Feminist Audit
It is important, and historic, that we have a prime minister and a government proud to proclaim ourselves feminists.
- Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, 2017
Intersectionality. Inclusion. Equity
It is important, and historic, that we have a prime minister and a government proud to proclaim ourselves feminists.
-Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland, 2017
What is Feminist Foreign Policy?
Keep scrolling!
There's more progress
to be made.
It is common to think of feminism as a theory that focuses solely on women’s issues. However, this does not tell the whole story.[1] In Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy, it is made clear that the promotion of feminism entails fighting for all marginalized people.[2] A definition of feminism that follows this logic is provided by Rosemarie Garland Thompson when she asserts that feminism is a theory that can be applied to critically analyze how societal understandings of gender, race, ethnicity, ability, sexuality, and class interact with one another to create identities which shape the way individuals experience the world and how the world views individuals.[3] This is the operational definition of feminism for the purposes of this project because it foregrounds diversity and difference in a way that provides ample grounds for accessing and interrogating international relations from a feminist lens. Overall, this understanding of feminism can be used to interrogate current power structures and promote equity for people of various intersectional identities.
Sweden provides a useful example of an actual and effective feminist foreign policy, that is predicated on 3 R's [4]:
This is a useful outline for how a feminist foreign policy: 1) represents the voices of women and other marginalized groups, 2) respects their human rights, and 3) allocates resources to rectify injustices.
We will further augment this conception into a three-dimensional framework to assert intersectionality in representation, ensure greater inclusivity in a rights-based approach, and reallocate resources for the purpose of equity.
Represenation
Rights
Reallocation
Represenation
Rights
Reallocation
Intersectionality
Inclusivity
Equity
The Audit
We hope to prove that feminist foreign policy can be universally applied to the broader framework of international relations by positioning it to be in dialogue with the other scenarios. This is opposed to isolating only select issues as traditionally feminist or women-focussed issues. Framing the various feedback on these scenarios as an audit allows for polyvocality in a range of issues, and maintains the critical function of feminism as a legitimate policy lens. The audit is based on self-reflections that prompted individual groups to consider how a feminist foreign policy could enhance their scenario.
The following scenarios were chosen based on the results of our audit. We selected scenarios that lacked diverse representation and reinforced masculine power structures. Based on this criteria scenario to be critiqued include:
CYBER
INTERFERENCE
Group: Security
NATO +
UKRAINE
Group: Global Governance
CRYPTO
EXPANSION
Group: Economy
UNIVERSAL
PHARMACARE
Group: Domestic
CANNABIS
PRIVATIZATION
Group: Domestic
TIP. 1
Click on the individual boxes above to explore feminist audits of each scenario.
TIP. 2
Click here if you want to see a more in depth breakdown of survey results.
So What and Who Are Missing?
Keep scrolling!
There's more progress
to be made.
LGBT2Q+
(DIS)ABILITY
Out of 21 scenarios, the impact of policy on queer individuals is considered by only one, Border Discrimination. It is of critical importance that Canadian policy takes LGBT2Q+ lives into consideration. Internationally, queer individuals are incredibly vulnerable. Homosexual behaviour is illegal in more than 70 countries [11]. It is punishable by death in eleven [12]. In 2017, Human Rights Campaign cited the death of 28 transgender people in the US due to fatal violence—the highest recorded number to date [13]. From a humanitarian perspective, foreign policy should consider the vulnerability of LGBT2Q+ communities as a human rights priority. A foreign policy with greater queer inclusivity could also help Canada promote global health outcomes. Policy based in LGBT2Q+ rights can decrease health barriers to queer individuals who are otherwise stigmatized and discouraged from seeking care or treatment, reporting sexual abuse, or disclosing specific health concerns [14]. Therefore, LGBT2Q+ individuals represent a specific population that international policy ought to consider. It is likely that heteronormativity and institutional homophobia play a role in the common disregard for LGBT2Q+ individuals in international policy. “International human rights norms,” for example, “are, in general, silent on issues of sexuality.” [15]. Therefore, sexuality is not explicitly protected by human rights instruments such as the Genocide Convention or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [16]. This should no longer be the status quo in international policy if we aim for equitable inclusion and protection. It is time for foreign policy to actively consider the value and vulnerability of LGBT2Q+ people.
MASCULINITY
None of the scenarios explicitly focused on (dis)ability. Only 2 scenarios, the Privitization of Marijuana and Universal Pharmacare, acknowledged a potential to consider the impact of the policy on (dis)ability. Considering the significance of intersectional identities, understanding how (dis)ability is, or isn’t, represented in international relations should be a core component of an intersectional feminist foreign policy. For instance, a significant amount of foreign policy analysis focuses on the gendered barriers to education for girls in developing countries, while largely overlooking how these barriers are compounded for girls with (dis)abilities.[17] Following from our operational definition of a feminist foreign policy, it is crucial to examine how policies that may affect one aspect of someone’s identity could also interact with another aspect. Canada has a history of placing issues of (dis)ability at the forefront and being an international leader in developing policy that focuses on people with (dis)abilities, notably between the years of 1981 and 1992.[18] However, since the 2000s the Canadian government has left behind its commitment to being a global leader on (dis)ability policy [19]. Therefore, considering the lack of attention given to policies pertaining to people with (dis)abilities from the Canadian government in the past two decades,(dis)ability policy deserves greater recognition. Additionally, (dis)ability has not found proper representation in the academic sphere, which is noted by Rosemarie Garland Thomson, when she states, “there has been no archive, no template for understanding disability as a category of analysis and knowledge, as a cultural trope, and an historical community. So just as the now widely recognized centrality of gender and race analyses to all knowledge was unthinkable thirty years ago, disability is still not an icon on many critical desktops.”[20] Thus, not only has (dis)ability been marginalized from government policy, students also do not have many opportunities to explore (dis)ability and its meaning, and therefore was largely left out of this project.
Click here, if you are interested in learning more about (dis)ability and how to unlearn ableist behaviour.
INDIGENOUS
A majority of scenarios were aware of how their policy reinforced masculine power structures, and took that fact for granted rather than being analyzed. Research has shown that substantive connections exist between males and: violence, aggression, hierarchical competition, and group identity [21]. Failures to challenge masculine norms in the field of international relations, and its academic study, is partly due to these spheres being male-dominated [22]. However, if the subject of international relations is concentrated around men and masculinity, assessing the subject of masculinity is important to establishing a feminist foreign policy [23]. Recognizing masculinity has the potential to bring unique insights for the purpose of challenging regressive gender hierarchies in a way the reinforces the goals of a feminist foreign policy [24].
Only 27% of scenarios considered the impact of policy on Indigenous peoples. Indigenous communities are too often considered a subset within the broader civil society of the state [25]. However, Indigenous communities are “civil societies in and of themselves.” [26] To recognize Indigenous Nations as distinct civil societies, and not only as members of Canadian society, appreciates the ways in which Indigenous peoples can participate at national and international levels. [27] It also “forces critical thinking about how the Canadian government and Canadian NGOs might best support Indigenous rights.” [28] Foreign policy must ensure the consideration of its impact on Indigenous communities as Nations in their own right, and the intersectional identities of the actors involved.
Summary
A feminist foreign policy uses an intersectional lens to challenge the masculine power structures that currently dominate the field of international relations. Referencing Sweden’s framework of the three Rs: representation, rights, and reallocation, we reimagine those categories to include intersectionality, inclusivity, and equity to allow a holistic understanding of feminist foreign policy. With this framework, feminist foreign policy is no longer limited to traditional categories such as security and development, but takes into account the structural and personal aspects of foreign policy.[30] Defining Canadian foreign policy as “feminist” is important and necessary for ensuring that the voices of marginalized communities are valued and heard in Canadian policy. Applying a feminist lens to our scenarios allowed us to fully imagine the ways feminist foreign policy can be applied more universally.