This document summarizes a presentation on applying feminist theory to the analysis of international relations. It discusses how feminist theory differs from traditional theories in its ontological, epistemological, and ethical foundations. While early feminist work aimed to provide broad explanations, more recent contributions focus on specific causal mechanisms. Feminist theory favors understanding over traditional explanatory models and sees both gender and power as mutually constitutive rather than distinct explanandum and explanans. The goal of feminist perspectives is to understand existing gender relations to transform them at all levels of social, political, and economic life globally.

1. EPISTEMOLOGY OF FEMINIST
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY
PROF. TOMÁS LISTRANI
RETHINKING IR FROM THE GLOBAL SOUTH
WISC SIXTH GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL STUDIES CONFERENCE
JULY 1ST, 2022
BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA

2. PRESENTATION
• This presentation aims to apply the theoretical tools of new epistemology of social sciences,
especially the aspects which deal with the problem of explanation.
• The aim of the exercise will be to analyze the Feminist Theory of International Relations
through certain central questions of the epistemology of the social sciences.
• The idea of the monograph will be to put Feminist Theory of International Relations in
dialogue with other theories of international relations on the basis of its epistemological,
ontological, methodological and ethical elements.
• In particular, feminist contributions will be considered in the light of the debate between the
explanations of the mechanistic-causal model and the model of explanation by unification.
• Finally, Feminist Theory of International Relations will be analyzed in relation to the
controversy between explanation and understanding in the social sciences.

3. KEY QUESTIONS
• What differences exist between feminist theory and the main traditional theories?
• Where does feminist theory stand in the discussion between the models of causal mechanism and unification?
• Does feminist theory propose to explain or understand the phenomena of the international system?

4. SETTING THE SCENARIO
• 1900s: emergence
• 1910s-1950s: canonical period of theoretical reflection
• 1950s-1970s: consolidation of the dominant positivist paradigm
• 1970s-1990s: interpretative epistemology and critical approaches
• 1990s-today: return to interdisciplinarity and the proliferation of new sub-disciplines
IR FEMINISM

5. FEMINIST IR THEORY VERSUS CANONICAL IR THEORIES
• In the early decades of the discipline, a dominant theoretical current was formed around a few
theoretical schools that had a high impact on disciplinary discussions. Subsequently, critical theories
such as feminist theories pointed out that, despite their differences, all the schools of that dominant
theoretical current shared a series of basic ontological, epistemological and ethical premises (nature of
power relations, actors of the international system, etc.).
• From these premises stem the main concerns of mainstream theoretical schools (both structuralist and
from the rationalist paradigm: realism and liberalism), such as order v. change, distribution of power,
the nature of anarchy, etc.
• Later, feminist thought entered the disciplinary theoretical field in the 1980s as part of a broader
movement to insert critical theories into debates in International Relations Theory.
• What ontological, epistemological and ethical changes did feminism propose in International Relations?

6. FEMINIST IR THEORY
• In the immediate post-Cold War period, feminist studies entered a climate of vigorous intellectual
production.
• Cynthia Enloe: Bananas, Beaches and Bases (1989).
• Ann Tickner: Gender in International Relations (1992).
• The latest strands of feminist theoretical work draw from radical and postmodern feminism (both of which
are much less connected than earlier feminisms to political causes relating to the family universe or to
mainstream political claims (e.g., political rights).
• However, this radical strand of feminist work is very closely associated with the revolutionary and resistance
political and social movements evident since the late 1960s. This feminism seeks to place women at the
center of political and analytical attention, and raises issues that traditionally concern women exclusively,
and not so much an agenda of equalization with their male peers.

7. FEMINIST IR THEORY
• Women and gender have now established a place (both theoretically and practically) in
international politics.
• Leaning towards post-structural methods, and with strong impetus from postcolonial theory,
queer theory and creative methodological approaches.
• Dialogue with the mainstream  elements of the consensus were challenged:
• Statocentrism;
• Change over continuity;
• Naturalised relations of domination;
• International and transnational hierarchies;
• Logic of self-help;
• Standards of cooperation and peace.

8. MAIN CONTRIBUTIONS
• Socially constructed roles and impact on leadership and power structures.
• Expansion of the arena of international politics.
• New cases: violence & war, private v. public spheres, ‘high’ & ‘low’ politics, peace studies,
globalization, population flows, global capitalism.
• Ethical commitment to inclusivity and reflexivity.

9. WHAT EXPLANATION?
• By the 1970s, debates within the rationalist paradigm of International Relations Theory were
moving towards an explanation by unification, which seemed to realise the dream of many
pioneers of the discipline of a grand International Theory.
• In recent decades, however, there was an overlap between new and old theories, new
(empirical and philosophical) concerns emerged, and epistemic communities multiplied on all
continents.
• Major shift towards the causal mechanism model of explanation, in an environment of
scientific knowledge production increasingly characterised by small circles producing self-
affirming research.

10. WHAT EXPLANATION?
• In its early days: a grand 'worldview' that could explain any given phenomenon in international politics in
relation to the grand explanations of patriarchal structures (these explanations for International Relations
were, logically, consistent with feminist theory in general).
• However, the contributions of Feminist Theory of International Relations moved away from this tendency
and moved towards causal mechanism explanations for specific case studies. Above all, this trend had to
do with the feminist critique of the reductionist general laws of schools such as realism and liberalism.
• Feminist scholarship sought to move away from the prevailing broad generalisations and identify
particular causes for particular cases. Precisely the first feminist contributions mentioned above were to
expose the "hidden mechanisms" of certain situations in international politics.
• This implied that the reasoning of Feminist International Relations Theory had to accept the traditional
features of such explanations, advocated by mainstream schools such as realism and liberalism. The four
elements are empirical content, universality in time and space, absence of exceptions and non-
accidentality (necessity) of their formulation.

11. WHAT EXPLANATION?
• Certainly, the great feminist work leans towards the possibility that the general truths we
discover about the world vary with respect to their degree of contingency on the conditions on
which the relations described depend.
• Empirical cases of feminism work in systems that depend on specific configurations of events and
properties that are not otherwise given, and that involve the interplay of multiple weak causal
relations rather than referring to a single, determinant causal relation.
• Feminist contributions would suggest that the "laws" that can be derived need to be
accompanied by additional information if that knowledge is to be used in new contexts.

12. WHAT EXPLANATION?
• Thus, this approach away from traditional explanation requires a conceptual shift from
traditional Hempelian explanation to the consideration of causal structures that allow for
multiple degrees of stability and strength in their relationships.
• As a research proposal, the epistemology of Feminist International Relations Theory provides
broader conceptual resources, replacing the dichotomy of law vs. accident into which general
laws fall with a range of degrees of stability.

13. WHAT EXPLANATION?
• Thus, this approach away from traditional explanation requires a conceptual shift from
traditional Hempelian explanation to the consideration of causal structures that allow for
multiple degrees of stability and strength in their relationships.
• As a research proposal, the epistemology of Feminist International Relations Theory provides
broader conceptual resources, replacing the dichotomy of law vs. accident into which general
laws fall with a range of degrees of stability.
• However, this new proposal brings with it methodological changes. Without the presumption of
universal and non-exceptional laws, we can no longer infer from one or a few observed and
studied cases that all similar situations will behave in exactly the same way.
• Instead, we need to take evidence and contextual information from a place of understanding to
see if and how what we have learned applies in other circumstances  This is where the
epistemological debate resurfaces, this time with the distinction between explanation and
understanding.

14. EXPLANATION OR UNDERSTANDING?
• The classical explanatory stance does not seem to be the case for Feminist International
Relations Theory.
• As contemporary theorists argue, if it were to be operationalised in classical terms, gender is
neither the explanandum nor the explanans, but rather both at the same time.
• Fourth debate: feminism has fought from the side of understanding. Feminist productions in
International Relations are generally endowed with a post-positivism that is sceptical of
objectivist epistemology. They therefore tend to prefer methodologies based on narrative,
interpretation and ethnography, as these start from a relational epistemology and ontology that
emphasises the social and constitutive aspects of world politics.

15. EXPLANATION OR UNDERSTANDING?
• Feminist perspectives on international relations seek to understand existing gender relations - the
dominance of masculinities over femininities - in order to transform the way they function at all levels
of social, economic and political life on a global scale.
• Within international relations, feminist theorists have drawn on the experiences of marginalised and
oppressed peoples, including women, to question and revise the epistemological and ontological
foundations of the field. They have challenged the gender bias inherent in explanatory ways of
knowing and incorporated fundamental concepts and concerns of international relations, such as
states, sovereignty, power, security, international conflict and global governance.
• Guided by a commitment to be inclusive of multiple views of international relations and reflexive
about possible exclusions, feminist reflections are highly sensitive to power and politics everywhere
within and beyond the conventional boundaries of states and international public spheres. This leads
them to question not only the powerful but also their relationship to the powerless.

16. CONCLUSION
• If the norm of inclusivity helps IR feminists to correct some of the biases of IR studies that fail to
consult a wide range of perspectives, elite and marginalised, then reflexivity helps IR feminists to
uncover their own exclusions and biases. Generated within and through the feminist
International Relations scholarly collective, reflexivity helps feminist theorists to become more
aware of the political exclusions that result from their normative purposes, choices of research
topic and methodology, and to take responsibility for these exclusions.
• Feminist international relations theory is very prolific, as evidenced by the many and varied
feminist contributions to the disciplinary field and in multidisciplinary studies. Yesterday,
feminism emerged from the margins of the theoretical universe of international relations. Today,
feminist contributions have provided International Relations Theory with productive theoretical
debates on critical questions of epistemology, ontology, methodology and ethics.

17. CONCLUSION
• We thus see that feminism does not merely add another theoretical perspective to international
relations. On the contrary, its ethical commitment to inclusivity and attention to human relations
opens International Relations Theory to feminist critique from within the discipline. Feminist
productions draw on marginalised actors and subjects to challenge mainstream IR theory.
• Thus, feminist contributions not only increase our understanding of world politics by including
new actors and processes, but also force the discipline's main theories (in their ontological
premises, methodological rigour and ethical considerations) to improve by subjecting them to
continuous critical revision.