‘Sexurity’ and its effects in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo

‘That thing of human rights’: discourse, emergency assistance, and sexual violence in South Sudan's current civil war

“…Meger () refers to this process as the ‘securitisation’ and subsequent ‘fetishisation’ of sexual violence, where the root causes of wartime rape and other related offences go unrecognised. This is akin to what Mertens and Pardy () call ‘sexurity’, or the colonisation of discourses on wartime sexual violence and the production of the worlds of ‘us’ and ‘them’, where the international community becomes the agent and voice of sexual violence in conflict and conflict‐affected populations are the subjects. In the same way that the ‘securitisation’ and ‘fetishisation’ of sexual violence in conflict have marginalised the root causes of acts such as rape (Meger, ), ‘sexurity’ has been responsible for the disenfranchisement of ‘local knowledge and desires’ in war‐torn areas (Mertens and Pardy, , p. 9).…”

“…The DRC is probably one of the most dramatic examples of this negative dynamic, given the sheer amount of attention that wartime rape and other related offences have received there, establishing what Heaton (, p. 626) calls ‘perverse incentive structures’ where aid organisations realise that they are more likely to be funded if they adapt their programmes to tackle sexual violence, while people in need of assistance in an environment characterised by infrastructural and state collapse adapt their stories to such a discourse. As a result, some organisations generate sexual violence prevention and response programmes without having the expertise, or the capacity to do so (Merters and Pardy, ), meaning that little is actually being done for the beneficiary populations despite international outrage over sexual violence. The outcome is that sexual violence becomes a business based on a ‘not‐for‐profit’ model, susceptible to misuse by both NGOs and sexual violence survivors themselves (Douma and Hilhorst, ).…”

“…Side‐lining ‘local knowledge and desires’ also disregards what conflict‐affected populations need and want (Mertens and Pardy, , p. 9). In the DRC, for example, it was more important to some survivors to provide education and food for their family than it was to demand justice for wrongdoing (Mertens and Pardy, ).…”

“…Side‐lining ‘local knowledge and desires’ also disregards what conflict‐affected populations need and want (Mertens and Pardy, , p. 9). In the DRC, for example, it was more important to some survivors to provide education and food for their family than it was to demand justice for wrongdoing (Mertens and Pardy, ). Yet, as Mertens and Pardy (, p. 8) remark, because the focus (especially after the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict in London, UK, on 10–13 June 2014) was on ‘shattering the culture of impunity’, most programmes emphasised aspects such as access to justice…”

Beyond the hype? The response to sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2011 and 2014

“…Graham () underlines that the spotlight on victimised bodies deprived women of their agency and social identity, while they were turned into the preferred NGO target group of vulnerable women and children. Similarly, Mertens and Pardy (, p. 4) maintain that the emphasis on sexual violence could be seen to serve the international community, providing a discourse that ‘enables state leaders and multilateral organisations, namely the UN, to become the global arbiters and spokespersons on sexual violence in conflict, and the prevailing authors of its causes and proper solutions’.…”