Contrasting Feminisms in Global Politics and Diplomacy, Prof. Joshua Goldstein

Summary

The speaker explores the psychological and societal impact of war, questioning traditional gender roles and highlighting the trauma faced by soldiers. They argue that violence is not an innate trait of men, challenging the narrative of men as inherently violent. The speaker calls for the liberation of both men and women from restrictive gender roles, advocating for a diverse, merit-based approach to leadership in military, diplomatic, and other spheres. They emphasize healing, inclusivity, and the importance of judging individuals on their qualifications rather than gender, proposing a world where both men and women contribute equally to shaping society.

Takeaways

• 😀 Men are not naturally violent; war and violence are behaviors shaped by societal expectations and pressures.
• 😀 Societies often use a variety of incentives—such as alcohol or sexual rewards—to encourage men to fight in wars.
• 😀 Historical and cultural narratives often portray men as naturally inclined to violence, but these are social constructs, not inherent traits.
• 😀 The idea of rewarding soldiers with medals or sexual access is deeply rooted in many cultures to motivate men in battle.
• 😀 Trauma from war, particularly in the form of PTSD, affects many soldiers, revealing the true cost of war beyond the perceived rewards.
• 😀 Gender roles and expectations have long been used to shape men and women's behavior in both war and peace contexts.
• 😀 Encouraging men to take on roles such as childcare should not be seen as a duty, but as a source of joy and fulfillment.
• 😀 Women's representation in military, peacekeeping, and diplomatic roles should be based on their qualifications, not their gender.
• 😀 It’s important to think about healing men from the trauma of war, not just protecting women from violence.
• 😀 Societies need to foster diversity in leadership and participation, ensuring that both genders contribute equally to the strength of institutions.
• 😀 True progress lies in creating systems that focus on individual merit rather than limiting roles based on outdated gender norms.

Q & A

How does the speaker view the relationship between gender and violence?

The speaker argues that violence is not innate to men. Instead, men are socialized through societal pressures and rewards to engage in violent behaviors, particularly in the context of war. These incentives, such as rum rations or promises of sexual rewards, are designed to motivate men to fight, even though many suffer from trauma afterward.

What are some examples the speaker gives of how men are encouraged to fight in wars?

The speaker mentions several societal incentives for men to fight, such as the historical use of rum rations in the British Army and the promise of sexual rewards, like the myth of the 72 virgins. Additionally, warlike societies often require men to engage in battle before they can marry, while medals and other symbols of gratitude are awarded to soldiers.

What does the speaker suggest about the concept of 'martyrdom' in the context of war?

The speaker highlights that many cultures offer the promise of rewards, such as access to women or divine rewards, for soldiers who either die in battle or survive. This notion of 'martyrdom' is often used to motivate men to fight, reinforcing the idea that sacrifice in war is honorable and brings societal benefits.

How does the speaker link gender roles with post-war trauma?

The speaker argues that, despite all the societal pressures encouraging men to fight, many soldiers return from war deeply traumatized. This trauma, often overlooked, is a significant issue, particularly in the United States, where hundreds of thousands of veterans struggle with the aftermath of their experiences.

What is the speaker's stance on the idea that men are inherently violent?

The speaker rejects the idea that men are inherently violent. Instead, they stress that men are conditioned by society to engage in violence, particularly in the context of war. The expectation that men will fight and kill does not align with their natural instincts but is rather a product of societal structures.

What alternative vision does the speaker propose regarding men and war?

The speaker proposes a vision of healing for men, where they are liberated from the societal expectations of violence and war. This includes imagining a society where men are encouraged to embrace roles like child care not out of duty, but as a source of joy, thus breaking the traditional notions of masculinity tied to violence and war.

How does the speaker propose to address gender roles in leadership and military roles?

The speaker suggests that women should be encouraged to participate in military and diplomatic spheres not because of their gender but because of their qualifications and abilities. Similarly, men should not be restricted to roles traditionally assigned to them, like combat, and should be free to pursue more diverse roles such as caregiving or leadership in non-violent sectors.

What does the speaker mean by 'liberating both women and men from the tyranny of gender roles'?

The speaker envisions a society where both women and men are freed from restrictive gender roles that limit their potential. For men, this means rejecting the expectation to be violent or warlike, and for women, it means being able to participate in spheres traditionally dominated by men, such as military or diplomacy, based on competence rather than gender.

What is the core message about gender in the speaker's argument?

The core message is that gender should not define an individual's opportunities or roles in society. The speaker advocates for merit-based assessment, where individuals are judged on their abilities and qualifications, rather than their gender. This includes embracing a diverse range of leadership and societal roles for both men and women.

Why does the speaker emphasize the importance of diversity in leadership and membership in institutions?

The speaker emphasizes that diversity in leadership and membership strengthens institutions by drawing on the broadest range of perspectives and talents. By moving beyond gender-based expectations and biases, institutions can better reflect the needs and capabilities of society as a whole, leading to more effective and inclusive decision-making.