Download 1 QUEER THEORY AND PEACE AND CONFLICT

1
Mizzi, R., & Byrne, S. (in press). Queer theory and peace and conflict studies:
Some critical reflections. In M. Flaherty, J. Senehi, H. Tuso, T. Matyok & S. Byrne
(Eds.), Gender and peacebuilding: All hands required. New York, NY: Lexington
Books.
QUEER THEORY AND PEACE AND CONFLICT STUDIES:
SOME CRITICAL REFLECTIONS
Robert C. Mizzi and Sean Byrne
A number of recent studies articulate the need for the Peace and Conflict Studies (PACS)
field to continue to include issues and people on the margins of society in the plurality of
peacebuilding.1 Johan Galtung (2009) points out how the “transdisciplinary” nature of
PACS in terms of theory building and practice2 deconstructs direct, cultural and structural
(invisible violence in systems and institutions) violence to empower people to build a
positive peace (social justice) for all citizens.3 Those critical of the Western model of
“liberal peacebuilding” state that the model often leaves people out of the peace process
altogether and point toward prompt reconsideration in light of this exclusion practice.4
For example, people with disabilities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer people
(LGBTQ); youth; women; and the elderly are often excluded from the peace processes
and practices that confront continuous acts of violence and hate crimes directed against
these social groups.5 The intersection of gender, race, sexuality and class in the
socialization process, and its engagement with dominant oppressive patriarchal power,
ensures that certain values relegate particular groups (such as those listed above) to the
social periphery. Concomitantly, this marginalization process shapes people’s daily life
experiences and provides little room for social emancipation.6 The effects of this
marginalization process by dominant patriarchal power often means, in practical terms,
unbalanced power structures with little or no representation of marginal voices, and for
those marginalized, feelings of low self-worth and the development of unhelpful coping
2
mechanisms. Clearly, as much as positive peace is a promising ideology, it remains a
forgotten or distant concept for certain groups excluded from peace processes.
This chapter provides some rationale and direction towards a more inclusive
peacebuilding process. It explores the potential of queer theory in adding to diversity in
theory building, research, pedagogy, and praxis in the PACS field, and vice versa.
Although queer theory largely focuses on deconstructing sexuality and gender categories
in a social hierarchy, such as analyzing the effects of normative gender roles on the lives
of people with same-sex sexual and/or gender non-conforming desires, there are tenets to
queer theory that advance Galtung’s assertion to deconstruct violence and build a positive
peace for all citizens.7 As Robert Mizzi points out, in a comparative view there is
similarity between peace movements and gay and lesbian liberation movements, which
may be enough to form a “same-sex marriage” between the two theoretical frameworks.8
We hope to perform such a marriage through this chapter, and conceptualize implications
for all activists and educators, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
We begin this chapter with an explanation of queer theory and PACS as distinct
theoretical frameworks. We then highlight new insights that may be useful when
reconceptualizing both theoretical frameworks in relation to one another. The question
that drives this comparative analysis is: What are the tenets of queer theory and PACS
that may be useful towards advancing notions of positive peace (social justice)? In a time
of dynamic and radical changes around queer issues in social organizing, and the
pervasive nature of conflict and violence, this chapter offers critical perspectives towards
the reconceptualization of necessary peacebuilding processes.
3
QUEER THEORY
The term “queer theory” appeared in queer lexicon by way of de Lauretis’s work on
deconstructing gay and lesbian identities.9 As de Lauretis states, queer theory “conveys a
double emphasis – on the conceptual and speculative work involved in discourse
production and on the necessary critical work of deconstructing our own discourses and
their constructed silence.”10 Deconstructing discourse is a key theme in this work, as
queer activisms (rooted in feminism) highlight the prevalence of heterosexism, which
uses values, understandings, and practices that favour cross-sex relationships, and
heteropatriarchy that purports heterosexual masculinity as superior and dominant to
expressions of femininity (e.g., effeminate males). Queer theory challenges dominant
social hierarchies and values and disrupts altogether the social construction of
male/female and hetero/homo as fixed and stable categories.11 The acronym “LGBTQ,”
for example, creates identity-categorizations that limit fluid, non-binary
conceptualizations of sex, sexuality, and gender.
The use of the term ‘queer’ represents a significant political shift. Historically, it
is a term that was used to name and shame queerness, people who engage in same-sex
sexual practices and/or do not subscribe to strict, traditional male/female gender roles.
Over the past few decades, “queer” has been reclaimed by activists and scholars to
pushback against the violent use of language, re-shift the balance of power, and position
the term as a preferable and useful term to challenge heterosexism and heteropatriarchy.
Although the term remains controversial both internal and external to queer communities
due to its troubling historical use, the term is growing worldwide as a symbol of
reclamation and inclusion. Queer theory comprises several key intellectual engagements
4
to understand human relationships, gender diversity and power. Generally speaking, these
engagements are based on the following intersecting concepts: sexual regulation,
performativity, and heteronormativity.
Sexual Regulation
Michel Foucault’s work highlights the hegemonic practice of institutionalized systems
using identity-categories (for example, a “homosexual” identity) to shame, regulate, and
eradicate same-sex sexual behavior.12 Science, medicine, and religion are institutions that
Foucault names that cause women and men to “confess” their shameful same-sex sexual
practices when they stray from the pro-creationist, gendered expectations to engage only
in cross-sex sexual practices. Women and men who engage in same-sex sexual practices
must be willing to accept punishment and adhere to a regime that will “correct” the
“deviant” behaviour. Foucault’s work indicates that sexuality is a political marker,
whereby institutions work to regulate sexuality according to what is considered
“acceptable” social norms. Through this work on sexual regulation emerges the potential
for discourse to resist dominant understandings and restrictions of sex, sexuality, and
gender. An example of this sexual regulation process is the use of electroshock therapy in
psychiatric hospitals as a means to “punish” and “correct” homosexual desires among gay
men.13
Performativity
The notion of “performativity” stems from a position of resistance to queer oppression,
which is widely considered a second intellectual engagement that is a part of queer
theory. Judith Butler critiques the social construction of gender, whereby men and
women adhere to rigid social roles and rules of masculinity and femininity in order to
5
gain acceptance into society.14 These roles and rules cause difficulty for people who do
not subscribe to such normative definitions of gender to gain agency and autonomy.
Butler states that gender then becomes “performative,” which means that people
“perform” their gender according to these social rules and roles.15 Through
performativity, attention is drawn to how gender becomes a concept that is socially
constructed, which makes gender fluid and not fixed. An example that Butler puts forth to
“trouble” gender is situated within a gay and lesbian social context.16 Butler highlights
how parody and fantasy disrupt normative constructions of gender through drag
performances. Drag performances destabilize the notion of what constitutes a “female”
identity in order to expose a set of social relations (that is, normative expectations of
masculine and feminine behaviours).17 Through the use of parody, drag performances
reveal aspects of a normatively gendered experience, rather than a whole female identity,
that are portrayed and made intelligible for heterosexual understanding.18 Significantly,
drag becomes a parody of the masculine and feminine mechanisms and practices that
construct and bind gender.19 When subjects disturb such binding practices around
(gender) identity, they then open up radical possibilities that break from the constraints of
social regulation.20 As Butler states, “gender proves to be performative, that is,
constituting the identity it is purported to be. In this sense, gender is always a doing,
though not a doing by a subject who might be said to preexist the deed.”21 Butler comes
to argue that there can be no gender identity since it is always “doing” and remains in
flux.22
Heteronormativity
6
A third intellectual engagement that is considered a part of queer theory is Michael
Warner’s work on heteronormativity.23 Warner states that “a whole field of social
relations becomes intelligible as heterosexuality, and this privatized sexual culture
bestows on its sexual practices a sense of rightness and normalcy. This sense of
rightness–embedded in things and not just in sex–is referred to as heteronormativity.”24
In other words, heterosexuality becomes embedded into everyday understandings and
psyches as the “norm” in which to base operations, with little space to explore differences
in sex, sexuality and gender. For example, a discussion on different forms of family
violence that excludes the possibility of violence towards and within families with samesex partners would be a heteronormative predisposition. In this instance, teaching
practices, support systems, curricula, policies, mandates, and communications are all
structured along heteronormative lines, which make it difficult for people to learn about
how to address violence within/towards same-sex parent families and to think creatively
about other non-normative constructions of “family.”
These three elements of sexual regulation, performativity, and heteronormativity
are considered hallmarks of queer theory. Analyzing social problems from each of these
perspectives may produce new lines of thinking into the origins of these problems as well
as some of the possible solutions. For example, the recent intensification of globalization
has now prompted queer theory to adopt a transnational perspective, where there is
acknowledgement that sexuality and gender are constructed differently everywhere and
has become influenced by global “gay rights” movements that employ Western-oriented
“LGBTQ” language.25 Also, at the front of recent queer scholarship is an analysis of
7
organizations that operate on rigid principles of heteropatriarchy, such as the Canadian
military,26 and a reconceptualization of ways to make them more queer-friendly.
PEACE AND CONFLICT STUDIES
Peace and Conflict Studies (PACS) is the fusion of conflict analysis and resolution, social
justice, conflict transformation, human rights, restorative justice, reconciliation, and
peace studies in assisting us in understanding the deep roots of social conflict. It also
provides some direction into the appropriate innovative processes that can be utilized to
creatively intervene and transform human relationships and social structures while
deconstructing patriarchy and militarization. The following sections outline some of the
key components and future direction of PACS including some selected recent debates in
the field.
Alternative or Appropriate Dispute Resolution and Peace Studies
Historically, traditional mechanisms of negative peace (the absence of war) such as
diplomacy, elite negotiations, and international law by powerful states and international
organizations were used to manage conflict at the global level.27 At the same time these
processes were in place a broad plethora of grassroots social movements emerged in the
1960s in Europe and North America to protest the balance of terror of nuclear weapons
and Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), violence against women, the denial of
African-American civil rights in the U.S., student protest movements against the Vietnam
War and inequality in France, the U.S. and Northern Ireland. These mainly nonviolent
movements sought to transform society from a culture of violence to a culture of peace.
As a result of local people’s distrust of the state, alternative and/or appropriate dispute
8
resolution processes were developed and employed to emancipate local communities.
Subsequently, Alternative or Appropriate Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes of
mediation, negotiation and arbitration began to emerge in university law schools as the
credentialing and professionalization of practitioners in the field became more tied to
court annexed mediation.28 Peace Studies programs also appeared on undergraduate and
graduate campuses as scholars and students struggled to understand the important social
issues of their time – and how to address them.
Conflict Analysis and Resolution
Conflict Analysis and Resolution (CAR) undergraduate and graduate programs analyze
the emergence and escalation of deep-rooted, destructive conflicts, and how they can be
resolved.29 John Burton and Edward Azar distinguish between values, interests and needs
by arguing that denial of people’s basic human needs (security, identity, self-esteem, and
freedom etc.) would escalate conflict and only the satisfaction of those needs would
resolve or prevent social conflicts.30 They argue that human needs were universal across
cultures, which can be found at interpersonal (between individuals), intergroup (between
groups) and global (between nations) levels. They contended that a problem-solving
process could assist people in need to analyze the roots of conflict in comparison to the
actualization of meeting human needs as a means to devise sustainable solutions and end
protracted conflict.
“Interactive problem-solving” largely takes place at the intergroup level as
middle-level professionals such as doctors, teachers, lawyers and so forth come together
to discuss the underlying causes of protracted ethnic conflicts in a process facilitated by a
knowledgeable third party.31 The idea is that over time problem-solving or dialogue
9
group participants can build trust and a common understanding of the dynamics of their
conflicts as well as culturally relevant solutions to resolve them, and transmit new
knowledge to decision-makers, and to the grassroots.32
Conflict Transformation
Conflict Transformation advocates believe that relationships have to be built and rebuilt
and that structures need to be changed over time to ensure peace processes are sustainable
and involve the whole society in its transformation to a just, peaceful, and inclusive
society.33 Building a culture of peace necessitates co-creating a long-term holistic system
that includes all internal and external stakeholders to forge a sustainable infrastructure for
peace.34 Such a peacebuilding process implies coordinating resources, training, structure,
process, and evaluation of the transformative process into an “integrated framework.”35
Reconciliation and forgiveness processes where truth, justice, mercy, and peace
intersect to build relationships are necessary to build a sustainable peace.36 Reconciliation
processes such as the national Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in El Salvador and
South Africa and local peacemaking processes provide critical contexts and spaces for
protagonists and survivors of conflict and violence to come together and for the former to
seek forgiveness from the latter so that together they can heal from the trauma of past
violence. “Chosen traumas” and “chosen glories” are often used by unscrupulous leaders
in the process of “the transgenerational transmission” of trauma or glory so that the seeds
are sown for the next escalation of violence.37
Peace and Conflict Studies
Peace and Conflict Studies (PACS) teachers, students, and scholars focus on critical
issues and innovative and creative intervention processes to build positive peace (social
10
justice) and to address direct, cultural and structural violence. For example, peace
activists in local cultural contexts empower women within patriarchal societies to change
behaviours and promote a social justice frame around global human rights laws.38 Global
human rights laws protect the rights of the individual within a diverse and complex world.
Real peace cannot be forged for nations or ethnic groups emerging from violent wars
unless there is social justice that addresses group trauma, poverty, environmental issues,
oppressive structures, and people’s needs among others.39
Peace educators seek to build a pluralistic and diverse civil society among adults
and children, across cultures, classes, and genders. For example, the Waldorf and
Montessori peace education methods integrate children’s abilities and interests with
nature and peacebuilding activities.40 “Constructive storytelling” processes and
approaches also play a role in educating children cross culturally, and in empowering
adults transitioning out of violent ethnic conflicts to deal with traumatic past events.41
Storytelling is a low-tech process and it is the way that children learn about the world
from adults.42 As Jessica Senehi articulates, anyone can tell a story and the human voice
is inextinguishable as the process of constructive (compared to destructive) storytelling is
both nonviolent and inclusive.43 Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. lived
lives that demonstrated the power of principled (compared to pragmatic) nonviolence in
confronting social injustice where the practitioner in a state of pure inner peace, works
lovingly with the protagonist to find the truth (social justice) together.44
Peacebuilding involves a multitrack, multimodal, multidimensional, and primarily
external intervention process that is conceptually and practically steeped in Western
liberal practices that include human rights, democracy, the rule of law, liberal
11
development, and a free-market economy.45 However, peacebuilding also includes
bringing young people, disabled people, elderly citizens, LGBTQ citizens, and women
into the decision-making process as well as including indigenous peoples and their
traditional processes of restorative justice and peacemaking within peacebuilding efforts
to co-create new systems and structures within a pluralistic and tolerant civil society.46
QUEERING PEACE/PEACING QUEER
When we reflect on these theoretical frameworks, we observe two similarities that may
be of use to scholars and researchers. First, both frameworks rely on metanarratives,
which are neither hierarchical nor in competition with each other. The presence of these
metanarratives indicates how both frameworks evolved over time to critique different
social institutions and arrangements, and as a means to end marginalizing and violent
processes; thereby, promoting equity and justice. These metanarratives work in tandem
with each other, reshaping and reforming perceptions of identity, power, and knowledge
according to social context.
Second, the encouragement of voice as a means for human emancipation is at the
core for both frameworks. Both frameworks re-conceptualize social hierarchies to
highlight specific groups that suffer negative consequences when they do not fit in with
the status quo. As a means to achieve an inclusive society, both frameworks call for
human dialogue, such as sharing experiences, deconstructing and dismantling dominant
systems of power, and promoting cultural values that do not fit normative categories of
what is (not) “acceptable” in society. It is through this emphasis on voice, and the
challenging and restructuring of power relations, that justice and peace can be achieved.
12
Pointedly, we live in an interdependent global village where inclusivity of all
perspectives grounds us in a synergistic, flexible, and pragmatic way. “Everyday
peacemakers” work at all levels to build connections and transform relations weaving
together stories of peacemaking as “hybridity and hybridization” of local and outside
peacebuilding approaches, which allows for creating realistic methods that incorporate a
plethora of voices into the creation of a just peace.47 Creating critical spaces for people to
come together and describe their experiences and identities is an essential component of a
pluralistic democracy, and in maintaining and forging human rights and a positive peace
with “transcultural constructive storytelling” at the heart of peacemaking and peace
education since it empowers people to “discover and share knowledge.”48
We see tremendous potential for both theoretical frameworks when pinned
together. First, queer theory stands to benefit from a strengthened inclusion of ally
perspectives that are a part of PACS. Allies can navigate through dominant systems that
structure hetero/homo binaries and help create change from within such systems.
Although queer theory is useful at deconstructing social systems that relegate queerness
to the periphery, an inclusion of ally perspectives would indicate how such systems affect
us all, are violent in their construction, and that the heteropatriarchial nature of these
systems can be challenged from the participation of allies that work in conjunction with
LGBTQ people. Embedded in this ally work, and related queer activisms, can be PACS’s
focus on reconciliation and forgiveness processes where there is consideration of such
notions as justice and peace. For example, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission
formed on the basis of exploring the persecution of LGBTQ people might be useful in
working through this peace process.
13
Of significance here is the idea that the construction of gender identities holds
masculine notions of competition and hierarchy as more sacred values by society than
feminine values of caring and compassion.49 The use of violence to achieve order within
the state and to maintain the state’s projection of power reinforces the masculine values
in a dominant (hetero)patriarchy, and a realpolitik self-help anarchic security system.50
Consequently, “sex typed” individuals are influenced by gender when they filter
information and carry their “gender schemata” into different conflict contexts.51 Anita
Taylor and Judi Beinstein Miller call for a radical reconceptualization that “allows for
more than two genders” (for example, androgyny and sexual orientation).52 John
Stephens warns, for example, that the ADR mediation process fails to change the
structural roots of male domination residing in ownership of property and a “power over”
social order that promotes an “ethics of rights” rather than an “ethics of care.”53 Instead
he articulates that feminist and gender issues can be more appropriately dealt with by
peace studies because it addresses direct, cultural and structural violence that includes
anti-LGBTQ violence and victimization, and hate crimes.54 Thus, men and women,
LGBTQ and heterosexuals, and children and adults have to create “new partnerships” to
work together to create egalitarian relationships and a just society.55
Second, PACS stands to benefit from queer theory by promoting inclusion on the
basis of more than simply listing “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” within calls
for anti-violence activism. Queer theory can be helpful in deconstructing heteronormative
understandings of peace and non-violence, determining what kinds of “performative”
discourses exist in PACS, and conceptualizing how violence acts as a form of
(homo)sexual regulation. Peace may be understood then as being a fluid concept, where
14
peace includes diverse identities and ideas that are constantly being re-formed to adjust to
changing societies, rather than a fixed state of non-violence determined by a larger
authority figure. For example, exploring notions of gender-based violence through a
queer theory lens may highlight how gender and sexuality are fluid and interconnected
and that violence occurs in macro and micro levels to screen out sexuality and gender
difference. Women and men may both experience harsh consequences if they do not
subscribe to fixed gender role expectations.
What remains in the future for research that utilizes both frameworks? One
direction may be located in the very nature of queer activism, which throughout history
and around the globe remains a nonviolent movement. The world to date has not
witnessed bloodshed committed by LGBTQ people as a means to demand equal rights
and fair treatment. On the contrary, there have been significant acts of violence towards
LGBTQ people as a perceived means to suppress and eradicate sexuality and gender
difference. Research into why queer activism remains nonviolent, and at times, in
solidarity with other marginalized groups (even with those who struggle with accepting
queerness), might be of use to both queer theory and PACS. Also of use may be research
into how PACS may become more queer-inclusive, especially when researching matters
relating to identity-difference and identity-expression. Given that peace education has
been marked as a heteronormative pedagogy,56 researching efforts to trouble such
heteronormativity can help steer things around so that attempts to end violence are
inclusive and relevant to all lives. Both research approaches may shed further light on the
mechanics of violence in order to build peaceful and peace-filled societies.
CONCLUSION
15
The recent challenge to civil and human rights by President Vladimir Putin evidenced by
the arrest and detention of Pussy Riot feminist punk rock band members, the violence
directed against the LGBTQ community in Russia that led to international protest against
the Sochi Winter Olympic Games, and the controversial anti-homosexuality law (“Kill
the Gays” bill) in Uganda are illustrative of recent global examples of direct and indirect
violence directed against LGBTQ people. Until the components of patriarchy in the
“private policy individual sphere” and the “public policy-collective battering sphere” are
removed the battering of women, nations, and LGBTQ people globally will continue
unabated.57
In sum, this chapter reviewed and espoused the main tenets of queer theory and
PACS as a theoretical framework. This analysis indicates how despite the different
orientations, there are similar perspectives, such as the deconstruction of social norms
and a re-shift in power relations in light of marginalized peoples’ experiences. Queer
theory reminds us of fixed binaries that create and sustain social hierarchies, such as
hetero/homo, white/black, male/female, and adult/child, which has given little room to
explore differences in human lives outside of this binary. PACS’s focus on constructive
storytelling, reconciliation and positive peace demonstrates the importance of coming to
shared understanding and achieving some degree of forgiveness, especially for LGBTQ
people who have suffered tremendous loss of life, family, status and resource as a result
of transphobic and homophobic violence. Queer reactions to this violence continue to
consist of peaceful protests, expressions of love, and nonviolent actions worldwide.
PACS researchers and scholars can indeed find a place and presence in this peacebuilding
process.
16
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, Margaret and Patricia Hill Collins. Race, Class and Gender: An Anthology.
Scarborough, ON: Cengage Learning, 2012.
Barash, David, and Charles Webel. Peace and Conflict Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage, 2002.
Boulding, Elise. Cultures of Peace: The Hidden Side of History. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse
University Press, 2000.
Burton, John. Violence Explained: The Sources of Conflict, Violence, and Crime and
Their Prevention. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press, 1997.
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Rev. ed.). New
York, NY: Routledge, 1999.
Byrne, Sean, and Jessica Senehi. Violence: Analysis, Intervention and Prevention. Athens,
OH: Ohio University Press, 2012.
Byrne, Sean and Jessica Senehi. “Revisiting the CAR Field.” In Handbook of Conflict
Analysis and Resolution, edited by Dennis Sandole, Sean Byrne, Ingrid SandoleStaroste, and Jessica Senehi, 525-30. London, England: Routledge, 2009.
Darby, John. The Effects of Violence on Peace Processes. Washington, DC: United States
Institute of Peace Press, 2001.
de Lauretis, Teresa. “Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities,” Differences: A
Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 3.2 (1991): iii-xviii.
Fisher, Ron, ed. Paving the Way: Contributions of Interactive Conflict Resolution to
Peacemaking. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2005.
17
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. Harmondsworth, England:
Penguin, 1978.
Galtung, Johan. “Towards a Conflictology: A Quest for Trans-Disciplinarity.” In
Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, edited by Dennis Sandole, Sean
Byrne, Ingrid Sandole-Staroste, and Jessica Senehi, 511-24. London, England:
Routledge, 2009.
———. Peace by Peaceful Means. Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 1996.
Gopinath, Gayatri. Impossible Desires: Queer Diasporas and South Asian Public
Cultures. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005.
hooks, bell. Yearning: Race, Gender, and Cultural Politics. Boston, MA: South End
Press, 1990.
Hurlbert, Margot, ed. Pursuing Justice: An Introduction to Justice Studies. Winnipeg,
MB: Fernwood, 2011.
Jeong, Ho Won. Peace and Conflict Studies: An Introduction. London, England: Ashgate,
2000.
———. Peacebuilding in Postconflict Societies: Strategy and Process. Boulder,
CO: Lynne Rienner, 2005.
Kelman, Herb. “Group Processes in the Resolution of International Conflicts:
Experiences from the Israeli-Palestinian Case,” The American Psychologist 52.3
(1997): 212-20.
Kemp, Graham, and Douglas Fry, eds. Keeping the Peace: Conflict Resolution and
Peaceful Societies Around the World. London, England: Routledge, 2003.
Kriesberg, Louis, and Bruce Dayton. Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to
18
Resolution. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002.
Kriesberg, Louis, Stuart Thorson, and Terri Northrup, eds. Intractable Conflicts and
their Transformation. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1989.
Lederach, John Paul. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies.
Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1997.
———. Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation across Cultures.
Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1995.
Maytok, Thomas, Jessica Senehi, and Sean Byrne, eds. Critical Issues in Peace and
Conflict Studies: Theory, Practice, and Pedagogy. Lanham, MD: Lexington
Books, 2011.
MacGinty. Roger. International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of
Peace. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
MacGinty, Roger. No War, No Peace: The Rejuvenation of Stalled Peace Processes and
Peace Accords. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
MacGinty, Roger, and Andrew Williams. Peace and Development. London, England:
Routledge, 2009.
Merry, Sally Engle. Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law
into Local Justice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006.
Mizzi, Robert C. “Let’s Get This Straightened Out: Finding a Place and Presence for
Sexual/Gender Identity-Difference in Peace Education.” Journal of Peace
Education 7.2 (2010): 139-56.
Mizzi, Robert C. “Uncovering Rainbow (Dis)connections: An Exploration of Sexual and
19
Gender Diversity in the Canadian Forces and Implications for Post-conflict
Reconstruction Training.” In Learning Gendered Militarism in Canada: A
Lifelong Pedagogy of Acceptance and Resistance, edited by Nancy Taber.
Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press, forthcoming.
Redekop, Vern Neufeld. From Violence to Blessing: How An Understanding of Deep
Rooted Conflict Can Open Paths to Reconciliation. Toronto, ON: Novalis, 2002.
Richmond, Oliver. “A Genealogy of Peace and Conflict Theory.” In Palgrave Advances
in Peacebuilding: Critical Developments and Approaches, edited by Oliver Richmond,
14-40. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillian, 2010.
Rice, Brian. “People of the Longhouse.” In Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution,
edited by Dennis Sandole, Sean Byrne, Ingrid Sandole-Staroste, and Jessica
Senehi, 409-19. London, England: Routledge, 2009.
Rice, Brian, Jill Oakes, and Roderick Riewe. Seeing the World With Aboriginal Eyes.
Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Press, 2005.
Ross, Marc Howard. The Management of Conflicts: Interpretations and Interests in
Comparative Perspectives. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993.
Ross, Marc Howard, and Jay Rothman, eds. Theory and Practice in Ethnic Conflict
Management: Theorizing Success and Failure. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press,
1999.
Said, Abdul Aziz, Nathan C. Funk, and Ayse S. Kadayifci. Peace and Conflict Resolution
in Islam: Precept and Practice. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2001.
Sandole, Dennis, Sean Byrne, Ingrid Sandole-Staroste and Jessica Senehi, eds. Handbook
of Conflict Analysis and Resolution. London: Routledge, 2009.
20
Senehi, Jessica. “Constructive Storytelling: A Peace Process.” Peace and Conflict Studies
9.2 (2002): 41-63.
Senehi, Jessica. “Constructive Storytelling in Inter-communal Conflicts: Building
Community, Building Peace.” In Reconciliable Differences: Turning Points in
Ethnopolitical Conflict, edited by Sean Byrne, Cynthia Irvin, Paul Dixon, Brian
Polkinghorn, and Jessica Senehi, 96-114. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian, 2000.
Senehi, Jessica. “Storytelling to Transform Conflicts Constructively.” In Handbook of
Conflict Analysis and Resolution, edited by Dennis Sandole, Sean Byrne, Ingrid
Sandole-Staroste, and Jessica Senehi, 199-212. London, England: Routledge,
2009.
Senehi, Jessica. “The Role of Constructive, Transcultural Storytelling in Ethnopolitical
Conflict Transformation in Northern Ireland.” In Regional and Ethnic Conflicts:
Perspectives from the Front Lines, edited by George Irani, Vamik Volkan, and
Judy Carter, 227-37. New York, NY: Prentice Hall, 2009.
Senehi, Jessica, and Sean Byrne. “Where Do We Go From Here?” In Critical Issues in
Peace and Conflict Studies, edited by Thomas Maytok, Jessica Senehi, and Sean
Byrne, 397-404. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2011.
Smock, David. Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding. Washington, DC: United States
Institute of Peace Press, 2002.
Stephens, John. “Gender Conflict: Connecting Feminist Theory and Conflict Resolution
Theory and Practice.” In Conflict and Gender, edited by Anita Taylor and Judi
Beinstein Miller, 217-35. New York: NY: Hampton Press, 1994.
Taylor, Anita, and Judi Beinstein Miller. “Introduction: The Necessity of Seeing Gender
21
in Conflict.” In Conflict and Gender, edited by Anita Taylor and Judi Beinstein
Miller, 1-17. New York: NY: Hampton Press, 1994.
Terry, Jennifer. An American Obsession: Science, Medicine and Homosexuality in
Modern Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999.
Thiessen, Chuck. Local Ownership of Peacebuilding in Afghanistan: Shouldering
Responsibility for Sustainable Peace and Development. Lanham, MD: Lexington,
2014.
Tifft, Larry, and Lyn Markham. “Battering Women and Battering Central Americans: A
Peacemaking Synthesis. In Criminology as Peace-Making, edited by Harold
Pepinsky and Richard Quinney, 138-39. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University
Press, 1991.
van Der Merwe, Hugo, and Audrey Chapman. Truth and Reconciliation in South Africa:
Did the TRC Deliver? Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008.
van Tongeren, Paul, Malin Brenk, Marte Hellema, and Juliette Verhoeven, eds. People
Building Peace II: Successful Stories of Civil Society. Boulder, CO: Lynne
Rienner, 2005.
Volkan, Vamik. Bloodlines: From Ethnic Pride to Ethnic Terrorism. Boulder, Co: Lynne
Rienner, 1998.
Warner, Michael. Publics and Counter-Publics. New York, NY: Zone, 2002.
Webel, Charles, and Johan Galtung, eds. Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies.
London, England: Routledge, 2009.
NOTES
22
1
Louis Kriesberg and Bruce Dayton, Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to
Resolution (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002); Jessica Senehi and Sean
Byrne, “Where Do We Go From Here?” in Critical Issues in Peace and Conflict Studies,
ed. Thomas Maytok, Jessica Senehi, and Sean Byrne (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books,
2011), 397-404; Sean Byrne and Jessica Senehi, “Revisiting the CAR Field,” in
Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, ed. Dennis Sandole et al. (London,
England: Routledge, 2009), 525-30; and Charles Webel and Johan Galtung, eds.
Handbook of Peace and Conflict Studies (London, England: Routledge, 2009).
2
Johan Galtung, “Towards a Conflictology: A Quest for Trans-Disciplinarity,” in
Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, ed. Dennis Sandole et al. (London,
England: Routledge, 2009), 511-24.
3
Johan Galtung, Peace by Peaceful Means (Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 1996).
4
Roger MacGinty, No War, No Peace: The Rejuvenation of Stalled Peace Processes and
Peace Accords. (Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008); Roger MacGinty,
International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace (Basingstoke,
England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; and Oliver Richmond, “A Genealogy of Peace and
Conflict Theory,” in Palgrave Advances in Peacebuilding: Critical Developments and
Approaches, ed. Oliver Richmond (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillian, 2010), 14-40.
5
Roger MacGinty and Andrew Williams, Peace and Development (London, England:
Routledge, 2009).
6
Margaret Anderson and Patricia Hill Collins, Race, Class and Gender: An Anthology
(Scarborough, ON: Cengage Learning, 2012); bell hooks, Yearning: Race, Gender, and
Cultural Politics (Boston, MA: South End Press, 1990); and Sean Byrne and Jessica
23
Senehi, Violence: Analysis, Intervention and Prevention (Athens, OH: Ohio University
Press, 2012).
7
8
Galtung, “Towards a Conflictology.”
Robert C. Mizzi, “Let’s Get this Straightened Out: Finding a Place and Presence for
Sexual/Gender Identity-Difference in Peace Education,” Journal of Peace Education 7.2
(2010): 139-56.
9
Teresa de Lauretis, “Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities,” Differences: A
Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 3.2(1991): iii-xviii.
10
Ibid., iv.
11
Ibid.
12
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: An Introduction (Harmondsworth, England:
Penguin, 1978).
13
Jennifer Terry, An American Obsession: Science, Medicine and Homosexuality in
Modern Society (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999).
14
Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Rev. ed.)
(New York, NY: Routledge, 1999).
15
Ibid.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid.
19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid., 33.
24
22
Ibid.
23
Michael Warner, Publics and Counter-Publics (New York, NY: Zone, 2002).
Ibid., 194.
24
25
Gayatri Gopinath, Impossible Desires: Queer Diasporas and South Asian Public
Cultures (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005)
26
Robert C. Mizzi. “Uncovering Rainbow (Dis)connections: An Exploration of Sexual
and Gender Diversity in the Canadian Forces and Implications for Post-conflict
Reconstruction Training,” in Learning Gendered Militarism in Canada: A Lifelong
Pedagogy of Acceptance and Resistance, ed. Nancy Taber (Edmonton, AB: University of
Alberta Press), forthcoming.
27
David Barash and Charles Webel, Peace and Conflict Studies (Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage, 2002).
28
Louis Kriesberg, Stuart Thorson, and Terri Northrup, eds., Intractable Conflicts and
Their Transformation (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1989).
29
Louis Kriesberg and Bruce Dayton, Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to
Resolution (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002).
30
John Burton, Violence Explained: The Sources of Conflict, Violence, and Crime and
Their Prevention (Manchester, England: Manchester University Press, 1997).
31
Ron Fisher, ed. Paving the Way: Contributions of Interactive Conflict Resolution to
Peacemaking (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2005).
32
Herb Kelman, “Group Processes in the Resolution of International Conflicts:
Experiences from the Israeli-Palestinian Case,” The American Psychologist 52.3 (1997):
212-20.
25
33
John Paul Lederach, Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation across Cultures
(Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1995).
34
John Paul Lederach, Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies
(Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press. 1997).
35
Ibid.
36
Ibid., 28.
37
Vamik Volkan, Bloodlines: From Ethnic Pride to Ethnic Terrorism (Boulder, CO:
Lynne Rienner, 1998).
38
Sally Engle Merry, Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International
Law into Local Justice (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006).
39
Margot Hurlbert, ed., Pursuing Justice: An Introduction to Justice Studies (Winnipeg,
MB: Fernwood, 2011).
40
Elise Boulding, Cultures of Peace: The Hidden Side of History (Syracuse, NY:
Syracuse University Press, 2000), 117.
41
Jessica Senehi, “Constructive Storytelling: A Peace Process,” Peace and Conflict
Studies 9.2 (2002): 41-63; and Jessica Senehi, “Storytelling to Transform Conflicts
Constructively,” in Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, ed. Dennis Sandole et
al. (London, England: Routledge, 2009), 199-212.
42
Jessica Senehi, “The Role of Constructive, Transcultural Storytelling in Ethnopolitical
Conflict Transformation in Northern Ireland,” in Regional and Ethnic Conflicts:
Perspectives from the Front Lines, ed. George Irani, Vamik Volkan, and Judy Carter
(New York, NY: Prentice Hall, 2009), 227-37.
26
43
Jessica Senehi, “Constructive Storytelling in Inter-communal Conflicts: Building
Community, Building Peace,” in Reconciliable Differences: Turning Points in
Ethnopolitical Conflict, ed. Sean Byrne et al. (West Hartford, CT: Kumarian, 2000), 96114.
44
Barash and Webel, Peace and Conflict Studies, 519.
45
Chuck Thiessen, Local Ownership of Peacebuilding in Afghanistan: Shouldering
Responsibility for Sustainable Peace and Development (Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2014),
12.
46
Brian Rice, Jill Oakes, and Roderick Riewe, Seeing the World With Aboriginal Eyes
(Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Press, 2005); and Brian Rice, “People of the
Longhouse,” in Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, ed. Dennis Sandole et al.
(London, England: Routledge, 2009), 409-19.
47
MacGinty, International Peacebuilding.
48
Jessica Senehi, “Constructive Storytelling: A Peace Process.”
49
Ho Won Jeong, Peace and Conflict Studies: An Introduction (London, England:
Ashgate, 2000).
50
Ibid.
51
Anita Taylor and Judi Beinstein Miller, “Introduction: The Necessity of Seeing Gender
in Conflict,” in Conflict and Gender, ed. Anita Taylor and Judi Beinstein Miller. (New
York: NY: Hampton Press, 1994), 10.
52
Ibid., 12.
27
53
John Stephens, “Gender Conflict: Connecting Feminist Theory and Conflict Resolution
Theory and Practice,” in Conflict and Gender, ed. Anita Taylor and Judi Beinstein Miller
(New York: NY: Hampton Press, 1994), 225.
54
Ibid., 226.
55
Elise Boulding, Cultures of Peace.
56
Mizzi, “Let’s Get This Straightened Out.”
57
Larry Tifft and Lyn Markham, “Battering Women and Battering Central Americans: A
Peacemaking Synthesis,” in Criminology as Peace-Making, ed. Harold Pepinsky and
Richard Quinney (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1991), 138-39.