Another Look at the Gendered Constitution of the Laws of War

Abstract

Abstract This article argues that the gendered constitution of the regulation of war runs even deeper than typically understood. Instead of merely the laws of war’s internal categories being gendered, it is the entire apparatus of war’s regulation as expressed in various versions of its denomination that manifests different shades of gender. Specifically, the article shows how the laws of war emerged as the hegemonic masculine synthesis between different conceptions of manhood, from the most unconstrained to the most chivalrous. As that compromise has been challenged by more ‘feminine’ approaches, this has triggered repeated reassertions of the regulation of war’s inherently masculine character. The article speculates about the staying power of the masculine script of war through law at the intersection of misogyny, racism and the politics of legal expertise. It concludes by reflecting on what it might mean to transcend the implicit heteronormativity of the regulation of war by queering its categories.