A Feminist Evolutionary Analysis of the Relationship Between Violence Against and Inequitable Treatment of Women, and Conflict Within and Between Human Collectives, Including Nation-States

Abstract

In this chapter we examine the theoretical linkage between the security of women and the security of states, drawing insights from evolutionary biology and psychology, political sociology, and psychology. A feminist evolutionary approach demonstrates the way in which male reproductive interests can and often do lead to strategies of sexual coercion of females, including violence. That violence can be directed at other males and other groups as male dominance hierarchies develop a parasitical approach to resource accumulation, involving coalitional aggression against outgroups in order to strip such groups of their resources. The mitigation of male dominance hierarchies is thus, we argue, key to the mitigation of dysfunctional, conflictual intergroup relations. We illustrate the effects of male dominance and structural patriarchy through an examination of polygyny and through historical cases before finally discussing strategies for mitigating male dominance hierarchies.

Honor and political violence

“…Hudson and co-authors (Hudson and den Boer 2012, Hudson et al 2009, Hudson et al 2012) review the study of othering related to patriarchal values, and link such othering to proneness to violence. Psychological studies show that human beings notice three basic differences almost from infancy: age, gender, and race.…”

“…Hudson et al hold that "the first 'other' is always woman, and if one can make peace with the first other without resorting to coercion, one will have a template in place to know how to do so with other 'others'" (Hudson and den Boer 2012, 317). In other words, when patriarchal dominance by men over women is reduced, the type of othering that breeds intolerance and violence is weakened, and more companionate marriages instead serve as templates for respectful and equal interaction with others (Hudson and den Boer 2012, Hudson et al 2009, Hudson et al 2012). …”

Pacific men: how the feminist gap explains hostility

“…Building on earlier research, we interpret our findings to mean that signals sent by people close to us about the different value of people of the other sex may also transfer into ideas about the different value of people from other nations or of other beliefs (c.f. the review of the literature on the origin of gender equal attitudes in Hudson and Boer 2012). The feminist argument that honor cultures which emphasize the value of militarized masculinity entail aspects of hostility to out-groups thus seems to hold true in the Pacific region and on the individual level, regardless of whether the out-group is of a different nationality or a different religion.…”