Study Guides (258,664)
CA (124,963)
UTSC (8,100)
POLB80H3 (38)

study guide

4 Pages
76 Views

Department
Political Science
Course Code
POLB80H3
Professor
Yvonne Ramcharan

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 4 pages of the document.
Feminism and Constructivism: A Comparison
The discipline of international relations (IR) is one that has witnessed a multitude of variations
and shifts. It has produced a fair amount of debate between academics within the international
relations scholarship. Due to a plethora of circumstances scholars have subjected the traditional
rationalist theories of neorealism and neoliberalism to critical re-evaluations. As a result,
constructivism is a concept that has emerged as an alternative approach to dominant IR theories.
It focuses on the importance of state identities in defining and gaining knowledge of state
interests, actions and goals. There are theorists who purport that the rise of constructivism
allows for a further understanding of another international theory, feminism. This is a branch of
critical social theory that illlustrates how gender has been thought of or avoided in traditional
international relations. While they are fundamentally different in many respects, it is the
purpose of this essay to illustrate that similar ontological commitments allow both constructivists
and feminists to share a focus centering on the concept of social construction. The paper will
provide a brief explication of constructivism and feminism before engaging in a comparative
analysis of both theories, including a discussion of strengths, weaknesses and contemporary
examples.
In order to gain a fuller understanding of the components involved it is first necessary to provide
a brief introduction to the concepts. Theories of international relations were developed through
three major debates and as such, IR ideas were traditionally dominated by the perspectives of
realism, idealism and behaviouralism . Criticisms leveled by critical theorists, combined with the
end of the Cold War and a generational change, led to the displacement of established axes of
debate by a new constructivist approach to IR literature . Rooted in sociology, constructivism is
about human consciousness and the role of this feature in international life . Dominant
rationalist theories make distinctions between the actions and interests of states on the basis of
economic and security concerns. They believe states act in accordance with the material
structural incentives of the international system. Conversely, a primary assumption of the
constructivist approach is that identities, norms and culture play fundamentally important roles.
Alexander Wendt and John Ruggie, the forefathers of constructivism, contend that this theory is
characterized by an emphasis on the significance of not only material but normative and
ideational structures affecting the role of identity in forming political action. An argument is
made on the mutual relationship between agents and structure . Constructivists argue that the
identities and interests of states are not only structurally determined but socially constructed by
interactions between states, institutions, norms and cultures . Concurrently, not only are
identities and interests of actors socially constructed, they must also 'share the stage' with a host
of other ideational factors emanating from people as cultural beings. The constructivist focus of
inquiry is social phenomena such as norms, rules, institutions, language or productions . In sum,
it is the process of social construction, the mechanisms that constitute reality, and not structure,
which determines the manner in which states interact in world politics.
The decade of the 1980s saw the beginnings of feminist IR scholarship . Carrying over to the
latter stages of the 1990s, for feminist political scientists such as Ann Tickner and Birgit Locher
the third debate provided a new basis for an engagement between feminist scholars and
mainstream IR proponents . At its core, feminism is a branch of critical social theory that
explores how gender is thought of or avoided entirely in international relation models such as
rationalism or realism . The fundamental difference between this theory and the traditional
realist model is that gender is established as a core tenet. It is not unitary in form and, akin to
constructivism, there is a concentration on social relations. An individual's social location -
meaning their ascribed identities, roles and relationships - are of central significance to feminists
as it influences the power one possesses, which in traditional IR theory is gendered and
patriarchical. According to Christine Sylvester, these scholars suggest that conventional IR has
avoided thinking of men and women in the capacity of embodied and socially constituted subject
categories by classifying them into 'neutral' categories . Most theorists too readily accept that
www.notesolution.com

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Description
Feminism and Constructivism: A Comparison The discipline of international relations (IR) is one that has witnessed a multitude of variations and shifts. It has produced a fair amount of debate between academics within the international relations scholarship. Due to a plethora of circumstances scholars have subjected the traditional rationalist theories of neorealism and neoliberalism to critical re-evaluations. As a result, constructivism is a concept that has emerged as an alternative approach to dominant IR theories. It focuses on the importance of state identities in defining and gaining knowledge of state interests, actions and goals. There are theorists who purport that the rise of constructivism allows for a further understanding of another international theory, feminism. This is a branch of critical social theory that illlustrates how gender has been thought of or avoided in traditional international relations. While they are fundamentally different in many respects, it is the purpose of this essay to illustrate that similar ontological commitments allow both constructivists and feminists to share a focus centering on the concept of social construction. The paper will provide a brief explication of constructivism and feminism before engaging in a comparative analysis of both theories, including a discussion of strengths, weaknesses and contemporary examples. In order to gain a fuller understanding of the components involved it is first necessary to provide a brief introduction to the concepts. Theories of international relations were developed through three major debates and as such, IR ideas were traditionally dominated by the perspectives of realism, idealism and behaviouralism . Criticisms leveled by critical theorists, combined with the end of the Cold War and a generational change, led to the displacement of established axes of debate by a new constructivist approach to IR literature . Rooted in sociology, constructivism is about human consciousness and the role of this feature in international life . Dominant rationalist theories make distinctions between the actions and interests of states on the basis of economic and security concerns. They believe states act in accordance with the material structural incentives of the international system. Conversely, a primary assumption of the constructivist approach is that identities, norms and culture play fundamentally important roles. Alexander Wendt and John Ruggie, the forefathers of constructivism, contend that this theory is characterized by an emphasis on the significance of not only material but normative and ideational structures affecting the role of identity in forming political action. An argument is made on the mutual relationship between agents and structure . Constructivists argue that the identities and interests of states are not only structurally determined but socially constructed by interactions between states, institutions, norms and cultures . Concurrently, not only are identities and interests of actors socially constructed, they must also share the stage with a host of other ideational factors emanating from people as cultural beings. The constructivist focus of inquiry is social phenomena such as norms, rules, institutions, language or productions . In sum, it is the process of social construction, the mechanisms that constitute reality, and not structure, which determines the manner in which states interact in world politics. The decade of the 1980s saw the beginnings of feminist IR scholarship . Carrying over to the latter stages of the 1990s, for feminist political scientists such as Ann Tickner and Birgit Locher the third debate provided a new basis for an engagement between feminist scholars and mainstream IR proponents . At its core, feminism is a branch of critical social theory that explores how gender is thought of or avoided entirely in international relation models such as rationalism or realism . The fundamental difference between this theory and the traditional realist model is that gender is established as a core tenet. It is not unitary in form and, akin to constructivism, there is a concentration on social relations. An individuals social location - meaning their ascribed identities, roles and relationships - are of central significance to feminists as it influences the power one possesses, which in traditional IR theory is gendered and patriarchical. According to Christine Sylvester, these scholars suggest that conventional IR has avoided thinking of men and women in the capacity of embodied and socially constituted subject categories by classifying them into neutral categories . Most theorists too readily accept that www.notesolution.com
More Less
Unlock Document


Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit