Family Values? Sexism and Heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) Research. / Kinsella, Helen; Sjoberg, Laura.

In: Review of International Studies, Vol. 45, No. 2, 04.2019, p. 260-279.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Family Values? Sexism and Heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) Research. / Kinsella, Helen; Sjoberg, Laura.

In: Review of International Studies, Vol. 45, No. 2, 04.2019, p. 260-279.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Kinsella, Helen ; Sjoberg, Laura. / Family Values? Sexism and Heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) Research. In: Review of International Studies. 2019 ; Vol. 45, No. 2. pp. 260-279.

BibTeX

@article{b6aae24b14ec4e009e0ca8433efcb007,
title = "Family Values? Sexism and Heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) Research",
abstract = "In this article, we focus on the subset of evolutionary theorizing self-identified as Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) within Security Studies and International Relations. We offer this accounting in four sections. First, we provide a brief overview of the argument that reproductive interests are the {\textquoteleft}origins{\textquoteright} of international violence. Second, we break down the definitions of gender, sex, and sexuality used in evolutionary work in Security Studies generally and in FEA specifically, demonstrating a lack of complexity in FEA{\textquoteright}s accounts of the potential relations among the three and critiquing their essentialist heteronormative assumptions. Third, we argue that FEA{\textquoteright}s failure to reflect on the history and context of evolutionary theorizing, much less contemporary feminist critiques, facilitates its forwarding of the state and institutions as primarily neutral and corrective bulwarks against male violence. Fourth, we conclude by outlining what is at stake if we fail to correct for this direction in feminist, IR, and security research. We argue that FEA work misrepresents and narrows the potential for understanding and responding to violence, facilitating the continued instrumentalization of women{\textquoteright}s rights, increased government regulation of sexuality, and a more expansive form of militarism. ",
keywords = "gender, heteronormativity, sex, evolutionary theory, international relations, war, conflict",
author = "Helen Kinsella and Laura Sjoberg",
year = "2019",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1017/S026021051800044X",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "260--279",
journal = "Review of International Studies",
issn = "0260-2105",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Family Values? Sexism and Heteronormativity in Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) Research

AU - Kinsella, Helen

AU - Sjoberg, Laura

PY - 2019/4

Y1 - 2019/4

N2 - In this article, we focus on the subset of evolutionary theorizing self-identified as Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) within Security Studies and International Relations. We offer this accounting in four sections. First, we provide a brief overview of the argument that reproductive interests are the ‘origins’ of international violence. Second, we break down the definitions of gender, sex, and sexuality used in evolutionary work in Security Studies generally and in FEA specifically, demonstrating a lack of complexity in FEA’s accounts of the potential relations among the three and critiquing their essentialist heteronormative assumptions. Third, we argue that FEA’s failure to reflect on the history and context of evolutionary theorizing, much less contemporary feminist critiques, facilitates its forwarding of the state and institutions as primarily neutral and corrective bulwarks against male violence. Fourth, we conclude by outlining what is at stake if we fail to correct for this direction in feminist, IR, and security research. We argue that FEA work misrepresents and narrows the potential for understanding and responding to violence, facilitating the continued instrumentalization of women’s rights, increased government regulation of sexuality, and a more expansive form of militarism.

AB - In this article, we focus on the subset of evolutionary theorizing self-identified as Feminist Evolutionary Analytic (FEA) within Security Studies and International Relations. We offer this accounting in four sections. First, we provide a brief overview of the argument that reproductive interests are the ‘origins’ of international violence. Second, we break down the definitions of gender, sex, and sexuality used in evolutionary work in Security Studies generally and in FEA specifically, demonstrating a lack of complexity in FEA’s accounts of the potential relations among the three and critiquing their essentialist heteronormative assumptions. Third, we argue that FEA’s failure to reflect on the history and context of evolutionary theorizing, much less contemporary feminist critiques, facilitates its forwarding of the state and institutions as primarily neutral and corrective bulwarks against male violence. Fourth, we conclude by outlining what is at stake if we fail to correct for this direction in feminist, IR, and security research. We argue that FEA work misrepresents and narrows the potential for understanding and responding to violence, facilitating the continued instrumentalization of women’s rights, increased government regulation of sexuality, and a more expansive form of militarism.

KW - gender

KW - heteronormativity

KW - sex

KW - evolutionary theory

KW - international relations

KW - war

KW - conflict

U2 - 10.1017/S026021051800044X

DO - 10.1017/S026021051800044X

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 260

EP - 279

JO - Review of International Studies

JF - Review of International Studies

SN - 0260-2105

IS - 2

ER -