IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v115y2021i2p347-359_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women Thinkers and the Canon of International Thought: Recovery, Rejection, and Reconstitution

Author

Listed:
  • HUTCHINGS, KIMBERLY
  • OWENS, PATRICIA

Abstract

Canons of intellectual “greats” anchor the history and scope of academic disciplines. Within international relations (IR), such a canon emerged in the mid-twentieth century and is almost entirely male. Why are women thinkers absent from IR’s canon? We show that it is not due to a lack of international thought, or that this thought fell outside established IR theories. Rather it is due to the gendered and racialized selection and reception of work that is deemed to be canonical. In contrast, we show what can be gained by reclaiming women’s international thought through analyses of three intellectuals whose work was authoritative and influential in its own time or today. Our findings question several of the basic premises underpinning IR’s existing canon and suggest the need for a new research agenda on women international thinkers as part of a fundamental rethinking of the history and scope of the discipline.

Suggested Citation

  • Hutchings, Kimberly & Owens, Patricia, 2021. "Women Thinkers and the Canon of International Thought: Recovery, Rejection, and Reconstitution," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 347-359, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:115:y:2021:i:2:p:347-359_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055420000969/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:115:y:2021:i:2:p:347-359_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.