (2000) argues that countries where women enjoy a higher status have fewer
international disputes. However, Caprioli does not offer an explanation as to whether the impact of women on
foreign policy stems from gender differences in values or whether the traditional roles of male-aggressive and
female-passive are weakened in less gendered societies (Caprioli, 2000: 53). In this paper I leave aside the
question of whether women are inherently more peaceful or not.
2
|
|
 Convention | | Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
