Women and international relations
The subjective consideration is whether the operatives within international relations would change if women were at the helm of the world affairs. It also infers the mobility in terms of structure and functional change once the metamorphosis from the era of men to that of women is complete. The objective is therefore to ascertain exhaustively the feminist claim that the world or the international relations would change (positively) if women become the world leaders (Tickner 612). Alternatively, can the feminist critics’ observations be validated in their acclamation that the difference in structure and function might not be achievable in the positive way but rather negatively? The bone of contention therefore illicit the contrast that may be existing between the two phenomena in as far as international relations is concerned. The feminist politics has existed since the dawn of female adult suffrage. The spoils and gains have not been ascertained because women have consistently remained in the shadow of the world politics. Nevertheless, the truth is; with women leadership change may or may not suffice or worse, the situation might get bad or better.
Women political leadership
First, the critics of the feminist international relations cite a number of women figures who are the women’s main undoing in as far as the claims of peace and soberness in women’s world politics is conncerned. Notably are, Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi. These women are some of the most prominent leaders who have ever existed in the history of women leadership. They are noted to have behaved like men during the period they were at the helm of affairs in leadership (Tickner 613).
Women leadership is majorly associated with peace. The feminists of the international relations assert that with peaceful leaders, you create a peaceful world and that women have the answer to peace that the world need so badly. There is also an assertion, albeit denied by the feminist at every instant that morally women score higher in superiority than men. The latter has no stint of solid justification while the former can be soberly debated. However, the association of peace with femininity is unrealistic, utopian and lacks the merits of justification. Whereas men are described as aggressive and women peaceful, it is important to evaluate the score card which essentially exist in all of these segments of consideration (Tickner 617).
To begin with, women are disadvantaged by history. The era before the dawn of women suffrage portrayed women so negatively that even the recent IR approaches to feminism have failed to rebuild the denatured image. Women were considered passive, emotional, and victims, whereas men on the other hand were known to be active, rational and agents of change and action. In as much as these are mere stereotypes, which the feminist campaigns have dealt with, the available evidence lacks no proof that women at the helm of international relations would be any better (Tickner 618). To add on it, the likes of Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi and Golda Meir never expressed it any different. They behaved and acted just as men have been known to do it.
The peaceful nature of women is acknowledged but does it empirically translates to peaceful run of international affairs. A peaceful world void of elements of violations of human rights and all sorts of international concerns need peaceful leaders, and that is difficult to challenge. However, the question is; is women leadership peaceful? Only hypothetical allusions may give the affirmative but it lacks significant evidence to prove the felicity of the assertion that with women leadership, expect a different international relations. The bottom line is there may not be significant positive change.
Tickner, Ann, “You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements between Feminists and IR Theorists,” International Studies Quarterly 41, No. 4, 1997, pp.611–632.
Don’t Delay Taking the Best Academic Help
We are, without a doubt, the best academic writing service to provide you with extremely high quality work at very reasonable rates. So delaying the decision of order placement is irrational. It will prove costlier because eventually, you are going to get back to us. Get your paper.