ARTICLE REVIEW Feminism and the role of gender politics in Literature

term Feminism and the role of gender politics in International dealings - Literature review sheathIssues between feminist and experts in transnational relations open fire non be reconciled the reasons could be that feminists and scholars of external relations are working on different realities and knowledge perspectives. Tickner states that silence occurs between feminists and IR women scholars because of their drawing on different realities and using dissimilar epistemologies. Some IR scholars refer to gender as a family line of analysis. Gender differences must be appropriately understood with more constructive dialogues on two sides. In bridging the gap between feminist and IR scholars, Tickner focused on feminist answers to questions and ideas from ordinary IR scholars. Identified were three types of misunderstandings on the debate between feminists and IR scholars 1) the misunderstandings about what gender means in personal conversations and actions 2) the various realiti es or nature of things as expressed by feminists and non-feminists when they talk about global politics, considering that feminists in like manner do not talk about the same subject matter of IR and 3) the epistemic gap about the question that feminists do not deal with theory. Claims of gender neutrality in diction are filled with masculinist assumptions. Feminists provide the meaning of gender with socially and culturally constructed wrangle like power, autonomy, rationality, and public, words which belong to the masculine world. These words live with opposites (weakness, dependence, emotion, and private) which refer to the feminine gender. Masculine characteristics are designated with positive values, and both masculinity and femininity are interrelated to be called a man one must not exhibit womanly weaknesses. Martin Wight (1995 as cited in Tickner 1997) lamented the lack of international theories about Western philosophies because the international system was characterized with less intellectual and moral aspects. Wights thoughts had some significance in that feminists had problems with theories when referring to the international subject. Realist and feminist theories could not reconcile. IR scholars comforted with the Kantian tradition that promoted a healthy debate on social relations and not on anarchy. Linklater (1982 as cited in Tickner, 1997, p. 5) supported the concept that citizens should cooperate with early(a) states to develop free lives. IR scholars posit that Kants philosophy on women depends on time which can easily be countered in a gender-sensitive world. Feminists believe that the Western philosophy is embedded with masculine traditions that cannot be depended upon in creating a gender-sensitive IR. Tickner concluded that feminists and IR scholars have never reached a point of agreement instead, their conversations have always been misunderstandings about ideas and theories on feminism and international relations. Some of the reaso ns for their misunderstandings are the use of ontologies and epistemologies, but also on power differences. IR scholars do not know full well feminist approaches. both(prenominal) sides have to settle their differences by means of constant dialoguing and understanding of the problems. However, feminists and constructivists can share the same ontology, although in that location are some differences. IR feminists see that gender and power should go together in the