Dissertation thoughts
12 Jul 2005 02:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kangeikoSo, I had a meeting with my dissertation supervisor today.
The way it's looking is a major restructuring of the whole thing in order to make it doable, 'cause it was much too broad previously.
Basically, I'm going to examine the impact of gender mainstreaming initiatives on the conceptualization of victim-hood within NGOs and multilateral front-line organizations, with a geographical focus on Central Africa and the Horn of Africa. This is going to involve unpacking the conceptualization of victim-hood prior to the gender mainstreaming programmes (going no father back than 1985, I’d say; much more likely that I’ll stick to the Beijing Conference as a starting point of the launch of mainstreaming programmes) – so, a focus on warfare, post-conflict theory, women in war etc etc.
Then, building on that, a look at the programmes themselves and exactly what they consist of. This will probably be a mix of unpacking training materials and also interviewing NGO reps and front-line workers about the impact of the initiatives, what their new thoughts are on the issues involved, etc.
(NB: this is a considerable change from before, as previously I was worried about having to use witness testimonies, and was even more worried that even if I were to secure them, they’d end up irrelevant, depending on the manner in which I narrowed my focus. Seeing as I’m focusing on the workers and the immediate impact of training etc, I’m quite glad that this has been resolved before I went through all the trouble of accessing databases of witness testimonies, especially as they’re now not the primary focus – although, depending on how things develop, they may become more relevant later.)
My hypothesis is that many training programmes are primarily means-orientated – the “ticky box” approach – rather than aims-orientated. The emphasis is on observing set rules and behaviours and fulfilling X,Y and Z on a list outlining M.O., which is resulting in distortions in the conceptualization of victim-hood, fetishing abuse rather than focusing on ameliorating the situation. I’d also argue that the media plays a major role here (maybe explore how it interferes / complements / distorts / whatever gender mainstreaming initiatives?).
Of course, it’s just a hypothesis. Hence, the question is more “what impact has gender mainstreaming had on ngos and front-line workers in the horn of Africa and central Africa?”, rather than “show how, with diagrams and ranting, gender mainstreaming has gone horribly wrong when it comes to rapid response and front-line workers.” ‘cause that would suck.
I’m still working this out in my head, obviously, but I think that I have a better grasp of it now. It involves oodles of work, but the write up is considerably smaller, especially with a narrower geographical and temporal focus than all conflict and media ever.
The way it's looking is a major restructuring of the whole thing in order to make it doable, 'cause it was much too broad previously.
Basically, I'm going to examine the impact of gender mainstreaming initiatives on the conceptualization of victim-hood within NGOs and multilateral front-line organizations, with a geographical focus on Central Africa and the Horn of Africa. This is going to involve unpacking the conceptualization of victim-hood prior to the gender mainstreaming programmes (going no father back than 1985, I’d say; much more likely that I’ll stick to the Beijing Conference as a starting point of the launch of mainstreaming programmes) – so, a focus on warfare, post-conflict theory, women in war etc etc.
Then, building on that, a look at the programmes themselves and exactly what they consist of. This will probably be a mix of unpacking training materials and also interviewing NGO reps and front-line workers about the impact of the initiatives, what their new thoughts are on the issues involved, etc.
(NB: this is a considerable change from before, as previously I was worried about having to use witness testimonies, and was even more worried that even if I were to secure them, they’d end up irrelevant, depending on the manner in which I narrowed my focus. Seeing as I’m focusing on the workers and the immediate impact of training etc, I’m quite glad that this has been resolved before I went through all the trouble of accessing databases of witness testimonies, especially as they’re now not the primary focus – although, depending on how things develop, they may become more relevant later.)
My hypothesis is that many training programmes are primarily means-orientated – the “ticky box” approach – rather than aims-orientated. The emphasis is on observing set rules and behaviours and fulfilling X,Y and Z on a list outlining M.O., which is resulting in distortions in the conceptualization of victim-hood, fetishing abuse rather than focusing on ameliorating the situation. I’d also argue that the media plays a major role here (maybe explore how it interferes / complements / distorts / whatever gender mainstreaming initiatives?).
Of course, it’s just a hypothesis. Hence, the question is more “what impact has gender mainstreaming had on ngos and front-line workers in the horn of Africa and central Africa?”, rather than “show how, with diagrams and ranting, gender mainstreaming has gone horribly wrong when it comes to rapid response and front-line workers.” ‘cause that would suck.
I’m still working this out in my head, obviously, but I think that I have a better grasp of it now. It involves oodles of work, but the write up is considerably smaller, especially with a narrower geographical and temporal focus than all conflict and media ever.