Reevaluating Gender and IR Scholarship: Moving beyond Reiter’s Dichotomies toward Effective Synergies

Laura Sjoberg, Kelly Kadera, Cameron Thies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

We seek a more accurate review of, and reflection on the gender and international relations (IR) literature than that offered by Reiter. Our evaluation corrects misunderstandings related to key dichotomies (mis)used in analyzing scholarship: sex/gender, positivism/nonpositivism, and epistemology/ontology. It also underscores the comparative strengths and weaknesses of different types of research in order to identify more fruitful possibilities for synthesis. We make the pluralist case that gender and IR research is at its best when it is multimethod, epistemologically pluralist, multisited, and carefully navigates the differences between feminist analyses and large-n statistical studies. The potential payoff of careful, synergistic engagement is worth any risks.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)848-870
Number of pages23
JournalJournal of Conflict Resolution
Volume62
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2018

Keywords

  • conflict
  • gender
  • rebellion
  • war

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Political Science and International Relations

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reevaluating Gender and IR Scholarship: Moving beyond Reiter’s Dichotomies toward Effective Synergies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this