An Intersectional Analysis of International Relations: Recasting the Discipline

Politics and Gender

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 156-173

  Ackerly, Brooke ^a   True, Jacqui ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 56549090375     PISSN: 1743923X     EISSN: 17439248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1743923X08000081     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Ackerly Brooke A., Stern Maria, and True Jacqui, eds. 2006. Feminist Methodologies for International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Ackerly Brooke A., and True Jacqui. forthcoming. Doing Feminist Research in Social and Political Science. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
3. Agathangelou Anna M., and Ling L. H. M. 2004. “Power, Borders, Security, Wealth: Lessons of Violence and Desire from September 11.” International Studies Quarterly 48 (3): 517–38.
4. American Sociological Association. 2005. Full-Time Faculty Distribution by Rank and Gender. Available from http://www.asanet.org/cs/root/leftnav/research_and_stats/profession_trend_data/fulltime_faculty_distribution_by_rank_and_gender (27 September 2007).
5. Anand Dibyesh. 2007. “Anxious Sexualities: Masculinity, Nationalism and Violence.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9 (2): 257–69.
6. Cancian Francesca M. 1992. “Feminist Science: Methodologies That Challenge Inequality.” Gender & Society 6 (4): 623–43.
7. Crawford Robert M. A., and Jarvis Darly S. L. 2001. International Relations—Still an American Social Science?: Toward Diversity in International Thought. Albany: State University of New York Press.
8. D'Costa Bina. 2006. “Marginalized Identity: New Frontiers of Research for IR?” In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations, ed. Ackerly Brooke, Stern Maria, and True Jacqui. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 129–52.
9. Fonow Mary Margaret, and Cook Judith A. 1991. Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
10. Gray M. Mark, Kittleson Miki Caul, and Sandholtz Wayne. 2006. “Women and Globalization: A Study of 180 Countries, 1975–2000.” International Organization 60 (2): 293–333.
11. Healey Teresa, and Neufeld Mark. 1997. “Critical Reflections on a Discipline: A Canadian Perspective.” Bulletin of the Canadian Political Science Association 26 (1): 27–31.
12. Hoffman Stanley. 1977. “An American Social Science: International Relations.” Daedalus 106 (3): 41–60.
13. Holsti Kal. 1987. A Divided Discipline: Hegemony and Diversity. London: Allen & Unwin.
14. Jarvis Darly S. L. 2000. International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism: Defending the Discipline. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
15. Jaschik Scott. 2007. “Philosophy and Sexism.” Inside Higher Education, September
16. Ma Jennifer. 2005. “Trends and Issues: Recruiting and Retaining Female and Minority Faculty.” New York: TIAA-CREF Institute.
17. Maliniak Daniel, Oakes Amy, Peterson Susan, and Tierney Michael. 2007. The View from the Ivory Tower: TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculty in the United States and Canada. www.wm.edu/trip.
18. Naples Nancy A. 2003. Feminism and Method: Ethnography, Discourse Analysis, and Activist Research. New York: Routledge.
19. Reinharz Shulamit. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. Ritter Gretchen, and Mellow Nicole. 2000. “The State of Gender Studies in Political Science.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 571 (1): 121–34.
21. Sen Amartya Kumar. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Smith Dorothy E. 1987. The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
23. Smith Steve. 2000. “The Discipline of International Relations: Still an American Social Science?” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 2 (3): 374–402.
24. Smith Steve. 2002. “The United States and the Discipline of International Relations: Hegemonic Country, Hegemonic Discipline.” International Studies Review 4 (2): 67–85.
25. Smith Steve. 2004. “Singing Our World into Existence: International Relations Theory and September 11.” International Studies Quarterly 48 (3): 499–515.
26. Squires Judith, and Weldes Jutta. 2007. “Beyond Being Marginal: Gender and International Relations in Britain.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9 (2): 185–203.
27. Staudt Kathleen A., and Weaver William G. 1997. Political Science & Feminisms: Integration or Transformation? New York: Twayne.
28. Sterling-Folker Jennifer. “Forward Is As Forward Does: Assessing Neoclassical Realism from a Traditions Perspective.” James Patrick, Freyberg-Inan Annette, and Harrison Euan eds. Realism Today: A Paradigmatic Inventory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008.
29. Strober Myra H. 1994. “Rethinking Economics through a Feminist Lens.” American Economic Review 84 (2): 143–47.
30. Waever Ole. 1998. “The Sociology of a Not So International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations.” International Organization 52 (4): 687–727.
31. Williams Christine L. 2000. “Preface.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 571 (1): 8–13.