Honor and political violence

Abstract

Who participates in political violence? In this study, we investigate the issue at the micro-level, comparing individuals who have used violence in political uprisings with those who have not. We develop our argument from the observation that men are strongly overrepresented in political violence, although most men do not participate. Literature on masculinities emphasizes the role of honor and its links to different forms of violence, such as domestic abuse, criminal violence, and violent attitudes. Building on this literature, we discern two separate but related aspects of honor: honor as male societal privilege and control over female sexuality, that is, patriarchal values, and honor as ideals of masculine toughness, that is, the perceived necessity for men to be fierce and respond to affronts with violence or threats of violence in order to preserve status. We argue that patriarchal values combined with ideals of masculine toughness together constitute honor ideology, which contributes in turn to the explanation of who participates in political violence. We present new and unique individual-level survey data on these issues, collected in Thailand. We find that honor ideology strongly and robustly predicts a higher likelihood of participating in political violence among male political activists. A number of previous studies found a macro-level relationship between gender equality and peacefulness in a society. This study provides evidence for one micro-level mechanism linking gender equality and political violence at the macro level. Based on these results, we conclude that honor ideology endorsement is a driver of violence in political conflicts.

Gendered preferences: How women’s inclusion in society shapes negotiation occurrence in intrastate conflicts

“…This enables me to capture practices that reflect different levels of patriarchal gender relations within and between countries over time. The statistical analysis substantiates my argument, provides cross-national support for micro-level findings that patriarchal values and ideals of masculine toughness drive participation in political violence (Bjarnegård, Brounéus & Melander, 2017), and offers systematic evidence in support of some core claims underpinning the feminist peace theory (Hudson et al, 2012). Following the quantitative analysis, I present the Philippines as a crucial case study to illustrate the argument.…”

“…These conflict dynamics are frequently presented as gender-neutral. However, gender is an integral organizing element of societal and governmental decisionmaking institutions (Chappell, 2010; Bjarnegård, Brounéus & Melander, 2017; Barnes & O’Brien, 2018; Webster, Chen & Beardsley, 2019) thereby shaping perceptions of threat, willingness to use or abstain from violence, and willingness to negotiate. In this article I focus on these overlooked gendered influences arguing that patriarchal gender relations expressed through practices of women’s exclusion shape governments’ preferences, thereby affecting the likelihood of peace talks.…”

“…Over the past two decades a substantial body of research has emerged supporting the link between gender and conflict. Studies show that men who subscribe to patriarchal values of honor and idealize masculine notions of toughness are more likely to participate in political violence (Bjarnegård, Brounéus & Melander, 2017), and that political organizations that have more gender-inclusive ideologies are more likely to employ nonviolent tactics (Asal et al, 2013). States in which gendered inequality is prevalent are more likely to: go to war (Caprioli, 2000); use severe violence (Caprioli & Boyer, 2001); be the first to use violence in interstate disputes (Caprioli, 2003); suffer intrastate conflict (Caprioli, 2005); escalate to high intensity violence and to be less likely to de-escalate violence once it begins (Melander, 2005).…”

Peacekeeping Prevention: Strengthening Efforts to Preempt Conflict-related Sexual Violence

“…195 In this vein, peacekeeping operations must recognize that some threats that women face within conflict and post-conflict settings are different than those threats which target the population at large. For example, men are more likely to be participants in political violence, driven in part by 'honour ideology' 196 ; women are more likely to be targeted through sexual violence, abductions/forced disappearances, and mob violence. 197 In this light, it is important for peacekeeping operations to adapt to the various contexts in which they are deployed to account for such variance.…”

Institutionalized behavior, morality and domination: A Habitus in action model of violence

“…Caprioli, 2000, 2005; Melander, 2005a, 2005b) but also individual variation (cf. Bjarnegård et al., 2017; Velitchkova, 2015) and within‐individual variation (cf. Luft, 2015) in violence participation.…”