Peacekeepers or Perpetrators? An analysis of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) by UN personnel in the Democratic Republic of Congo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peacekeepers or Perpetrators? An analysis of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) by UN personnel in the Democratic Republic of Congo Natalie GilliardSome individuals in the western world may find the large scale sexual violence committed against women in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) shocking.They may turn a sympathetic ear to the occasional news report detailing the realities of mass rape, genital mutilation and forced prostitution which face Congo women on a daily basis (Meger 2010; 119-20).However, far too often the horrors over "there" in the third world are promptly forgotten and the conscience assuaged by affirming oneself that responsibility is out of "our" jurisdiction.Amidst this environment UN presence is supposed to function as a beacon of peace and hope.However, amongst UN peacekeepers sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) of civilians, most frequently women and girls, in the Congo has proliferated (Murphy, 2006: 532).These specific instances of sexual abuse are part of the larger culture of sexualized violence and exploitation in the Congo.They are an epidemic today, no less real than the spread of HIV/AIDS or famine.More specifically, academics should be concerned with analyzing how constructs of gender enforce and create such behaviours.The question this essay addresses is to what extent feminist theory explains SEA of females in post-conflict DRC by UN personal whom are deployed for the United Nations Organization Mission in Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC).Not only are the incidents of SEA important but the ramifications of these actions; spread of HIV/AIDS, "peacekeeping babies," shame, and the further entrenchment of gender inequalities into society must also be considered (Murphy, 2006: 534-5;Higate, 2007; 100).This essay argues that feminist theory is particularly illuminating in explaining how conceptualizations of gender and resulting unequal power structures cause SEA and shape the reaction of international actors such as the UN.The discourse this essay engages in is normative, which means that it does not detach itself from values to attempt to achieve objectivity rather its depth is enriched by them (Carver et al. 2003:289).The essay will be broken down into seven major sections and, when necessary, subsections that will analyze how corresponding aspects of feminist theory highlight aspects of the case study.The first section considers gender as the unit of analysis and discusses how social conceptions of both masculinity and femininity as a "natural" fosterer of inequality and exploitation.The second section argues that international relations are conflictive and designed to exclude women.The next section discusses how patriarchy characterizes the international system and the impacts this has on the rights of women living in the DRC.The fourth section Abstract Peacekeepers or Perpetrators examines the complex international problem of Sexual Abuse and Exploitation (SEA) committed by UN peacekeepers in the conflict-ravaged area of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).In particular, this paper uses feminist theory to break the problem down into its smaller components, including looking at the nature of the UN mission and the patriarchal structure of the international system.It uses gender as an analytical tool in order to view SEA as not simply a security issue but as a nuanced phenomenon arising from the intersection of gender, culture and conflict.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".