This study sets out to examine how men and women within the Swedish Armed Forces (SAF) reason about decision-making and the use of violence in relation to security and conflict resolution, and whether or not their reasoning differ. The study comprises a qualitative case study whereas the SAF has been identified as a critical case. The research takes off in theoretical fields such as; international relations, gender, security and feminism. With departure in essential-, standpoint- and difference feminism in particular, an analytical framework has been created. The core assumptions in the framework are: women are peaceful and prefer individual decision-making in relation to security and conflict resolution. Men on the contrary are violent and prefer individual decision-making. The validity of these assumptions is tested by ten qualitative interviews with five women and five men within the SAF. The finding of the study is that the SAF appears to socialize a similar behavior amongst their male and female co-workers. Hence, men and women within the forces seem to reason about security and conflict resolution in comparable ways. The feminist assumptions in the analytical framework are thus proven invalid. Nevertheless, the branches of the feminisms that depart from social construction rather than biological determinism are proven correct.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:mau-23345 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Uvelius, Karin |
| Publisher | Malmö högskola, Institutionen för globala politiska studier (GPS), Malmö högskola/IMER |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds