Résumés
Résumé
Cet article explore l’aspect genré de la spécialisation disciplinaire et professionnelle en Relations internationales et la façon dont se reproduisent les perceptions des compétences et du savoir. Il se base sur une analyse de discours des participantes ayant assisté à l’atelier canadien de l’organisation Women in International Security (Wiis-Canada) en 2015, ainsi que sur mes propres expériences en tant qu’organisatrice de cet évènement. L’un des thèmes principaux auquel les participantes ont réfléchi est celui de la voix professionnelle : qui l’acquiert, comment elle est encouragée ou entravée et ce qui arrive quand elle est réduite au silence. Tandis que les jeunes chercheurs tentent de concilier leurs approches académiques et leur identité universitaire naissante, une transition professionnelle s’effectue. Sans un dialogue inclusif sur ces modèles de recherche et les méthodes critiques, les progrès ontologiques et épistémologiques qui se réalisent lors d’évènements tels que l’atelier Wiis-Canada pourraient s’avérer superficiels.
Mots-clés :
- méthodologies féministes en Relations internationales,
- Women in International Security – Canada,
- genre,
- expertise,
- méthodes critiques,
- modèle de recherche
Abstract
This article explores the gendered aspect of disciplinary and professional specialization in International Relations and the means through which perceptions of competency and knowledge are reproduced. It is based on a discourse analysis of statements by participants in the 2015 Canadian workshop of Women in International Security (Wiis-Canada) as well as my own experience as organizer of that event. One key topic dealt with by participants was the issue of professional voice – who acquires it, how is it fostered or hampered, and what happens when it’s silenced ? As junior scholars attempt to reconcile their academic approaches with their nascent academic identities, a professional transition occurs. Without an inclusive dialogue about our research models and critical methods, any ontological or epistemological inroads made at events like the Wiis-Canada workshop may well prove shallow.
Keywords:
- feminist methodologies in International Relations,
- Wiis-Canada,
- gender,
- expertise,
- critical methods,
- research model
Resumen
Este artículo explora el aspecto de género de la especialización disciplinaria y profesional en materia de Relaciones internacionales y la manera en que se reproducen las percepciones de las competencias y del conocimiento. Se basa en un análisis de los discursos de los participantes que asistieron al taller canadiense de la organización Women in International Security (Wiis-Canada) en 2015, al igual que en mis propias experiencias como organizadora de este evento. Uno de los temas principales sobre los que reflexionaron los participantes es el de la voz profesional : quién la adquiere, cómo se estimula o se obstaculiza y lo que pasa cuando esta voz es silenciada. Mientras que los jóvenes investigadores intentan conciliar sus enfoques académicos y su identidad universitaria incipiente, se efectúa una transición profesional. Sin un diálogo inclusivo sobre estos modelos de investigación y los métodos críticos, los progresos ontológicos y epistemológicos que se realizan durante eventos tales como el taller Wiis-Canadá podrían resultar superficiales.
Palabras clave:
- metodologías feministas en Relaciones internationales,
- Wiis-Canadá,
- género,
- experiencia,
- métodos críticos,
- modelo de investigación
Parties annexes
Bibliographie
- Ackerly Brooke et Jacqui True, 2008a, « An Intersectional Analysis of International Relations : Recasting the Discipline », Politics & Gender, vol. 4, no1 : 156-173.
- Ackerly Brooke et Jacqui True, 2008b, « Reflexivity in Practice : Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations », International Studies Review, vol. 10, no 4 : 693-707.
- Ackerly Brooke et Jacqui True, 2010, « Back to the Future : Feminist Theory, Activism, and Doing Feminist Research in an Age of Globalization », Women’s Studies International Forum, vol. 33, no 5 : 464-472.
- Ackerly Brooke, Maria Stern et Jacqui True (dir.), 2006, Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, New York, Cambridge University Press.
- Agathangelou Anna M. et L. H. M. Ling, 2002, « An Unten(ur)able Position : The Politics of Teaching for Women of Color in the us », International Feminist Journal of Politics, vol. 4, no 3 : 368-398.
- Armstrong Anita Harker, 2011, « Making the “Good” Professor : Does Graduate Mentoring Promote Gender Equality in Academia ? », Utah State University. Page consultée sur Internet (digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2059&context=etd) le 17 janvier 2016.
- Azocar Maria J., et Myra Marx Ferree, 2015, « Gendered Expertise », Gender & Society, vol. 29, no 6 : 841-862.
- Bevir Mark, Oliver Daddow et Ian Hall, 2013, « Introduction : Interpreting British Foreign Policy », The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, vol. 15, no 2 : 163-174.
- Black David et Heather Smith, 1993, « Notable Exceptions ? New and Arrested Directions in Canadian Foreign Policy Literature », Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 26, no 4 : 745-774.
- Caprioli Mary, 2004, « Feminist ir Theory and Quantitative Methodology : A Critical Analysis », International Studies Review, vol. 6, no 2 : 253-269.
- Carpenter R. Charli, 2002, « Gender Theory in World Politics : Contributions of a Nonfeminist Standpoint ? », International Studies Review, vol. 4, no 3 : 153-165.
- Chao Georgia, Pat Walz et Philip Gardner. 1992. « Formal and Informal Mentorships : A Comparison on Mentoring Functions and Contrast with Non-Mentored Counterparts, Personnel Psychology, vol. 45, no 3 : 619-636.
- Enloe Cynthia H., 1989, Bananas, Beaches and Bases : Making Feminist Sense of International Politics, Berkeley, University of California Press.
- Enloe Cynthia H., 2004, The Curious Feminist : Searching for Women in a New Age of Empire, Berkeley, University of California Press.
- Enloe Cynthia H., 2005, « Masculinity as Foreign Policy Issue », Foreign Policy In Focus, vol. 5, no 36 : 254-259.
- Enloe Cynthia H., 2013, Seriously ! Investigating Crashes and Crises as if Women Mattered, Berkeley, University of California Press.
- Hall, Ian, 2014, « The Promise and Perils of Interpretivism in Australian International Relations », Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 73, no 3 : 307-316.
- Hancock, Kathleen J., Matthew A. Baum et Marijke Breuning, 2013, « Women and Pre-Tenure Scholarly Productivity in International Studies : An Investigation into the Leaky Career Pipeline », International Studies Perspectives, vol. 14, no 4 : 507-527.
- Harding Sandra et Kathryn Norberg, 2005, « New Feminist Approaches to Social Science Methodologies : An Introduction », Signs – Journal of Women in Culture and Society, vol. 30, no 4 : 2009-2015.
- Howell Alison, 2005, « Peaceful, Tolerant and Orderly ? A Feminist Analysis of Discourses of “Canadian Values” in Canadian Foreign Policy », Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, vol. 12, no 1 : 49-69.
- Jackson Patrick Thaddeus, 2010, The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations, New York, Routledge.
- Keohane Robert O., 1988, « International Institutions : Two Approaches », International Studies Quarterly, vol. 32, no 4 : 379-396.
- Kram, Kathy E. 1985. Mentoring at Work : Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life. Glenview, Foresman.
- Lapid Yosef, 1989, « The Third Debate : On the Prospects of International Theory in a Post- Positivist Era », International Studies Quarterly, vol. 33, no 3 : 235-254.
- Locher Birgit et Elisabeth Prügl, 2001, « Feminism and Constructivism : Worlds Apart or Sharing the Middle Ground ? »,International Studies Quarterly, vol. 45, no 1 : 111-129.
- Maliniak Daniel, Amy Oakes, Susan Peterson et Michael J. Tierney, 2008, « Women in International Relations », Politics & Gender, vol. 4, no 1 : 122-144.
- Maliniak Daniel, Ryan Powers et Barbara F. Walter, 2013, « The Gender Citation Gap in International Relations », International Organization, vol. 67, no 4 : 889-922.
- Nayak Meghana, 2009, « The Influence of International Feminist Journal of Politics : Possibilities of Mentorship and Community for Junior Feminist Faculty », International Feminist Journal of Politics, vol. 11, no 1 : 21-29.
- Noe Raymond A. 1988, « An Investigation of the Determinants of Successful Assigned Mentoring Relationships, »Personnel Psychology, vol. 41, no 3 : 457-479.
- Nossal Kim Richard et Wayne Cox, 2009, « The “Crimson World” : the Anglo-core, the post- Imperial non-core, and the hegemony of American ir », dans A. B. Tickner et O. Waever (dir.), International Relations Scholarship around the World, New York, Routledge : 287-307.
- Op-Ed Project, http://www.theopedproject.org/
- Open Syllabus Explorer, 2016, http://explorer.opensyllabusproject.org/, consulté le 8 février 2016.
- Peterson V. Spike, 1997, « Whose Crisis ? Early and Post-modern Masculinism », dans S. Gill et J. H. Mittelman (dir.), Innovation and Transformation in International Studies, New York, Cambridge University Press : 185-205.
- Ragins Belle Rose, John L. Cotton, et Janice S. Miller, 2000, « Marginal Mentoring : The Effects of Type of Mentor, Quality of Relationship, and Program Design on Work and Career Attitudes », Academy of Management Journal, vol. 43, no 6 : 1177-1194.
- Ragins Belle Rose et John L. Cotton, 1999, « Mentor Functions and Outcomes : A Comparison of Men and Women in Formal and Informal Mentoring Relationships » Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 84, no 4 : 529-550.
- Ragins Belle Rose et John L. Cotton, 1991, « Easier Said than Done : Gender Differences in Perceived Barriers to Gaining a Mentor », Academy of Management Journal, vol. 34, no 4 : 939-951.
- Saideman Steve, 2015, « Canada’s ir Scholars : Who They Are and Where They Think You Should Go to School », OpenCanada.org. Page consultée sur Internet (www.opencanada.org/features/canadas-ir-scholars-who-they-are-and-where-they-think-you-should-go-to-school/) le 16 décembre 2015.
- Sarson Leah, 2015, « Renewing Canadian International Policy Discourse by Highlighting Gendered Voices »,cda Institute Blog : The Forum, 25 juin. Page consultée sur Internet (www.cdainstitute.ca/en/blog/entry/renewing-canadian-international-policy-discourse-by-highlighting-gendered-voices) le 10 février 2016.
- Schwartz-Shea Peregrine et Dvora Yanow, 2012, Interpretive Research Design : Concepts and Processes, New York, Routledge.
- Shepherd Laura, 2008, Gender, Violence and Security : Discourse as Practice, Londres, Zed Books.
- Ship Susan Judith, 1994, « And What About Gender ? Feminism and International Relations Theories Third Debate », dans C. T. Sjolanderet W. S. Cox (dir.), Beyond Positivism : Critical Reflections on International Relations, Boulder, Lynne Rienner Publishers : 129-151.
- Sjoberg Laura, 2009, « Introduction : Feminist Contributions », Security Studies, vol. 18, no 2 : 183-213.
- Sjoberg, Laura, 2008, « The Norm of Tradition : Gender Subordination and Women’s Exclusion in International Relations » Politics & Gender, vol. 4, no 1 : 173-180.
- Sjolander, Claire Turenne, Heather Smith et Deborah Stienstra (dir.), 2003, Feminist Perspectives on Canadian Foreign Policy, Don Mills, Oxford University Press.
- Smith, Heather, 2010, « The Disciplining Nature of Canadian Foreign Policy », dans M. Beier et L. Wylie (dir.), Canadian Foreign Policy in Critical Perspective, Don Mills, Oxford University Press : 3-14
- Stern Maria, « Racism, Sexism, Classism and Much More : Reading Security-Identity in Marginalized Sites », dans B. Ackerly, M. Stern et J. True (dir.), Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, New York, Cambridge University Press : 174-198.
- Sylvester Christine, 1994, Feminist Theory and International Relations in a Postmodern Era, New York, Cambridge University Press.
- Sylvester Christine, 2004, Feminist International Relations : An Unfinished Journey. New York, Cambridge University Press.
- Tickner J. Ann, 1997, « You Just Don’t Understand : Troubled Engagements Between Feminists andir Theorists », International Studies Quarterly, vol. 41, no 4 : 611-632.
- Tickner J. Ann, 2005, « What Is Your Research Program ? Some Feminist Answers to International Relations Methodological Questions », International Studies Quarterly, vol. 49, no 1 : 1-21.
- Tickner J. Ann, 2006, « Feminism Meets International Relations : Some Methodological Issues », dans B. Ackerly, M. Stern et J. True (dir.), Feminist Methodologies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press : 19-24.
- Waylen Georgina, 2006, « You still don’t understand : why troubled engagements continue between feminists and (critical) ipe », Review of International Studies, vol. 2, no 1 :145-164.
- Wendt Alexander, 1998, « On Constitution and Causation in International Relations », Review of International Studies, vol. 24, no 5 : 101-118.
- Whitworth Sandra, 2006, « Theory and Exclusion : Gender, Masculinity, and International Political Economy », dans R. Stubbs et G. Underhill (dir.), Political Economy and the Changing Global Order, Don Mills, Ont., Oxford University Press : 88-99.
- Whitworth Sandra, 1994, Feminism and International Relations : Towards a Political Economy of Gender in Multilateral Institutions, Basingstoke, MacMillan Press.
- Whitworth Sandra, 1989, « Gender in the Inter-Paradigm Debate », Millennium – Journal of International Studies, vol. 18, no 2 : 265-272.
- Women Also Know Stuff, 2016, http://womenalsoknowstuff.com/
- Yaeger Taryn, 2012, « The OpEd Project Byline Report », The OpEd Project. Page consultée sur Internet (theopedproject.wordpress.com/2012/05/28/the-byline-survey-2011/) le 8 mai 2012.
- Youngs Gillian, 2004, « Feminist International Relations : A Contradiction in Terms ? Or : Why Women and Gender Are Essential to Understanding the World “We” Live in », International Affairs, vol. 80, no 1 : 75-87.
- Zalewski Marysia, 1998, « Where Is Woman in International Relations ? To Return as a Woman and Be Heard », Millennium – Journal of International Studies, vol. 27, no 4 : 847-867.
- Zalewski Marysia, 2007, « Do We Understand Each Other Yet ? Troubling Feminist Encounters With(in) International Relations », The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, vol. 9, no 2 : 302-312.