Feminism In The World - Essay Example

Feminism In The World The qualities of women are increasing in demand, in the field of International Relations. The perception that serious matters between any two nations can only be handled in a ‘manly’ way is increasingly being challenged by several high profile failures deriving from men’s hard-nosed approaches. The need for softer skills that are best offered by women is growing with every failed round of negotiations and ineffective sanction. It is gradually becoming apparent that the unsurpassed way to solve disagreements is almost always to talk and women are best suited to do this.

Their excellent negotiation skills are increasingly coming to the fore, alongside other qualities like patience, which is key in protracted conflicts where solutions are, to put it mildly, not easy to arrive at (Dunne et al. 2010). Even when armed with these requisite qualities, women still find it difficult ascend to the top of organizations where these skills are most needed. This paper shall seek to explore why this unjustifiable and self-defeating glass ceiling exists and what can be done to make these positions accessible to women.

The inspiration behind this article is in turn an article by Micah Zenko in Foreign Policy entitled ‘City of Men’. The statistics that back these claims can not be ignored. There is slightly less than 25% of female lecturers in international relations (Zenko 2011). Only about a sixth of the Pentagon’s senior defense officials are women. Lastly only 29% of ambassadors and other senior foreign office holders are women.Three main reasons are behind this lamentable under representation. Top among them is women’s disinterest in research and writing about military might and industrial strength which are the core, prevailing themes in international relations.

Secondly, the gender imbalance that is self-perpetuating. Men at the top fleet between top jobs in a web of inter connected postings while women are left trailing in this male dominated world. Thirdly, the women’s inability to take up these demanding jobs owing to equally demanding responsibilities as home makers also contributes to their lack of representation in international relations.Women’s supposed disinterest in matters that regard the military and other hard power solutions are not new.

However, in an age of feminism when women are keen to prove that they are equal to if not better than men, their willingness to venture into traditionally male domains is greater. As a consequence, we have witnessed such women as Madeleine Albright, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice rise to senior positions in the foreign office and offer outstanding service. Williams et al. (2006) asserts that their success can be attributed to the approaches women bring to the negotiating table.

For instance, women are more likely to associate with the opponents’ point of view, unlike men. They also approach negotiations, not as a zero-sum game, but having in mind the need to find ‘win-win’ solutions. However, the notion that profess the universe to be a much more peaceful place with women at the top should be studied more closely. After all, it is clear that women have formed great wartime leaders, notably Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir (Wilson, 2004). Also, a self perpetuating gender imbalance has ensured women are locked out of top jobs in foreign affairs.

As a result, the few women who finally find their way into these top organizations do so to satisfy affirmative action demands that keep mounting in this era of feminism (Baylis et al. 2011). However, this does not mean that women are less qualified. As a minority group, women have to be ‘twice as good’ in the words of Condoleezza Rice, to be successful in these positions. Where these top jobs are elective, it is also essential to note that women are less likely to seek elective office. When they do, more attention is paid to their family background, and they eventually fail, not because they are not sufficiently qualified, but because politics is deemed a men’s domain, even in the developed world.

A good example is the line of questioning vice-presidential Geraldine Ferraro had to undergo during the 1984 election. She was asked if she were ready to push the nuclear button, one of the questions that had never been put to any male candidate before or since (Wilson 2004).Lastly, there is the abiding belief that women are supposed to be home-makers. Cynthia (1993) asserts that the field of international relations is extremely involving. Those who occupy such positions are ‘living in jets’.

They spend a lot of their time going around the world in search of elusive consensus. They are away from their families on official duties in many instances. Societal expectations demand women to be concerned of their families while men go to work. It is not customary for men to stay at home while their wives provide financially for the family. However, recent changes are backing the trend. Zenko (2011) explains that the economic imperative for the family to sustain most lucrative jobs has seen more men take care of their families as their wives go to work.

Generally, greater involvement of women in international relations is coming late in the day. Traditional stumbling blocks in their paths are being lifted. More women are taking an interest in these maters than before. More women are breaking these glass ceilings that have limited them considerably. Lastly, men are ready to step in the shoes of women and assist them in raising the family so as to set them free to pursue careers. However, it should not be assumed that women shall do everything right in this field.

Indeed, research has shown that when women have moved into these positions and have adopted masculine methods to make ends meet (Dunne et al. 2010). They should be encouraged to look at their soft power as strength in an environment where the competition is based on physical strength. Let us ensure that the world adopts a more feminine outlook, so that it becomes more peaceful. ReferencesBaylis, John, et al. (eds.) 2011, The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction toInternational Relations.

Oxford University Press, New York,Cynthia, E 1993, “The Morning After. Sexual Politics at the end of the Cold war,” University of California Press, California.Dunne, Tim, et al. (eds.) 2010, International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Oxford University Press, New York.Williams, Phil, et al. (eds.) 2006, Classic Readings and Contemporary Debates in International Relations. Thomson Learning Press, Belmont.Wilson, M 2004, “Women, War and the Presidency,” Feminist.com, viewed 18 April 2012 from http://www.feminist.com/news/womensleadership3.

htmlZenko, M 2011, “City of Men.” Foreign Policy Magazine, July 14 2011, viewed 18 April 2012 from http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/14/city_of_men