Instructor: Brett O'Bannon
Office:
202 Emison Hall
Office
Hours: MWF
Appointments available
Office
Phone: x-4157; E-mail: bobannon
Course Description
This course is subversive and reconstructive. During the next 14 weeks I will introduce you to a number of issues in, and theoretical approaches to, the study of world politics. POLS 390 is subversive because we will expose the conventional methods of inquiry for their biases, which are often masculinist at best, or patently sexist at worst. We will examine the very “curious” similarities in women’s social, economic and political condition in radically different cultural, political and geographic contexts. At the same time, however, we will also take note of the very important differences among the concerns and efforts of women in different contexts. That is, we will explore a variety of issues engaged by women who reside in different parts of the world and how they both construct, and are constituted by, varied opportunity structures that comprise local, historical, cultural and ideological contexts. The course is reconstructive in the sense that we do not merely examine the nature of the world “as it really is” to use the language of realpolitik. Feminist analyses tend to reject the realist notion that there is some strictly immutable world that we are constrained merely to understand. Rather, feminists of all stripes tend to see that the world is quite often as those with the access and power to do so make it. A course such as this moves beyond description and explanation to normative theorizing about how we may rethink the nature of what we study and thus how to reconstitute empirical realities through meaningful praxis.
We will begin the course with an introduction to feminist theories. Please note the plural usage. No area of study or methodological approach is more varied, some might say divided, than feminist studies. To assume a “feminist” theory is to miss the rich and complex body of theories that compete to make sense of, and reconstitute, our world. We may be tempted to view the body of feminist approaches as a tapestry, one whose different fibers blend into an intellectually appealing product. We might equally be drawn, however, to the conclusion that competing feminist theories are irreconcilable or mutually exclusive accounts of the world. Wherever you arrive on this question, it is the objective of this course that you leave here with a fuller understanding of the varied political questions feminists ask, how they seek to answer them, and the competing visions of the nature of world politics they inform.
Consistent with the subversive and reconstructive
project in which we are engaged, this course will intentionally breach the wall
of separation between two conventionally discrete areas of study in world
politics: Comparative Politics and International Relations. Beginning with the
latter, International Relations is typically viewed as the study of what
is often called “high politics:” war, peace, diplomacy, international economy,
etc. Such a distinction has served a very useful function – exclusion. Women
have rarely occupied top positions in national and international politics, and
today they still hold an inequitable number of academic appointments in the
fields dedicated to their study. Thus, a number of key concerns associated with
these offices (war and peace, international organization, etc.) have been
framed in decidedly sexist ways. The sexist construction of the dominant
paradigms in international politics is a function not only of the machinations
of the practitioners of high politics, but of those who have traditionally
studied the practitioners. Comparative
Politics on the other hand, is a field concerned with what is considered
“deep politics:” social movements, ecopolitics, human
rights, governance, etc. As you might expect, women occupy a more prominent
place in the efforts of those who study of comparative politics. Perhaps this
is because women occupy a more visible role in the social movements,
nongovernmental organizations and other institutions,
to name only a few, that constitute the focus of comparative politics
scholarship. In connecting the deep with the high, that is, by seeing problems
in political participation at the local level as connected to problems at the
levels of such international organizations as the World Trade Organization or
the United Nations, we put ourselves in a better position to explore more
holistically the gendered nature of world politics and also to critique the
nature of international politics on very solid empirical and theoretical
grounds.
“Deep”
Politics: governance, regime change, human rights, environmentalism, and
participation
Feminist
Scholarship and World Politics
It
is my deep conviction that this project is worth doing. I welcome you along
what I hope you will find is a rewarding intellectual (and political!) journey.
To give you some sense of where we are headed, the figure above is a graphical
representation of the breach between International Relations and Comparative
politics feminists are forging.
Course Objectives
By the end of the term you should:
q Have an understanding of the
dominant themes, concepts and theories in world politics and an appreciation of
the works that typify scholarship in these areas
q Have an understanding of the
varied criticisms that feminists have leveled against mainstream scholarship and
the body of theory these criticisms have informed
q Understand the complex
condition and efforts of women in various social, economic, ideological,
political and geographical contexts
q Be able to bring your own
informed voice to the varied discourses to which you have been introduced
Please
note: I require your engagement of the intellectual material – not your approval
of it on ideological or normative grounds. That is to say, though this is a
feminist course on politics, you are certainly not required, or even expected,
to subscribe to any variety of feminism. By the same reasoning, any disapproval
of feminism or the feminist project in which we are engaged is not subject to
my review. Any interference in your ability to engage the material that a disdain
for feminism may cause, is, however, of my central concern. In other words, you
don’t have to be a feminist to pass this course. You must, however, demonstrate
the ability to comprehend, and critically respond to, the material we will
explore.
Required Reading
There
are 4 texts required for purchase. The books are available at Fine Print
Bookstore, in the heart of downtown
Please
note that the additional readings are as central to our project as the texts
you purchase. Several of the additional readings are not gender-focused. This
is intentional. My aim in this class is to introduce you to the scholarship on
world politics as it is practiced.
D’Amico, Francine, and Peter
Beckman (eds.) Women in World Politics:
An Introduction.
Rueschemeyer, Marilyn (ed.) Women
in the Politics of Postcommunist
Steans, Jill. Gender and
International Relations: An Introduction.
Waylen,
Additional Reading
Collins, Evelyn. “European
Union Sexual Harassment Policy,” in R. Amy Elman
(ed.) Sexual Politics and the European Union: The New Feminist Challenge.
Delphy, Christine. “The European
Union and the Future of Feminism,” in R. Amy Elman
(ed.) Sexual Politics and the European Union: The New Feminist Challenge.
Diamond,
Larry and Marc F. Plattner. “Introduction,” in their The Global Resurgence of Democracy Second
Edition.
Harrington, Mona. “What Exactly is Wrong with the
Huntington, Samuel P. “Democracy’s
Third Wave,” The Global Resurgence of Democracy Second Edition.
Fernandez-Kelly,
Maria Patricia. “Maquiladoras: The View from the Inside,” in
# Visvanathan, N.(Eds.). ( 1997). The Women,
Gender and Development Reader
Grigsby, Ellen. “Key
Concepts in Political Science,” Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to
Political Science.
Hawkesworth, Mary E. “Democratization:
Reflections on Gendered Dislocations in the Public Sphere,” in
Kelly et. Al.
(eds.) Gender, Globalization, &
Democratization. LanhamL ROwman and Littlefield, 2001.
Keck,
Margaret and Kathryn Sikkink. “Transnational Networks on
Violence Against Women,” in their Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics.
Kopinak, Kathryn. “Gender as a
Vehicle for the Subordination of Women Maquiladora
Workers in
Lambert, Caroline. “French
Women in Politics: The Long Road to Parity.” US-France Analysis, May, 2001.
The Brookings Institute.
Mazur, Amy G. “The
Interplay: The Formation of Sexual Harassment Legislation in France and EU
Policy Initiatives,” in R. Amy Elman (ed.) Sexual
Politics and the European Union: The New Feminist Challenge.
Mossuz-Lavau, Janine. “French Women Seek
to Conquer Politics.” Dossier No 37 10/1999. Ministry of Foreign Affairs / Label France.
O’Bannon, Brett. “The
Patterson, Amy. “The Impact of
Simms, Marian. “Gender,
Globalization, and Democratization: Some Lessons from
Smyth, Ailbhe.
“ ‘And Nobody Was Any the Wiser’ Irish Abortion Rights
and the European Union,” in R. Amy Elman (ed.) Sexual
Politics and the European Union: The New Feminist Challenge.
Stoddard, Ellwyn. “ ‘Ladies of the Assembly
Line’: Gender Issues in the Maquiladoras,” Maquila: Assembly Plants in
Tiano, Susan. “Chapter 8,” Patriarchy
on the Line: labor, gender and ideology in the Mexican Maquila
Industry.
Tickner, J. Ann. “Conclusions and Beginnings: Some
Pathways for IR Feminist Futures,” in her Gendering World Politics.
Urdang, Stephanie. “Chapter 11,
Women in National Liberation Movements,” in Hay, Margaret Jean and Sharon Stichter (eds.) African Women South of the
Course Contents
q Introduction to feminist
theories and theories of politics (S1; D&B Introduction; W
Introduction and chapter 1; Grigsby*)
q The Widow’s Walk and other
paths to power: On the nature of Women’s formal political participation (D&B
2-5,7)
q “High” Politics?
International Relations Theory and Feminist Critique [2 weeks] (S2-5)
*Test one is scheduled for Friday, February 27
q Politics in Advanced
Industrialized Nations: West European Feminist Politics and the European Union
[2 weeks] (Harrington*; Collins; Mazur; Smyth; Lambert; Mossuz-Lavau; R 5,6)
q The “Post-Communist Body
Politic:” Women, Transitology and post-Soviet political economies in Eastern
and
*Test two is scheduled for Tuesday, April, 2
q Gender and Economic
Transformation in the post colony (S 6; W 2-3; O’Bannon; Stoddard*;
Tiano*; Kopinak,
Fernandez-Kelly)
q Women and National
Liberation Struggles (W 4; D&B 12; Urdang*)
q Women and the “Third Wave: (W
5-7;
q Toward a unified theory of
feminist world politics? (S 7; Tickner*; Keck and Sikkink )
q If time permits, we will
hold a mini conference during the last week of class in which you will present
the results of your research to the class.
*Final examination: Wednesday, Monday May 17 (
*GLCA Women's Studies Conference: "Acting Up,
Acting Out: Living Critically within the Academy,"
see: http://www.glca.org/main.cfm?location=232
As we approach the date for the conference, we will confirm
whether we can attend together. Please do make an effort to clear your schedule
for the weekend.
The Grades
Memos. Students will submit 10 one-page, typewritten memos
summarizing and criticizing the reading assignment for that week. The memo is
intended to stimulate class discussion but also to allow me to gauge your grasp
of the material. The memo is due at the
beginning of class on Thursday. Marks for these memos will consist of ü+, ü, ü- or no ü. All ten memos are worth 10% of the final
grade. Please note that you are not required to submit a memo every week. But
remember you must submit 10 by the end of the term.
Tests. There are two tests and one final examination. Test
one is worth 15 % of the final grade, test two is worth 15% and the final exam
is worth 25%. Thus, testing accounts for 55% of the final grade. All exams
consist of several short answer (terms for identification) and a few essay
questions.
The paper. You will be required to submit a 15-page,
double-spaced, typewritten research paper on any gendered topic in world
politics, subject to my approval. I will discuss in class the specific
requirements for the paper. However, it is important that you realize the
project has three components. First, a two-page, double-spaced typed written
précis will be submitted no later than Friday, March 12. The précis will lay
out the research question you wish to explore, what types of materials you
expect to use and how these materials will help you answer the question. The
précis is my opportunity to approve the topic you have chosen. Second, an
annotated bibliography is due on Friday, April 30. The bibliography should
include at least five sources that you have read, three of which are not
Internet sources and which are not assigned reading for this course. The bibliography
will briefly summarize each entry and indicate how the entry is supportive (or
perhaps even contradictory) of your thesis. Lastly, the final paper is due
Tuesday, May 6. The précis is graded “pass/fail” (worth 1 percent), the
annotated bibliography is graded on a letter grade scale (worth 4 percent) and
the final paper is graded on a letter grade scale (worth 20 percent). Please
note, though the paper is due Tuesday, May 6, you may, if you choose, submit a
revised paper following your presentation of the research in class
(mini-conference).
Class participation. This is required. We seek
to construct a discourse in this class. We cannot do so if you don’t
participate. Your views on the issues matter. Most importantly, your informed
views matter. What I mean by this is that successful class
participation is that which reflects a familiarity with the material for which
you are responsible (i.e., the assigned reading). Participation in the class is
worth 10% of the final grade. Please note that there is no required attendance
policy in this class, but you cannot participate if you do not attend.
Academic Integrity
From
the Student Handbook:
“Academic integrity refers to the ethical standards
and policies that govern how people work and interact in the academic
enterprise at a college or university. These standards and policies attempt to
do more than define and condemn what is wrong or unethical; they also attempt
to provide a foundation for the mutual trust and individual responsibility necessary
in a healthy academic community….
Academic integrity is not solely the responsibility
of students. Rather, faculty members and administrators have the responsibility
of creating an environment in which honesty is encouraged, dishonesty
discouraged and integrity is openly discussed.”
Consistent
with these remarks, please understand that I view academic integrity as the
moral foundation of the university experience. In recent years the presumption
of integrity has suffered some very serious blows. A professor at
We
cannot be responsible for what others may do, but we can see to it that our
efforts are of the highest caliber. To pursue such a course, we must be
familiar with the University’s policy regarding Academic Integrity. In this, as
in all my courses, I apply the University’s policy fully.