Book Review: Jane L. Parpart and Marysia Zalewski, eds Rethinking the Man Question. Sex, Gender and Violence in International Relations. London and New York: Zed Books. 2008. xvi + 217 pp. ISBN 978—1-84277—979—8 (hb.), ISBN 978—1-84277—980—4 (pb)
| Author | Ovidiu Cristian Norocel |
| Date | 01 December 2009 |
| Published date | 01 December 2009 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0010836709344657 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Book Review
Jane L. Parpart and Marysia Zalewski, eds Rethinking the Man Question.
Sex, Gender and Violence in International Relations. London and
New York: Zed Books. 2008. xvi + 217 pp. ISBN 978–1-84277–979–8 (hb.),
ISBN 978–1-84277–980–4 (pb).
Generally portrayed as a follow-up to an earlier inquiry into the male
hegemony in international relations, this book edited by Jane L. Parpart and
Marysia Zalewski is an attempt to rethink how theories and masculinities
impact on international issues. This new edition integrates studies on mascu-
linities and feminist theorizing and covers highly actual global themes,
ranging from the sustained androcentrism in the conceptualization of inter-
national politics, through the militarization of masculinities, to the compli-
cated constellation of relationships emerging from nation, nationalism
and different masculinities across the globe. In doing so, the volume seeks
to revitalize interest on the study and practice of international politics as
primary sites of empirical and theoretical analysis.
In the opening essays, Kimberly Hutchings and Kevin Dunn investigate
the enduring characteristics of international relations as an academic disci-
pline, noting the containment of gender concerns to a peripheral position
within the field. While Hutchings argues that masculinity functions as a
‘cognitive short cut’ in the theorizing of international politics, and thus limits
the possibility for innovation in the field, Dunn questions the continuous
domination of white men in the analysis of international relations. He
argues convincingly that dislodging white men’s privilege would provoke
far-reaching institutional changes in the discipline.
Subsequently, Terrell Carver looks into the metaphorical language
that enables the construction of machine-resembling masculinities, which
serve the purpose of militarization. Unveiling the ‘man’ in the apparently
de-gendered ‘human’ as the site of exclusion and subordination of women
and generic others, he denounces the destructive impact of the peace/war
and civilization/barbarity dualities on international politics. In connection
with that, Cristina Masters interrogates the bio-political architecture of
power, analysing the ethical and political implications of the constitution
of US cyborg soldiers, which she argues lies somewhere at the intersection
between techno-science and masculinist power discourses. Even though
she also focuses on militarized masculinities, Sandra Whitworth takes a
different stance, and looks at disciplinary efforts to maintain militarized
Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association
Vol. 44(4): 457–458. © NISA 2009 www.nisanet.org
SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, and Washington DC
www.sagepublications.com
0010-8367. DOI: 10.1177/0010836709344657
To continue reading
Request your trial