Postmodern Feminist Theories of International Relations

Critiques of Liberal Feminists

The critique mirrors that of critical theory, focusing on underlying factors.
Critical theory posits material factors and the power of ideas as foundational.
The relationship between these factors changes, prompting the question: What drives this change?
Critical theorists are questioned for omitting an exogenous variable that causes change.

Similar to generic postmodernists, they prioritize the power of ideas.
Discourses, especially hegemonic discourses, are central.
Postmodern feminists focus on discourses related to gender roles.
They analyze how the concept of gender informs our understanding of international relations.
They examine the language used by mainstream figures (realists, liberals, political/military leaders).
They critique sanitized language, e.g., "counterforce" vs. "countervalue" for nuclear war, "collateral damage" for civilian casualties.

A prominent figure who brought attention to gendered language in the mainstream.
In 1984, she attended a workshop on nuclear weapons and war during a period of Cold War tension.
She wrote "Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals" about her experiences.
Cohen was surprised by the extent of gendered language and sexual metaphors used by defense experts.
Gender language had long been part of warfare but the extent of it shocked her.

"Soft laydowns," "deep penetrations," "protracted versus spasm attacks," "harden our missiles," "Russians are a little harder than we are."
Bomber nose art from World War II depicting women in alluring positions.
Ships referred to as "she," e.g., "She's a good ship."
Brochure for an anti-tank shell called a "long rod penetrator."
Mobile ballistic missile on a truck, with the device used to tip the missile into firing position called an "erector."

Postmodern feminists argue that using sexually explicit or gendered language to discuss war obscures the destructive reality of warfare.
It can lead to macho posturing instead of genuine understanding.
Analogy: Using language from games can diminish the appreciation of war's true nature.

Postmodern feminists critique liberal feminists for not challenging the status quo.
Liberal feminists aim to integrate women into existing political, economic, and social systems without systemic change.
They don't challenge hierarchies but seek women's inclusion in them.
Postmodern feminists argue that the system itself is inherently gendered.

Efforts to incorporate women's issues into the decision-making processes of organizations like the UN, IMF, and World Bank.
Liberal feminists view this positively, aiming to factor in the impact on women.
Postmodern feminists critique it as merely trying to improve existing systems without considering alternatives.

Mainstream theory is criticized for ignoring women and being oblivious to its gendered norms and values.

A prominent figure in postmodern feminism, though she doesn't self-identify as postmodernist, she was president of the International Studies Association (ISA).
Authored "You Just Don't Understand: Trouble Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists" (1997).
Argued that postmodern feminists and the mainstream are not engaging in meaningful dialogue due to differing vocabularies and shared grounds.

Cohane, a mainstream positivist, responded, acknowledging interesting points but arguing they are difficult to study due to their post-positivist nature and lack of measurable data.
Tickner countered that the scientific method itself is not value-free and that postmodern feminists cannot satisfy its criteria without compromising their methodology.
Mainstream approaches ignore the roles and contributions of women (e.g., wives of diplomats, women in agriculture and textiles).

Postmodern feminists sometimes build their analyses on exaggerated foundations.
Masculine language and imagery are a significant part of discussions of war, but not entirely descriptive of all discourses.

In contrast to Western masculine imagery, Egyptian discussions of nuclear weapons in the 1950s-60s sometimes used female-oriented imagery, such as women and childbirth.

Attributed to Sigmund Freud, this argues that not everything has a deeper symbolic meaning.
Missile shapes are primarily driven by aerodynamic reasons, not deliberate efforts to evoke male sexuality.
If bales of hay were more aerodynamic, missiles would be shaped like them.