Dominant and destructive masculinities

In the first of three commentaries on Gillian Youngs' article on ‘Feminist International Relations’, Andrew Linklater argues that what is at stake in the discussion of the neglect of gender differences in mainstream IR analysis is the nature of international political reality, how best to analyse it and how to understand the consequences for women. He suggests that to further Youngs' argument that both feminists and non-feminists can contribute to an explanation of international political structures and processes, a large-scale empirical project is required—how did one version of masculinity come to prevail over others in the modern period and earlier? Other ‘spin-offs’ fitting Youngs' study of competing masculinities are apparent and an analysis of how different ethical traditions favour one conception of masculinity over another, he suggests, would be a profitable exercise.