Lo personal es político y es internacional: Contribuciones feministas, interseccionalidad y RRII

Abstract

El artículo se propone describir y analizar los debates en la disciplina de las Relaciones Internacionales (RRII), focalizando en los aportes que los feminismos hacen al campo como corriente disidente, y en especial, en sus vertientes postcoloniales/decoloniales. Con una metodología cualitativa, se revisa bibliografía específica que permite dar cuenta de las discusiones actuales en la disciplina, las confrontaciones al interior de los feminismos en RRII y sus contribuciones, y, en ese plano, se repasan los aportes propios del feminismo decolonial latinoamericano y caribeño, considerando el señalamiento sobre la interseccionalidad realizada por este. Así, se examinan cuestiones metodológicas y epistemológicas concretas como la cuestión del cuerpo, los estudios desde la micropolítica y el foco en las prácticas cotidianas de las personas, iluminadas por los feminismos en las RRII. Ese marco es fundamental para visibilizar las diferencias de género desde una perspectiva interseccional, que desde el feminismo postcolonial/decolonial se concentra en sus vínculos con otras desigualdades y opresiones (raza, origen, clase social, entre otras). En América Latina y el Caribe esta mirada adquiere una relevancia distintiva y da lugar en este escrito a la problematización de sus vínculos con los derechos humanos, con las desigualdades y las violencias, y sus articulaciones con el neoliberalismo transnacionalizado. El texto se divide en tres apartados: primero, en el marco de los debates actuales del campo de estudio, se revisan los aportes de los feminismos en las RRII y se describen las diferencias al interior de estos. En particular, se indican como contribuciones teórico-metodológicas de los enfoques feministas a las RRII aquellos estudios basados en la micropolítica, la corporeidad y las prácticas de la vida cotidiana. Luego, se tratan las particularidades de los feminismos decoloniales en América Latina y el Caribe y su mirada interseccional en el campo: la cuestión de la subalternidad, la diferencia, la inequidad y el neoliberalismo, las formas concretas que adquieren en el Sur Global y en la región. Por último, se presentan las conclusiones con posibles líneas relevantes para futuras investigaciones. Los aportes disidentes en las RRII, en general, ponen en cuestión la corriente principal, dando lugar en los últimos años a voces alternativas, periféricas y silenciadas a través de los estudios postcoloniales (decolonialidad) y los feminismos, entre otros. Son esas voces de la diferencia las que presentan discusión a las perspectivas hegemónicas, produciendo contribuciones claves para continuar pensando la disciplina; en América Latina y el Caribe esto se realiza desde cosmovisiones propias, que buscan amalgamar saberes tradicionales y populares, propiciar nuevos enfoques y valorizar un conocimiento situado, interseccional, plural y corporeizado.

The article aims to describe and analyse international relations debates, focusing on the contributions that feminisms make to the field as one of the dissident currents and reflectivist approaches -especially in its postcolonial/decolonial formulations. The methodology used is qualitative, and a specific bibliography is reviewed in order to examine the current discussions in the discipline, the confrontations within feminisms in IR, as well as their contributions. Moreover, we will look at the revision that Latin American and Caribbean decolonial feminism has instigated, considering the importance of intersectionality for expanding disciplinary boundaries. The text is articulated around the following questions: What debates run through the contemporary disciplinary field? What do the approaches of feminisms, within this framework, question and propose? What methodologies and notions do they introduce in IR studies? Which contributions are made by Latin American and Caribbean feminism? Thus, specific methodological and epistemological issues illuminated by feminisms in IR, such as the body politics,the micropolitics approach, and the focus on everyday practices,are given particular consideration. Solomon & Steele (2016) affirm that it “is only now — with increasing shifts to the micro — that academic IR has begun to (re)discover the lives and people of global politics, and to breathe life back into a field that grand theory mostly neglected”. Every life of any person around the world should be recognized; there is no international system or society without the actions and practices of ordinary people. In this regard, feminisms have been key introductions into the field of IR, along with poststructuralism and postcolonialism, which are regular research instruments in disciplines like anthropology or sociology. For instance, ethnographic studies or participant observation are techniques that support the turns and innovations mentioned above. This framework is fundamental to make gender differences visible from an intersectional perspective. Postcolonial/decolonial feminism concentrates their studies on that difference, especially considering its links with other inequalities and concrete oppressions: e.g. in relation to race, ethnicity, religion, class, and nationality. In Latin America and the Caribbean, this perspective takes on an added relevance, and gives rise in this text to the problematization of its entanglement with human rights; the relationship between women, work and racialization; inequalities and violence; together with their links with global neoliberalism. In this respect, the article gives a comprehensive account of the main issues tackled by feminisms in the region, such as women’s positions during the colonization period, and the multiple forms of violence related to their role. For instance, there is the importance of state responsibility in femicides, and the internal colonization and the neglect of diversity in national (plurinational) societies. These are performed by academia and social movements, particularly so in Western (white) feminist perspectives. The text is divided into three sections. Firstly, the framework of current IR debates is established, the differences between feminisms in IR and their classifications are described, and the theoretical contributions that these approaches have made to the discipline through methodological instruments such as micropolitics, corporeality and the practices of everyday life are elaborated. In the words of Enloe (2007, p.100) “Feminism is a multidimensional yet coherent worldview. Feminism is an achieved mosaic of understandings, yet it is still unfolding. […] feminism is a complex set of understandings about how power operates, how power is legitimized and how power is perpetuated”. Regardless of which perspective within feminism is being highlighted, some fundamental common issues will appear: neoliberalism and patriarchy are two of them, but also violence against women, gender identities and rights, exploitation, public and private spheres distinctions, etc. Then, the particularities of decolonial feminisms in Latin America and the Caribbean, along with their intersectional look at the field, are discussed: the question of subalternity, difference and neoliberalism, the concrete forms they acquire in the Global South and in the region. Moreover, the relevance of the link between neoliberalism and patriarchy is brought into consideration as a research topic shared by different feminist perspectives. In this respect, we name some authors form the region that propose feminist genealogic studies (Ciriza, 2015; Parra, 2021). As Marchand (2013, p.64) explains, the opportunities of a young middle-class woman with a university education are greater than those of a 65-year-old indigenous man with little formal education and a peasant life. While obviously not in a dominant position in society and the labour market, the young woman still has a privileged position with respect to the indigenous. These differences are invisible in the rational mainstream, and also in liberal -and some socialist or poststructuralist- feminisms. Some particular research is mentioned to show how the body politics, micropolitical approaches, and the practice turn are effectively used in IR studies, with innovative techniques oriented towards ethnographic studies and participated action. For instance, the examination of global women (and gender diversities), migration and mobility are illuminated by focusing in particular case: women from Guerrero in Texas (Muñoz y Mendoza, 2018). Also, the incidences of sexual violence in the conflict in Guatemala is brought to light through the voices of the Maya women survivors and thanks to the research of Fulchiron (2016). This research emphasises the use of the femininized body as a war instrument. In addition, this paper mentions the contribution that Latin American and Caribbean feminisms have made to the field of human rights, especially through the participation in international organizations such as OAS and UN. (Barrancos, 2021; Chiarotti Boero, 2021) Considering all the above mentioned, we state that critical and intersectional feminisms allow us to think IR as a diverse field, with true planetary scope, and capable of recovering the importance of the well-being and daily lives of people. Finally, the conclusions are presented with possible relevant lines for future research (ecofeminism and the Latin American approaches to it). Dissident contributions in IR, in general, call into question the mainstream, giving rise in recent years to alternative, peripheral and silenced voices through postcolonial studies (decoloniality) and the feminisms, amongst others. These voices of difference generate discussion beyond hegemonic perspectives, producing key contributions for the continued interrogation of the discipline. These voices, for instance from Latin America and the Caribbean, draw on their own worldviews, along with traditional and popular knowledge. This assists in the promotion of new approaches and value situated, plural, intersectional and corporeized knowledges.