[Marxism] Protesters: War a man's issue

Jesse Jack jjack99645 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 29 22:22:29 MDT 2006


> It strikes me as profoundly *silly*  to try to pretend gender does not
> play
> a central role in armed conflict since it quite obviously and
> transparently
> does.

I disagree. What I'm about to say seems to be essentially Ian's explanation
in a nutshell; but in the interests of remaining involved in the discussion
I'll continue:

 It's obvious that gender plays a role in armed conflict as most of the
world's armed forces are predominantly male, if not universally. However, a
*central* role? Meaning that gender is the #1 cause of armed conflict? That
seems to be a lackluster explanation of the current conflict. I doubt that
Israeli troops are invading Lebanon to prove their manliness, and bombing
Beirut because they hate women. I think the imperialist designs of Israel
has more to do with it.

> Moreover, I
> believe it is not possible to derive the gendered nature of war strictly
> and
> solely from class, for the very simple reason that gender predates class,
> patriarchy is the original hierarchical model.

Obviously gender predates class, but that does not necessarilly make it the
dominant conflict driving an instance of warfare, or any other social
interaction you might come up with. I agree that you can't reduce it
strictly to class. I simply feel that class has more to do with it.



More information about the Marxism mailing list