Aug 01, · The analyses found in previous research revolve around two strands of explanations; why gender inequality may be associated with an increased risk for intrastate armed conflict or why gender equality instead may contribute to resolving a conflict without blogger.com by: 1 Oct 15, · Gender inequality exists in the workplace due to the ongoing conflict between the man, who wants to express his control, and the woman, who wants to express her equality. In the 21 st century, where the women have found a compromise with the men to obtain her own wages, Conflict theory states that there is a new blogger.comted Reading Time: 5 mins The Conflict Perspective used in gender inequality is similar to the Structural-Functionalist Perspective in which it is contributed by society’s structure and the institutions within. More specifically, the conflict perspective focuses on the theory that the relationship between men and women have very different ranks in the production process
The Conflict Perspective: Gender Inequality, And Sexism | Cram
Prior research has found robust support for a relationship between gender inequality and civil war. Conflict perspective in gender inequality results all point in the same direction; countries that display lower levels of gender equality are more likely to become involved in civil conflict, and violence is likely to be even more severe, than in countries where women have a higher status.
But what does gender inequality mean in this area of research? And how does research explain why we see this effect on civil war? To explore this, we start with reviewing existing definitions and measurements of gender inequality, noting that the concept has several dimensions.
We then proceed to outline several clusters of explanations conflict perspective in gender inequality how gender inequality could be related to civil war while more equal societies are better able to prevent violent conflict, as described in previous research. It is clear that existing misconceptions that gender inequality primarily involves the role of women are clouding the fact that it clearly speaks to much broader societal developments which play central roles in civil war.
We conclude by identifying some remaining lacunas and directions for future research. Research has found robust support for a relationship between gender inequality and internal armed conflict. These associations hold in global statistical analyses and when controlling for numerous alternative explanations.
In fact, gender inequality may potentially even trump level of democracy and economic development in terms of explanatory power in civil war research Bjarnegård et al. As recently pointed out by Bjarnegård et al. Rather, the determinants of civil wars have mainly been sought in, conflict perspective in gender inequality, for example, levels of poverty, regime characteristics, treatment of ethnic minorities, population size, and physical terrain.
As such, the most frequently cited scholarly works that statistically investigate the correlates of civil war e. This is a puzzling omission, especially in light of the striking role gender appears to play in the mobilization and conduct of political violence of all kinds.
To contribute to progress, the aim of this article is to explore the concept of gender inequality in greater depth and to iron out the conflict perspective in gender inequality theoretical explanations of how gender inequality could be related to civil war.
We begin by disaggregating the notion of gender inequality and its various dimensions both conceptually and through the manner in which it has been captured by different indicators in previous research on gender inequality and armed conflict. We then proceed to outline several clusters of explanations of how gender inequality could be related to civil war as described in this research.
We conclude by discussing a few central potential paths for future research conflict perspective in gender inequality the challenges these entail. In previous research there are two underlying understandings of gender inequality.
One is to consider it as a specific relation among groups where the level of inequality refers to an almost mathematical description of the distribution of certain resources between these groups.
In the case of gender inequality, it concerns the resource distribution between men and women. The form of the resource varies. The more prominent forms focus on power, and material and immaterial resources. There are interesting variations of this understanding of capacity, encapsulating ideas related to human capital investments in the individual as well as social capital.
In its essence, research where gender inequality is understood as social capacity uses this to capture the distribution of skills, power, and resources in a society. The other underlying understanding of gender inequality is normative. In this understanding, gender inequality is considered in terms of one kind of normative intolerance more broadly. For example, in her study of the impact of gender inequality on civil war, Caprioli makes this link by comparing discrimination against women and ethnic groups as two manifestations of a domestic environment characterized by conflict perspective in gender inequality. The two understandings of gender inequality—as social capacity and as a norm—underlie much of the debate but to analyze how they function empirically they must be disaggregated into something observable.
Different dimensions bring up a number of potentially relevant processes and dynamics for understanding how gender inequality can be related to civil war. Let us look closer at four central dimensions in previous research—political, economic, social, and physical in security—and outline a few concerns and considerations about content, interrelations, and measures. The first dimension, often employed in capturing gender inequality, relates to access to political power.
Thus, if women are not allowed to participate in the public sphere equally to men, then that entails a lower access to power Caprioli, ; see also Olsson, Two often-used measurements to capture political power are representation in political institutions and decision-making capacity. This indicates also the conundrum of being able to detect the difference between mere representation and actual influence. At its most basic, the argument is that parliaments represent the people.
The more even the balance in parliament, the more even the power distribution among men and women in the population is assumed to be. As noted by several scholars, however, a high proportion of women in parliament is not always a reflection of gender equality in society.
For instance, many highly authoritarian states do have parliaments, but these lack real influence. This underlines the question of what we expect to measure in this dimension; is it the distribution of resources or the norm? Concerning the former, conflict perspective in gender inequality, research notes that it is possible to use direct access to the highest decision-making level as an indicator.
What they have found, however, is that this measure may be a less adequate manifestation of gender equality. First, the reason for expecting women to behave differently in politics remains questionable.
Second, many female leaders have come to power for dynastic reasons rather than as a force of female empowerment. The second dimension is the economic. At its basis, this centers on access to material resources through which individuals in a group can affect their own lives. If women are holding jobs outside of the household, that is assumed to foster a sense of political participation and capacity to influence.
Hence, this indicator, similar to that of suffrage, is argued to capture the breadth, or spread, of the gender equality norm in a society. In effect, if women do not work to generate income, a natural consequence is that control of financial material resources may be quite concentrated, conflict perspective in gender inequality.
It should be noted that using conflict perspective in gender inequality participation in the labor market as a measure of economic gender inequality can be quite crude. For example, Caprioli underlines that a caveat should be placed on equalizing women holding a job with women controlling the use of their paycheck. In addition, she notes that it does not include type of employment or household responsibilities, in particular so considering that some countries have a large informal work sector.
Finally, the economic dimensions underline the importance of conflict perspective in gender inequality equality as relative; ratios between conflict perspective in gender inequality and women are perhaps more central than the actual number, conflict perspective in gender inequality. A third dimension often emphasized by scholars concerns the social dimension of gender inequality.
As noted by Caprioli, it is a dimension which is quite difficult to capture. In that sense, research often considers this as fundamental to the other dimensions in that it can encapsulate both basic demographic aspects and normative values and understandings.
The social dimension is perhaps the one where the question of what the different measures capture is the most pertinent. To begin with two dominant demographic entry points, fertility rates and sex ratios, there have been several studies which use these indicators to capture the basic state of gender inequality.
For example, Caprioliand Regan and Paskeviciute suggest that high fertility rates indicate persistent gender inequality in society. The reasons are several. The consequences of high fertility rates is that women spend a large proportion of their lives either pregnant or breastfeeding, which leads women in such societies to have less time to educate themselves, seek employment, and become involved in politics.
High fertility rates by themselves can also strongly indicate if women have the right to decide over their own body. In that sense, the indicator of fertility rates can capture both direct and indirect forms of power in gender relations.
As argued by Hudson and den Boerif a common practice is to allow one child to live and not another due to sex-selective abortion, or active or passive infanticide or when one child is consistently prioritized in terms of nutrition and health care on the basis of gender, it is a clear indication of exaggerated gender inequality.
Since such practices are almost universally the result of a son preference, it indicates that the value and status of females are substantially lower than that of males. This can, for example, be overrepresentation of young men in urban areas Urdal,which, in effect, can speak to gender inequality but of a more indirect and less grave form than that of distorted sex ratios among children. Apart from the demographic indicators, the social dimension of gender inequality can focus on the value-based distribution of investment in individuals based on gender considerations.
Hence, access conflict perspective in gender inequality education is a core aspect of more immaterial resource distributions conflict perspective in gender inequality Melander, ap. Basic education has, therefore, conflict perspective in gender inequality, become a less relevant measurement for understanding the level of conflict perspective in gender inequality inequality in a given society on the macro-level see Caprioli,p, conflict perspective in gender inequality.
To come to terms with the measurement problems on the macro-level, many studies nuance the measurement of access to education by studying female-to-male higher education attainment and deviations in literacy rates. Being costly, the former would capture the amounts of resources that are invested in women. It would also, probably, be related to other economic aspects of gendered distribution of labor, such as on what level women could be employed in business and state administration.
Hence, it could speak to the elite aspects of developments of gender inequality. Deviations in literacy rates among the population at large, on the other hand, would capture the broader spread of a gender inequality norm. Last, the dimension of physical in security of women has been used as a measure of gender inequality.
There are some measures that capture the security of women indirectly, for example, life expectancy and maternal mortality, or de jure rather than de facto security, such as legislation against domestic conflict perspective in gender inequality. However, Hudson et al.
This is fruitful, they argue, as it to a high degree speaks to the situation in the most basic of institutions in a society, the family. They therefore focus on rape and violence against women see Caprioli,p. However, it is not an easy measurement to use. Many forms of violence against women come with a stigma or a blaming of the victim. In addition, in some societies, domestic violence may not be considered illegal.
Therefore, many women do not report abuse. This results in a lack of data on violence against women, which is sketchy at best in most states. To address this, Olsson uses the concept of security equality as a proxy for physical insecurity of women. This concept focuses on the resource distribution to protective measures set in place for different forms of violence, as violence tends to follow gender-specific patterns. It is therefore possible to see if, for example, domestic violence and rape are given a substantive amount of efforts and resources in comparison to violence which affects primarily men.
In conclusion, conflict perspective in gender inequality, these four key dimensions bring up numerous aspects of gender inequality. As we can see, they all relate in different manners to both forms of understanding of gender inequality, that is, as social capacity or as a norm. To complicate matters, the indicators of the dimensions do not co-vary in a way which makes it easy to spot a pattern.
The same survey found, however, very positive views toward women getting higher education and holding a well-paid job outside of the household Naskidashvili, In Italy, economic equality is rising, conflict perspective in gender inequality, resulting in very low fertility rates as the social dimensions of gender equality lag behind—thus, conflict perspective in gender inequality, individual women may find it very difficult to reconcile the social role with the economic and thereby choose to have few or no children.
Thus, while extremely high fertility rates may be an indication of gender inequality, this cannot be assumed to hold to a linear function. Given social welfare systems that subsidize child care and pay for extended parental leave, with the explicit purpose of providing more equal rights for women and men, families may choose to have more children than in a context where such support systems are absent.
Hence, fertility rates may be a consequence of the level of social gender inequality but may, in turn, also affect the economic and political dimensions of the phenomenon. In sum, there is a need for further research to develop the measurement of gender inequality, as the social processes are very complex.
Why is gender inequality related to internal armed conflict? The analyses found in previous research revolve around two strands of explanations; why gender inequality may be associated with an increased risk for intrastate armed conflict or why gender equality instead may contribute to resolving a conflict without violence.
Sociological Perspectives on Family
, time: 9:54Gender Inequality and Internal Conflict | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
Oct 15, · Gender inequality exists in the workplace due to the ongoing conflict between the man, who wants to express his control, and the woman, who wants to express her equality. In the 21 st century, where the women have found a compromise with the men to obtain her own wages, Conflict theory states that there is a new blogger.comted Reading Time: 5 mins A domestic and corporate conflict is a standard issue in the societies characterized by gender inequality. When a woman is a typical housewife who does not earn money, she has little influence on her husband. When there are conflicts, he will always be a The Conflict Perspective used in gender inequality is similar to the Structural-Functionalist Perspective in which it is contributed by society’s structure and the institutions within. More specifically, the conflict perspective focuses on the theory that the relationship between men and women have very different ranks in the production process
No comments:
Post a Comment