Of exceptions and continuities: theory and methodology in research on conflict-related sexual violence
Of exceptions and continuities: theory and methodology in research on conflict-related sexual violence
复制标题
例外与连续性：冲突相关性暴力研究的理论与方法
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Boesten
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Boesten
摘要针对性暴力研究中出现的定性和定量方法的争论，本文探讨了两种方法之间明显的不安，并询问冲突中性暴力方面的经验数据如何为政策提供信息并呼吁正义。我认为，在与冲突有关的性暴力研究的定量转向饲料到其例外，往往离婚这种暴力从更多的背景下的性别分析，或强调基于性别的暴力的连续性的观点。虽然在某些情况下，例外化是必不可少的，例如为了追究刑事责任，但为了了解普遍性，我们需要定量和定性分析，以及比较和背景数据，使我们能够看到连续性。对性别的分析，被理解为“社会关系的构成要素”（斯科特，J.W. 1986.“性别：一个有用的历史分析范畴。《美国历史评论》91（5）：1053-1075）是更好地理解性暴力和战争的核心。
ABSTRACT In response to an emerging debate around qualitative and quantitative methods in sexual violence research, in this paper I explore the apparent unease between the two methodological approaches, and ask how empirical data with regard to sexual violence in conflict informs policy and calls for justice. I argue that the quantitative turn in conflict-related sexual violence research feeds into its exceptionalization and tends to divorce such violence from more contextualized gender analyses, or perspectives that emphasize continuums of gender-based violence. While in some cases exceptionalization is essential, such as for the purpose of criminal accountability, for the purposes of understanding prevalence we need quantitative and qualitative analysis, and comparative as well as contextual data that will allow us to see the continuities as well. The analysis of gender, understood as a “constitutive element of social relations” (Scott, J. W. 1986. “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis.” The American Historical Review 91 (5): 1053–1075), is central to such a quest of better understanding both sexual violence and war.