The concept of domination in international relations
|Faculté||Faculté des sciences de la société|
|Département||Département de science politique et relations internationales|
|Cours||Critical approaches to international relations|
- Introduction to critical approaches to international relations
- Sociology of the discipline of international relations
- Norms in international relations
- Globalizations: definition and situation
- Globalization: circulation between imperialism and cosmopolitan strategies
- Otherness in international relations
- The concept of domination in international relations
- Humanitarian action: between action and intervention
- The concept of development in international relations
- Security and international relations
- Surveillance and international relations
- War and international relations
- War, peace and politics in Africa since the end of the Cold War
- Borders in international politics
- The borders of Europe
- Mobility and international relations
- To conclude the course of critical approaches to international relations
We will approach two perspectives, namely gender perspectives and postcolonial perspectives.
- 1 Gender perspectives
- 2 Post-colonial perspectives
- 3 Annexes
- 4 References
Gender perspectives[edit | edit source]
Domination[edit | edit source]
A distinction must be made between oppression and domination. For Young in Justice and the Politics of Difference, "oppression consists of systematic institutional processes that prevent some people from learning and using skills[relational, e.g. self-esteem/relationship to others; translation of satisfying and expansive skills] in socially recognized environments, or in institutionalized social processes that hinder people's ability to interact and communicate with others or to express their feelings and perspectives about social life in contexts where others can hear".
Oppression induces a system where people are exploited. There is the idea of direct action against someone and preventing them from being what they want to be. There can be no oppression without some form of domination and even without oppression.
For Young, "domination consists of institutional conditions that hinder or prevent people from participating in the determination of their actions or the conditions of their actions. People live in structures of domination if other people or groups can determine the conditions of their actions without reciprocity, either directly or by virtue of the structural consequences of their actions. Full (thorough) social and political democracy is the opposite of domination.
There is a dimension where people cannot think of themselves as different, we will create conditions in which people think of themselves. We are out of domination if we can occur and think without constraint. Heteronormativity for gender perspectives is a form of domination because it leads us to think in a dichotomous system where there is a natural distinction between being a man and being a woman.
In De la critique. Précis de sociologie de l'émancipation published in 2009, for Boltanski, "domination is not directly observable and moreover, most often escapes the consciousness of the actors. The domination must be revealed. It does not speak for itself and hides itself in devices whose obvious forms of power constitute only the most superficial dimension.... Everything therefore happens as if the actors were under the domination that is exercised over them not only without their knowledge, but sometimes even by contributing to its exercise.
The purpose of critical approaches is to highlight forms of domination. From the point of view of heteronormativity, it is found in the reproduction of our daily practices. Colonial approaches show that the colonized person has appropriated the forms of domination of the colonizer. The report is complicated. When we talk about a system of oppression, we are following a logic that goes in one direction. When we start from the logic of domination, we realize that the dominated and the dominant are in a symbiotic logic where they reproduce both.
feminism|gender: more than a nominalist question[edit | edit source]
Feminism focuses on male-dominated knowledge, on the place of women in society as objects of knowledge and on their invisibility. It is an apparent naturalism of gender relations.
Gender studies focus on the social construction of social roles and the social construction of hierarchies, but also on the deconstruction of representations and the social construction of identities (bodies, collective identities). Gender studies focus on the idea of masculinity.
[edit | edit source]
Often, the question that is asked through this distinction between gender and feminism is the distinction between biological and social. It is the transition from the naturalness of the biological (sex) to the construction of the social (gender). It is often assumed that there is an obvious distinction between a man and a woman with social and political consequences. It is a dichotomy that is quite entrenched in our society:
- natural - social
- pre-cultural - cultural
- pre-discursive - discursive
The problem highlighted by gender perspectives and the idea of whether this does not represent a dichotomy of the world around us. The challenge of gender perspectives is to see if there are fluidities in sex. Butler shows how the norm of heteronormativity is challenged when we talk about "trans" or "drag". The transvestite is the idea that anyone can play the game of being a man or a woman without being fooled. On the other hand, the "drag" is someone who completely challenges the distinction between biological and social. It is a man or a woman who, by transforming himself, challenges the norm. Butler questions the idea of drag because there is a fluidity. The idea is to show that we tend to live in a dichotomous relationship of one or the other.
For Butler in Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, "Gender must not simply be understood as the cultural inscription of meaning on an existing sex pré́-; gender must also refer to the production system by which the sexes themselves are established. In the end, gender is not to culture what sex is to nature; gender is also the discursive/cultural means by which the'sexual nature' or'natural sex' is produced and established as'pre-discursive', before culture, a politically neutral surface on which culture acts'.
The fundamental idea of the gender perspective is to show that there is always a political construction, there is always a hierarchical and hegemonic relationship that dictates how we should be. People on the margins of the norm are always reminded of this.
(hyper)masculinity[edit | edit source]
For Hutchings, in Cognitive short cuts published in 2008, the notion of masculinity refers to two things in feminist literature even if they are analytically distinct are generally:
- linked to masculinity as an essence explaining what it does: causal or constitutive links are distinguished between masculinity-related qualities (aggression, instrumental rationality, objectivity) and dominant practices in international relations;
- masculinity as a practice in order to determine what it is: how masculinity, apart from qualities that could be attributed to it a priori, is a rhetorical operator that values, denigrates or excludes an Other.
Heteronormativity[edit | edit source]
For Carver in Sex, gender and heteronormativity: Seeing "Some Like It Hot" as a heterosexual dystopia, heteronormativity is "the normative and normalizing power of heterosexuality in representations, subjectivity, legality and discipline". This is the idea that heteronormativity has consequences on the way the world is perceived and the role of men and women. It is the conception that the man will try to protect the woman, the woman is also a destabilizing element.
In Bananas, Beaches and Bases. Making Feminist Sense of International Politics published in 1989, Enloe says, "It is always good to ask,'Where are the women?' Answering this question reveals the dependence of most political and economic systems not only on women, but on certain types of relationships between men and women.
We must save the veiled woman....[edit | edit source]
In 2001, the United States attacked Afghanistan and one of the justifications is to change the Taliban government because the Taliban regime is an oppressive regime for women. It is a process of justifying the intervention and building the threat.
The victimization of Afghan women and girls is done by their character as passive victims since the Taliban imputed their desires and wills. The idea of removing burqa is to free women from evil is an old discourse, especially colonial. Modernization is a discourse that can be found in nationalist modeling discourse. There is a process consistent with the imperialist discourse on "foreign" women.
A discourse that took place in the 19th century is not necessarily in the same terms, but in the same logic. For Shepherd in Veiled references: Constructions of gender in the Bush administration discourse on the attacks on Afghanistan post-9/11 published in 2006, "Women abroad[abroad] are recognizable in this discourse as variations of what Mohanty (1991: 56) calls the "average woman of the Third World" who "pursues an essentially truncated life because of her feminine gender (i.e. sexually constrained) and her "Third World" being (i.e. ignorant, poor, uneducated, traditionally linked, domestic, family, victimized, etc.)) ».
There is a dimension that links femininity to sexuality. The discourse is to say that dominated women are not women who do not reveal themselves, but women who are forced day after day to follow a number of norms related to the desire of others. What is often presented as a form of emancipation would be linked to male desire. Non-western feminists show that the use of the full veil is one way to reject this change. Often the male-female relationship must be linked to considerations that go beyond gender. You should never think of these things in isolation. Often, sexuality is seen as the criterion in a Western progressive normativity as a criterion of freedom.
The other dimension is that we will make passive objects of a patriarchal structure and forget a certain number of realities or social practices in which women have power, will defend education or practical knowledge not taken into account in a Western vision. The construction of the other is already a form of representation of someone.
If we think about a construction of victimization of women, there is an oppressive and a protective dimension. For Shepherd, "The attacks in Afghanistan were articulated around a gendered discourse focusing on the notions of appropriate protection and care due to women [...] These constructions served two purposes. First, the construction of a female victim marked the foreign enemy as an Irrational Barbarian to be corrected by the Figure of Authority. Second, through reference to accepted gender references, this construction of the enemy has facilitated the conceptual division between'nation' and'enemy'.
The intervention in Afghanistan is justified because a wrong is being done. Vladimir Putin in the Crimea can be analysed as a righting agent. In Afghanistan, there is the idea of redressing a wrong by empowering women. When the "post-" perspectives think in terms of borders, understanding how the attack in Afghanistan was justified through a "gender" prism allows us to see how the other was built, how the other is multiple, but also, one of the functions of construction is the constitution of boundaries on who is the self and who is the other.
We must save Private Lynch....[edit | edit source]
Private Jessica Lynch was captured in March 2003 in Iraq. Her supply convoy was reportedly ambushed and she was taken prisoner.
Spike Peterson relates in Gendered Identities, Ideologies, and Practices in the Context of War and Militarism published in 2012 that "Although the initial reports praised his soldiering courage under enemy fire, they were quickly drowned by the feminization of his critical situation: a white woman allegedly subjected to rape by Arab men was to be dramatically saved. The story reproduced the virtues and vulnerability of (white) femininity, the demonization of Iraqi men, and the heroic efforts of U.S. special forces to "save" it from these alleged abuses.
Covering this story from the time of capture to the time it was saved, there is an important transition from active to passive discourse. Very quickly, her abilities were taken away, she was rebuilt not as a soldier with values linked to masculinity and she was made a passive victim. There is a form of representation where we must save this woman. The dimensions of hypermasculinity are related to American special forces. What is fascinating is to see how much this woman has taken away her ability to be someone, she has been given a narrative that enters a gender perspective.
Private Lynndie England must be convicted[edit | edit source]
There is a contrast with Abu Ghraib where American soldiers torture Arab men. On the one hand, Private Lynch represents positive values both in his action and in his own. Private England has committed atrocious acts, acts that are unfortunately common in any prison system, but what is interesting is that soldier England has been stripped of her ability to have her own history, imposed on her what she is not. We didn't try to put her in a system of normality.
For Spike Peterson, "The details of England's personal life (early divorce, pregnancy out of wedlock, love affair with a man accused of beating his wife) built her as an'unseemly' woman who seemed to enjoy doing'unseemly' things [....... England's history completely diverted attention from cultivated violence among the military through hypermasculine norms-a violence practiced not only against external enemies, but against all those who are feminised, including female soldiers themselves.
The England soldier is not what she should be, being a woman, she is out of the ordinary making negative choices by choosing violence, she does not choose care. We find ourselves in a specific institution, the army. The military institution is a male institution that reproduces forms of domination, which is hypermasculine. Women in military institutions are in the minority and are the recipients of multiple forms of sexual harassment and more traditional harassment in terms of employment relationships.
Madam is served...[edit | edit source]
Thousands of men and women leave their families to go abroad; it is necessary to understand the political economy behind these migrations. In The gendering of Philippines international labor migration, Tyner describes gendered migration patterns as, for example, the domestic workers of expatriates or bourgeois families in Europe, Lebanon, Hong Kong or the Persian Gulf highlighting the existence of an international political service economy.
As Pettman points out in Women on the move: globalization and labour migration from South and Southeast Asian states, the first idea is that female labour is represented as "cheap". The international service economy is supported by public and private institutes revealing a governmental and private institutionalization of this gendered model as in the Philippines.
Thus, an international political sociology of migration emerges and for Tyner,"[...] the motives and actions of non-migrant participants, including recruiters, foreign employers, and foreign administrators, are fundamental in the production of gendered migration models. Based on a multitude of representations-of people, places and occupations-these individuals and institutions market and recruit workers using gender as an organizing principle.
It is necessary to understand how migration flows are interpreted in order to understand the place of women in society. Thus, Pettman points out that "The growing demand for women's work reflects their commodification as cheap work... Making work cheap depends, in part, on ideologies on femininity".
Women's work is built as temporary as an intermediary before marriage, in addition to complementing the real financial pillar of the family through money transfers. For women there is the idea that their work is only a support to the person who will bring the money to feed the family who is the man. We will limit the function of women in the political economy by constructing the idea that women are naturally patient, persevering and skilled with their hands in order to disqualify them from certain functions.
There are other forms of predispositions to work in globalized assembly plants with a homology built between domesticité́ and work such as, for example, sewing. These are patterns used both by the recruiter and by the way people perceive themselves. It means creating the conditions for the possibility. What is fascinating is that unskilled work can be qualified as specialized work for a man.
For Pettman, "The commodification of women's bodies within the multinational space and for multinational work in globalized assembly plants is not detached from transnational circuits offering women's bodies across state borders for domestic or sex work. In both cases, it is not only gender markers that identify women's bodies for certain works, but also processes that nationalize and racialize these gendered bodies [...]"
Summary[edit | edit source]
The discourse that produces feminization is synonymous with depoliticization trying to identify certain categories. Thinking about gender makes it possible to reflect on an international political economy through the flow of[invisible] migrants, of whom more and more women are part. International political economy reflects power relations (domination) between North/South, men/women.
These power relations are not limited to a gender dichotomy, for example, "bourgeois" or expatriate women from the north and south also participate. It is necessary to deconstruct gendered representations and underline their centrality in order to go beyond a foundationist conception of the world and subjects in order to reconcile performativity with the possibility of change.
Post-colonial perspectives[edit | edit source]
Postcoloniality is the continuity of a developmentist model of the world. There would be certain levels where we should be and this is presented as natural or necessary. Postcolonial thinking is a distinction between problematization and chronology. Some who will talk about neo-colonialism will say that there are still practices that would persist beyond colonialism. A postcolonial problematization is thinking in a complexity of production and subjectivity that has effects on the colonizer.
Between chronology and problematization[edit | edit source]
The idea of post-colonialism refers to a specific historical period in the context of States, regions. This implies a chronological marker of a before and after. Decolonization is an old process that can be dated back to the 19th century, particularly with Haiti up to the post-World War II period. From now on, the states would be more equal, but some authors analyse the former colonies as being in a situation of domination with an interventionist margin and manipulation of the former metropolises. But in this case we limit ourselves to power relations.
Post-colonialism refers to a condition in The Intimate Enemy. Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism, Nandy refers to a "state of mind": "Colonialism is an indigenous process liberated by external forces". External forces are produced by a specific phenomenon, namely colonialism, which has taken many forms. During modernity, essentially in the 19th century, the colonial idea was born with a moral, but also religious reflection on the world order. These processes are the external forces that Nansi talks about, they are currents of practice, ideas and discourse that have an impact on the colonizer and the colonized.
Thus, Post-colonialism groups together approaches problematizing a particular historical and postcolonial condition. In Postcolonial Theory. In Critical Introduction, Leela Gandhi speaks of "postcoloniality".
The postcolonial condition[edit | edit source]
Post-colonial approaches focus on continuity. It is not a question of neo-colonial approaches that the practices are obviously continuous, but we are in the idea that there is a "discontinuity in continuity" as Foucault says. We will see how forms, patterns of thought make it possible to study, question and reveal (post-)colonial continuity. For Nandy, "colonialism is an indigenous process liberated by external forces". Nandy wonders to what extent the order has been reversed, but by reproducing frames of thought. There are frameworks of thought that survive the chronological dimension.
There is a dimension of knowledge production such as, for example, anthropology that was born in the Netherlands with the production of experts who were interested in the Dutch Indies in a need to dominate the other. It is also the production of frameworks and terms to make sense of a different reality. The idea of "tribute" is an anthropological concept developed in order to make sense of a reality that is not necessarily recognized in this term. When we talk about reproducing continuity is that in the long run, the colonized themselves have come to use these terms in order to make sense of this reality.
For Thomas, the meaning of others is a loss of autonomy. In Colonialism's Culture Anthropology, Travel and Government published in 1994, colonial knowledge is "often in the form of a panoptic and encyclopedic appropriation of indigenous customs, histories, relics and statistics".
The production of subjectivity, especially by nationalisms, can be colonial subjectivities for both the colonizer and the colonized. In The Other Question..., Homi K. Bhabha reconsiders the stereotype and colonial discourse, Bhabha postulates that "to understand the productivity of colonial power, it is crucial to build it as a regime of'truth'". There will be practices through the people who will bring things up in the colonial space.
The symbiotic colonizer-colonized relationship[edit | edit source]
Colonialism in its complexity must be considered. According to Nandy, there are two forms of colonialism:
- that of bandits, raptors and profit: a form of exploitation that refers to the first forms of colonialism;
- that of the liberals, rationalists and modernists referring to that of civilization: colonialism has sometimes been thought of in a positive way in order to get people somewhere because they would not be ready to govern themselves. In relation to populations, there will be justifications. Colonialism should not be seen simply as something to be seen.
For Nandy, "This colonialism colonizes minds in addition to bodies and liberates forces within colonized societies to change their cultural priorities once and for all. At the same time, it helps to generalize the concept of the modern West from a geographical and temporal entité́ to a psychological category. The West is now everywhere, inside and outside the West; in structures and in people's minds.
There is a dimension that is sometimes found in independence movements, but also in movements that react to certain situations. Part of postcolonial thinking shows that this is an illusion, one cannot escape the ways of thinking that have had an effect for hundreds of years. Danger is the thought of the authentic by returning to something that has not been "corrupted". Postcolonial thinking is always relevant because we are in a situation where everything has been changed.
At one point in history, the West takes many forms. Colonialism makes it a universal category. In social science, when we think in comparative terms, the categories that come first, such as the State and citizenship, are Western ways of thinking presented as universal modes. Colonialism has had an effect on how we think. It is a specific production that has become dominant in Western countries, but it has had an effect on ways of thinking.
In Colonialism's Culture. Anthropology, Travel and Government, Thomas writes: "Although we are generally sympathetic to the suffering of the colonized, this view frequently exaggerates colonial power, thus reducing the degree and extent of indigenous resistance and accommodation in the formation of colonial histories. In many cases what may appear to be the exercise of colonial hegemony - the imposition of Christianity, for example - is in fact better understood as the appropriation of introduced institutions, material objects or speech for strategic reasons by colonized peoples or by particular groups within them.
When we think about colonialism, it is not necessarily an imposition, it can be an instrumentalisation, especially of elites who wish to improve or take power. Often we tend to think that the colonizer arrives and everything submits. Romain Bertrand shows that historiography in the Javanese language only mentions the Dutch from the 19th century onwards, whereas formally the Dutch Indies only existed since the 18th century.
How to explain a disjunction between knowledge production and reality? Naivety comes from giving too much power to one and rejecting the power capacity of the other. The Javanese elites used the Dutch in their quest for power.
In The Intimate Enemy. Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism, Nandy shows that there are also effects on the colonizer, in particular the production of hypermasculinity, which leads to the delegitimization of "female" constructions in the public sphere. This is part of a construction that is not necessarily specific to the West.
The second effect is that there is a false sense of cultural homogeneity, that is, believing oneself to be a homogeneous whole. In Gândhî's mind, one of the first acts was to reach out to the English working classes, some of which were linked to cotton production to show them that they are also among those exploited by the colonial system. The British working classes thought they were part of this empire when they were part of those exploited by this system.
Nandy underlines the omnipresence of colonial ideology in spheres other than politics such as religion and morality. In morality, we can show very strong links on how to conceive the poor. The notion of development is mainly thought of at the domestic level and has been brought to the colonial populations, but there is a discourse around the function of development.
Thucydides underlines the Athenians' taste for risk, Nandy highlights the false sense of omnipotence and permanence. It is a dimension where there is a before and an after and the thought that we are in the right.
The persistence of colonial reference and understanding frameworks[edit | edit source]
Postcolonial thinking highlights the persistent idea of colonial hierarchies of value and knowledge. Chakrabarty published Provincializing Europe in 2000. Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference showing how in historiographic thought, Europe is the centre of everything: "It would seem that only'Europe' is theoretically (i.e. at the level of the fundamental categories forming historical thought) knowable; all the other stories are objects of empirical research giving substance to the theoretical skeleton that is substantially'Europe'".
Most postcolonial thinkers widely question most of the concepts and categories we use. Beyond the specific modes of exploitation as such, or when we talk about the colonization of minds, it is the way we think and as researchers, our thinking is linked to colonialism.
The Orientalism[edit | edit source]
Orientalism is about thinking about how we conceive the orient in the context of a mirror effect. Orientalism is an academic research enterprise, a production of knowledge, a production of history. Orientalism has been a current of academic thought, but also a literary current.
For Said in The Orientalism, "Orientalism is a style of thought based on the ontological and epistemological distinction made between the "East" and (for the most part) the "West" [...] a collective institution to deal with the East - to deal with it by making statements, authoritative views, descriptions, teachings, ordering, rules about the East: Orientalism, in other words, is a Western style of domination, restructuring, and authority over the East.
The East does not exist in itself, it is a Western production that brings together diverse, contradictory realities, but also in tension and we talk about it as what is in the East of us. This is produced through expert effects. It means thinking of the other, but also bringing the other to think of himself as we understand him.
For Said,"[...] the East is not an inert fact of nature. It is not there, just as the West itself is not just there too. It is necessary to show how there is a constitution of imaginaries and representations. In the imagination, the oriental is the irrational, the sensual.
The East is grouped around a multiple. However, it is not a question of denying the existence of one or rather a multitude of references in the East. The problematization that interests Said "is not that of the correspondence between Orientalism and the East, but that of the internal coherence of Orientalism and its ideas about the East [...] malgré́ and au-delà̀ of any correspondence with a "true" Orient". What is interesting is to look for what is behind the behaviour of certain States in particular or in the context of postcolonialism how orientalism has been instrumentalized. To understand certain practices, it is necessary to understand that they are part of a certain discourse.
Thus, Said writes that"[Orientalism] is rather a distribution of geopolitical attention in aesthetic, academic, economic, sociological, historical and philological texts;[...]. Orientalism] is, more than it expresses, a certain volonté́ or intention to understand, in some cases to control, manipulate, and even incorporate, what is clearly different (or alternative and new); it is above all a discourse that is in no way direct, a corresponding relationship with a raw political power, but rather a discourse that is produced and exists through an unequal exchange within different powers [...]"
Often we will create categories to serve our power. Said's speech starts from a beggar's attention which is to understand the other by trying to understand their language, their society, their economic mode. We must not fall into the idea of instrumentalizing the other and believe that a relationship of domination is an instrumentalization. Domination can arise from a desire to understand and know the other. There is no such thing as a truly neutral element, it is the idea of a production of knowledge. There is an inequality in the production of knowledge.
The production of developmentalist knowledge is part of an unequal production. Developmentalists realize that they are in an unequal system where they come with their knowledge. The postcolonial perspective highlights a contradiction that requires an understanding of the subjectivity of the other.
To some extent, there is a postcolonial contradiction that highlights a tension between phenomena, structures, practices, discourse that derive politically and chronologically from colonialism on the one hand and the cultural obligation to be inventive and creative on the other, such as the Gandhi support in Postcolonial Theory. A Critical Introduction. Post-colonial reflection questions how to go beyond this continuity. On the one hand, postcolonial production essentially emphasizes domination, yet the normative and positive discourse will challenge and go beyond domination.
Gilroy is interested in the Atlantic and the relationship with the Atlantic in The Black Atlantic. Modernity and Double Consciousness, he postulates that "whatever their affiliation to the right, left or centre, groups have fallen back into the idea of cultural nationalism, into that of over-integrated conceptions of culture presenting immutable ethnic differences as an absolute break in the histories and experiences between'white' and'black'. Another choice is possible, a more difficult option is possible: the thought of creolization, mixing, mestizaje, hybridity.
Gilroy rethinks triangular trade through cultural exchanges. When we think of domination, there are more emancipatory effects that allow ways of rethinking. To a certain extent, if we remain in a pattern, we remain in a superficial criticism. When we produce a self, we tend not to look at ourselves in our own complexity and tensions. The positive message of the postcolonial approach is to question the extent to which hybridity can be produced. The challenge is to be creative about where we are and where we need to go.
Summary[edit | edit source]
The predominance of reference frameworks is Euro-centric. This predominance does what Fabian calls in Time and the Other. How Anthropology makes its Object a negation of temporal co-presence and a persistence of "not yet". It is important to take into account the positionality of the knowledge producer. Said speaks of the omnipresence of Orientalist discourse in The Orient which is an illusion of non-political discourse, because the discourse on the Orient would be academic, scientific and impartial. Postcolonial analysis is a way of thinking about oneself in the context of a mirror discourse. We must be careful about the danger of thinking about authenticity.
Annexes[edit | edit source]
Bibliography[edit | edit source]
- Bhabha, H. K. (1983). The Other question... Homi K. Bhabha reconsiders the stereotype and colonial discourse. Screen, 24(6), 18–36.
- Butler, J. (1999 ). Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge.
- Carver, T. (2009). Sex, gender and heteronormativity: Seeing “Some Like It Hot” as a heterosexual dystopia. Contemporary Political Theory, 8(2), 125–151.
- Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincializing Europe. Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Enloe, C. (1989). Bananas, Beaches and Bases. Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the Other. How Anthropology makes its Object. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Gandhi, L. (1998). Postcolonial Theory. A Critical Introduction. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
- Gilroy, P. (1993). The Black Atlantic. Modernity and Double Consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Hutchings, K. (2008). Cognitive short cuts. in Jane L. Parpart and Marysia Zalewski (eds.) Rethinking the man question. Sex, gender and violence in international relations. London: Zed books, pp. 23–46.
- Nandy, A. (2009). The Intimate Enemy. Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
- Pettman, J. J. (1998). Women on the move: globalisation and labour migration from South and Southeast Asian states. Global Society, 12(3), 389–403.
- Pritchard, A. & Morgan, N. J. (2000). Privileging the male gaze. Gendered tourism landscapes. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 884–905.
- Shepherd, L. J. (2006). Veiled references: Constructions of gender in the Bush administration discourse on the attacks on Afghanistan post-9/11. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 8(1), 19–41.
- Spike Peterson, V. (2010). Gendered Identities, Ideologies, and Practices in the Context of War and Militarism. in Laura Sjoberg and Sandra Via (eds.) Gender, War, and Militarism: Feminist Perspectives. Santa Barbara: Greenwood publishing group, pp.17– 29.
- Thomas, N. (1994). Colonialism's Culture. Anthropology, Travel and Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Tyner, J. A. (1996). The gendering of Philippines international labor migration. The Professional Geographer, 48(4), 405–416.
References[edit | edit source]
- Page de Stephan Davidshofer sur Academia.edu
- Page personnelle de Stephan Davidshofer sur le site du Geneva Centre for Security Policy
- Compte Twitter de Stephan Davidshofer
- Page de Xavier Guillaume sur Academia.edu
- Page personnelle de Xavier Guillaume sur le site de l'Université de Édimbourg
- Page personnelle de Xavier Guillaume sur le site de Science Po Paris PSIA
- Page de Xavier Guillaume sur Academia.edu
- Page personnelle de Xavier Guillaume sur le site de l'Université de Groningen