In the world of feminism and the movement feminists, fairer sex in their role in militarism has taken a deep subjective thought in the context of its gender and the turmoil of the battleground. Feminist movements echo the subordinate and torturous women in the military actions, whether they were part of the actions or not, and secondly, if we go by essentialist feminists, their role in the war front itself is embedded in their role as being feminine.
Their equal position in the war front and combat battles is giving ample room to the tortures and rape yet again conform to their conventional role of being a woman. In the following essay, I will trace the essentialist feminists and their juxtaposition to the extent of their deep thoughts and activities toward the militaristic attitude and the changing perception of women in the militarism set up while on the other hand getting exposed to the dangers, risk of rape and exploitative attitude. It is seen in the context of the perception of women in their role in militarism.
It is said, “What could be more profoundly gendered than a space said to contain nothing but men, than an activity described as performed by men only,”(Pettman 1996: 146) but the unfortunate part is the complexity implied in the decision of bringing woman- a bearer of a child into the verge of the war-torn zones. Their whole debate moves around connections between masculinity and militarism, and between militarism and citizenship.
The United Nation’s Organization for women while confirming its opposition to the draft says that as per the draft women are equally liable to join and perform their duties. They emphasize that women’s continuous separation from the rights and responsibilities and exposure to the extreme dangers of war make them nothing but just second-class citizens. But Cynthia Fuch Epstein brings on argument against giving special privilege to women. Giving them equal chance would mean making some woman warriors and some sure to die. (Pettman 1996: 147)
The force of feminism is deeply embedded in the contours of the third world of today and is also understood in the light of the “destructive divisions” of gender, color, class, sexuality, and nation. (Mohanty 2003: 43-44) It is also the world with powerful histories embedded in the resistance and revolution in the daily lives and in liberating movements. The example of Sierra Leone presented both the challenges and debacle situation whether to look at the women’s role in the warfare as stereotype image of woman as victim and man the perpetrator or as a woman as a liberator.
Chris Coulter looked at the attitude and perceptions of feminists as itself gendered. While it has become essential to reflect on the actions of a woman during the war and her violent attitude, it also becomes more crucial to reflect upon the woman as a victim of these perpetuated wars.
During the period of the Sierra Leone war, it was found that between 20 to 30 percent of all fighters were women and girls and many of these girls and women participatory in the wars were forced into it by either abduction by the rebels or other forces who were taking part in the war. They were subjected to consequent rapes, physical abuse, and forced labor and many were forced to become a witness and take part in the killing of their own relatives. Many of them were forced into marriage and, become what in the local language known as “bush wives.” But many of the women were able to escape from the forced captive.
During the course of the period of social change, many girls had already grown to become a woman. Many did what they could do to flee the tortures of war and many used this opportunity to loot. During the long period of war, many of these women either got married, fell in love, some divorced and many had children. When the war got over, the people received these women back into their social setup depending on the number of days they had spent with rebels and the roles they had played but it is also true that they had to face the social stigma of getting branded as rebel women. (Coulter 2008: 55)
An account of Kadi who was abducted when she was just nine years old says, “It took me only two months to get used to it, because of the gun firings, because of that time when they were firing it would frighten me, but just after these two months I became used to the gun firing. It will remember playing music. At that time we were afraid, but then [later] when we were eating if firing started we will just look up to see if they were our enemies [y].
So we were afraid of those people.” (Coulter 2008: 59) During that time, stories of brutalities of rebel women became a heated object of discussion. Their war was not to improve the condition of society but for their own survival. Guns would make them feel empowered. But at all cost they were victims. Still, we cannot forget war is a war and if it is brutal for woman, it is equally brutal for male and we also cannot ignore the fact that women have been transcribing herself into the war fronts at all levels still we perceive the fighters and rebels in the context of masculinity.
There is also the concept of feminist approaches towards the legal and illegal activities in the light of transnational financing of wars and how the gender, race, and economic inequalities have become the most conducive part of the neo-liberal economies; giving specification to the fact that the handling of the war and economies of information on criminal activities are gender-based. This is the biggest challenge being confronted by feminists. Immediately the questions that come to mind are the analytical view and corresponding resonance to a new war. In the most productive manner, it figures what is there that needs to be done like entailing the women to take an active and participative role of social development and reproduction, bestowing greater autonomous power to women, and the way to respond towards any other war.
It is also true that the economy is more complex and extensive when it comes to financing, involving the circulation of illicit goods, frauds in accounting, and laundering of money. Here to the perception of gender is taking feminists to the level of core thinking. The agents involved in the operations are all transfixed and gender-based and they position themselves in the operational network. (Peterson 2008: 17)
All the perceptions of the feminists’ women appeared non-coherent to each other. From several of the feminist’s ideological frameworks, there are many a breaking cord of looking at the world and its relation to women. When we look at this view as stated by Dejanikus and Dawson, “It is dangerous to believe that ending militarism will end the oppression of women, even though there is a link between them, just as it is also misleading to believe that ending capitalism will end women’s oppression, even though there is a link between them.”(Gard 1998: 21). But the truth is contrary for women, and people in the majority of the countries of the world still take militarism as a synonym for several controls exerted by men of guns.
The greatest feminist of 19th century Mary Wollstonecraft in her “Vindication of the rights of women” raised speculation reaching the cutting edge of contemporary feminism. She did not emphasize perpetuating equal rights for women, but also never thought it beneficial for women to pick their arms. The feminine beauty of women as a bearer of a child reflects her as tender and loving and should recuse herself from making arms as their ornaments and military have always been construed as a stronghold of male power. But, as the example of Sierra Leone shows and legislatures of different countries reflect, women, have got ample space in the armed forces.
This woman owes to liberation movements carried out by feminists. But is also quite true that the ideology of feminist movements is not free from complexities, is very vast, and has various dimensions to come to any conclusive answer. Political feminists are construed by dividing lines for considering their role. They want equality for women with men in the existing order whereas others want to change in order. The second category belongs to others whose heated debate with radical feminists found that any alternation in the society and economic order has its basis on values so cherished by females whereas Marxists and socialists feminist treats it to be based on socialism.
Feminists believing in equal rights for women lay more stress on the women to achieve success, attain the powerful position, power, and every opportunity to make both money and take part in the war. This equal right means both equal obligations and responsibilities, which involves their liberty to give their services in the armed forces. They believe if women are excluded from war, it entails their exclusion from economic and political affairs also.
They also do not deny the fact that women are more inclined towards peace and are more compassionate than men. They wanted that there should be again rethinking of the differences in the roles between men and women. In contrast, radical feminists believe that God has bestowed women with unique characteristic power to view the war from different ideologies and perspectives. Woolf pinpoints that it is her inaccessibility to the power and resources that enable her to attain these special qualities. (Luise-Gättens, 1995: 11) This special quality is enshrined in women’s reproductive power.
Women are considered as the mothers of the race and therefore always considered as the peace-loving sex. It is her inherent nature of motherly care and devotion that brings about peace and responsibility towards others. Olive Schreiner echoed that if women were imbibed with political power, she would never allow her children to go to the war front. She asserted that war only undermines the biological so profound and so pure women’s urge of motherhood.” (Cock & Bernstein 2002: 187)
From the study of various feminists approach, one thing that comes to light is the extremeness of the continuity of theories and different dimensions and approaches these theories produce. The essentialist school of thoughts describes the gap between these men and women to the natural features, as said by Nincic & Nincic, of “testosterone in men to the differences in the psychology of mothers and in their caring nature and their tenderness.” (Nincic & Nincic 2002: 551)
Critics recognize the feminist ideologies regarding gender as the most crucial part of social relations enabling the women to think of themselves as distinct and incorporating specific needs. But the differences in males and females are so deeply imbibed not just by social constructions or endeavors but also by nature that there is no chance that this gap can in any case be narrowed.
In this essay, it has been shown that gender does not play the most crucial part in social relations but helps in shaping the social world. If we look at the definition of essentialism, we would find that there are wide deviations in feminism criticism. Many criticisms on the gender roles conform to the notion that these are essentialists but behind the vagaries of history and behind every essentialist, there is one feminist critic who is standing to undermine essentialism and stands to beckon the woman to withdraw herself from the role of conservative subjugation and feminist’s tenderness to show equal power to masculine strength in militarism.
Reference List
Cock, J. & Bernstein, A.R. 2002. Melting Pots and Rainbow Nations: Conversations about Difference in the United States and South Africa. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
Coulter, C. 2008. female fighters in the Sierra Leone war: challenging the assumptions? Feminist Review, 88: 54-73.
Gaard, G. C. 1998. Ecological Politics: Ecofeminists and the Greens. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Hunt, K. 2006. Embedded Feminism and the War on Terror, in (En)gendering the War on Terror: War Stories and Camouflaged Politics, edited by Krista Hunt and Kim Rygiel. Aldershot: Ashgate: 51-72.
Janda, L. 2001. Reviewed work(s): Women in Uniform: Perceptions and Pathways by Kathryn Spurling ; Elizabeth Greenhalgh. The Journal of Military History, 65(1): 271-272
Luise-Gättens, 1995. Women Writers and Fascism: Reconstructing History. Florida: University Press of Florida.
Mohanty, C. 2003. Cartographies of Struggle: Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, in Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Durham; London: Duke University Press: 43 – 64.
Nincic, M. & Nincic, D.J. 2002. Race, Gender, and War. Journal of Peace Research, 39(5): 547-568.
Peterson, V.S. 2008. ‘new wars’ and gendered economies. Feminist Review, 88: 7-20.
Pettman, J. 1996. Worlding Women: A Feminist International Politics. New York: Routledge.
Segal, l. 2008. gender, war and militarism: making and questioning the links. Feminist Review, 88: 21-35.
Wollstonecraft, M. 1996. Vindication of the Rights of Woman. New York: Courier Dover Publications.