Gender, Agency and Political Violence 2012
DOI: 10.1007/978-0-230-37024-1_5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Power and Gendered Rationality in Western Epistemic Constructions of Female Suicide Bombings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is similar to the way in which the motivations of female suicide bombers are often portrayed. See Gentry (2009), Brunner (2005 and Narozhna (2012). 6.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is similar to the way in which the motivations of female suicide bombers are often portrayed. See Gentry (2009), Brunner (2005 and Narozhna (2012). 6.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent efforts to develop a more complex understanding of gendered agency is mainly located in a lively area of research that investigates how gendered frames marginalize female perpetrators of violence, thus denying violent women agency, rationality, and womanhood (Alison, 2004; MacKenzie, 2009; Åhäll and Shepherd, 2012; Auchter, 2012). This points to an entrenched androcentric view that the realm of political violence is a man’s world, and violent women betray social norms that assert that women are passive, non-violent, and peaceful (Elshtain, 1995: 166–168; Narozhna, 2012: 82; Park-Kang, 2012: 122).For example, Sjoberg and Gentry (2007) argue that three dominant narratives of women’s agency, ‘the mother’, ‘the monster’, and ‘the whore’, provide gendered reference frames for understanding women involved in political violence.This in turn shapes what type of agency individuals can exercise, as agentive subjects’ narratives of intentions and desires are read and interpreted according to sometimes outspoken, sometimes silent, rules (Shepherd, 2012: 6).…”
Section: Advancing the Agendamentioning
confidence: 99%