Gender in international relations

Feminist security studies offer a corrective to the realist assumptions of International Relations (IR). Although many scholars have questioned the effectiveness of including a feminist analysis in IR, this paper aims to illustrate the intrinsic value of feminism and gender in security studies. This paper will use a gendered lens to critique realist assumptions to demonstrate that a feminist approach to IR will provide a more holistic understanding of security. Feminist security studies enhance the security by broadening the scope of IR. First, using a gendered lens provides a tool to deconstruct the epistemological inequalities in the study of International Relations. Secondly, incorporating a feminist approach to IR helps deconstruct the realist assumptions of state as the central actor by including a human security perspective in the study of IR.  Lastly, realists are specifically concerned with war and peace and fails to address the security implications during the in between phase. A feminist approach to IR thus provides a more holistic understanding of security in recognizes the in between phase of war and peace to demonstrates the gendered violence which occurs.
Feminist epistemology: standpoint theory
Feminist Epistemology is an epistemology concerned with the ways gender influences concepts of knowledge and its practices of inquiry and justification. The very notion of Feminist Epistemology is for the purpose of providing recognition of the traditional disregard for women's experiences and their contribution to culture and knowledge, and the belief that the unique positions of women in society have inherent value for knowledge contribution.
Scholars such as Abigail Brooks have echoed the voice of other feminist scholars such as Sandra Harding in suggesting the significance of Feminist Standpoint Epistemology in IR to develop itself and bring forth other unrepresented perspectives such as third world, as well as African American feminist perspectives. Brooks, along with Hudson recognize the importance of epistemology. Hudson suggests that IR collapses femininity or masculinity into the term 'human,' which conceals the gendered underpinnings of security practices. The term 'human' is presented as though it were gender-neutral, but in practice, it expresses only masculine ideals. The gender dimension is then overlooked and the analysis provides only a partial understanding of security issues. Feminist Standpoint Epistemology suggests women, combined with their capacity for double consciousness, are granted a kind of "epistemological privilege" from which new and critical research questions arise (Brooks 2006, 69). Thus incorporating feminist approaches in IR, specifically emphasizing a Feminist standpoint perspective, will arguably develop the study of IR since women's subordinate status in society will provide useful in the broadening of security studies.
State-centric realist assumption
A realist national security enforces conformity to values that are often maledefined.  Incorporating a gendered lens in security studies will help overcome the limitations of realism. Realism recognizes the state as central actors in IR, however fails to recognize that individuals require protection from the powers of the state. Hudson recognizes the importance of intersectionality in IR and suggests a critical feminist perspective to overcome the dichotomy between universalism and cultural relativism by connecting individual experiences in a particular location to wider regional and global structures. Since women are seen as a category of identity, security studies needs to integrate gender as a unit of analysis to refrain from creating silences which ultimately reinforce the dominance of masculinist universalisms. In security studies, people should also be recognized as the object of security since gender- based security threats are often inseparable from other threats.
The state centric perspective is not inclusive since it does not recognize the security threats of women. Contrary to realist assumptions of security, although states are important in security, the individual also faces numerous threats from the state.  Human security complements state security by providing a more comprehensive emphasis on the well being of individuals below the state level.
Realist focus on war and peace
The war/peace dichotomy, that is defined in realist assumptions, limits the study of various forms of violence that occur in between periods of conflict. Since women's concerns, as victims of human rights violence, are not integrated to realist concerns on security, which thereby extends the notion that human security is essentially masculine.  Realists are only concerned with security threats at the state level, during war and peace.
The realist focus on war and peace neglects to take into account the politics of everyday violence. The narrow focus on war and state-based violence fails to include the everyday violences that exist since the everyday does not fall into the categorical time frames of 'war' nor 'peace'. Thus, the violences inherent to times of peace, against women are overlooked in the study of war.
Material violence is experienced differently depending on where individuals are situated in society. Through material acts of violence, discourses of gender are given physical form. The prisoners in Abu Ghraib were forced to do acts which were intended to humiliate the prisoners and undermine their masculinity and reinforce the power relation which privilege masculinity over femininity. A gendered analysis of violence in between the war/peace dichotomy is relevant because, as suggested by Sjoberg, many scholars have developed statistical evidence that domestic gender equality is an independently significant variable in predicting which states refrain from wars. The study of IR and security thus would benefit from using a gendered lens since the treatment of a state's female population is associated with the probability of a states going to war.
Many feminist scholars have questioned the relevance of incorporating feminism and gender into International Relations. This paper used a gendered lens to critique realist assumptions to demonstrate that a feminist approach to IR will provide a more holistic understanding of security.
Feminist scholarship has attempted to deconstruct the realist assumptions in IR by incorporating a gendered lens in the analysis of security. Although many scholars remain unconvinced that a feminist approach will be beneficial to the study of IR, Feminist scholars continue to demonstrate the various limitations in realist assumptions that can be overcome by incorporating feminist approaches in security studies. Gender as the unit of analysis in security, will promote integration across various levels and dimensions. To avoid recreating and suggesting incomplete understandings of security, scholars must recognize the complex and equivocal roles attributed to women and men in security analysis. Including women as a category of identity but not integrating gender as unit of analysis, creates silences in the study of IR and ultimately reinforces the dominance of existing masculinist universalisms. Realism as a dominant intellectual framework for IR, would benefit by broadening the scope and integrating feminist perspectives to further security studies and theoretical progress.

Tazrian Alam is a graduate in politics and international relations from Queen's University, Kingston, Toronto, Canada.