Search icone
Search and publish your papers

Why Women Can't Run the World: International Politics according to Francis Fukuyama

Or download with : a doc exchange

About the author

Level
General public

About the document

Published date
Language
documents in English
Format
pdf
Type
book reviews
Pages
7 pages
Level
General public
Accessed
0 times
Validated by
Committee Oboolo.com
0 Comment
Rate this document
  1. An analytic abstract of Tickner's article
  2. Why the Fukuyama's thesis is deeply against any human progress

Humans are like chimps. The social-constructionist theory was a wrong methodology to study human behaviors and the social sciences should turned towards sociobiology. So males are more aggressive than females, it is engraved in their genetic code and this is the cause of insecurity around the world. Living in the democratic zone of peace tamed this aggressive nature because a feminist point of view emerged with the women's right to vote. Nevertheless, there is a zone of turmoils where young men are still victims of their instincts. That is why women shouldn't take in charge international relations. This is highlighted in Women and the Evolution of World Politics, an article written by F. Fukuyama and published in Foreign Affairs which used an argumentation based on sociobiology to take up with the clash of civilization and a patriarchal vision of international politics against feminist scholarships. It is easy to understand why this article provoked a strong controversy and many responses like the sum of articles untitled Fukuyama's Follies: So What if Women Ruled the World? published in Foreign Affairs. In this context, J. A. Tickner, quoted by Fukuyama like one of the major feminist scholars on international relations theory, wrote her own response to Fukuyama and stood back from the controversy. In her article Why Women Can't Run the World: International Politics According to Francis Fukuyama, like in her working paper You Just don't Understand, Tickner hope to create a productive dialogue between classical IR scholars and feminist in order to promote feminist point of view on international relations.Though, Tickner could be wrong about willing to refocus the debate on the feminist IR scholars concerns and not on the basement of Fukuyama's thesis. Because there is a real danger to based social sciences on biology, in other words on human nature. That is what I will attempt to demonstrate in this essay. In the first part, I will make an analytic abstract of Tickner's article. In the second part, I will criticize her argumentation in order to demonstrate that Fukuyama's thesis based on the concept of human nature is not only a deeply conservative vision of the women's role in IR and in our society but is deeply against any human progress.

Similar documents you may be interested in reading.

To what extent can Islamic terrorism be considered as One Unified Movement?

 Politics & international   |  Political science   |  Case study   |  10/09/2012   |   .pdf   |   27 pages

Top sold for international relations

An evaluation of constructivism as an approach to international relations theory

 Politics & international   |  International affairs   |  Presentation   |  09/29/2010   |   .doc   |   11 pages

Constructivism and intervention: The case of Kosovo

 Politics & international   |  International affairs   |  Term papers   |  11/29/2009   |   .doc   |   5 pages