Abstract

This paper examines the contribution of feminist and poststructuralist perspectives to the field of conflict research and focuses on the works of Cynthia Enloe and David Campbell as representatives of these two approaches. Although their epistemological positions are diametrically opposed (Enloe's is positivist, Campbell's post-positivist), there are remarkable similarities in their method: both question the definitions and categories of traditional conflict research and highlight their blind spots and political biases by pointing to empirical examples. These similarities can be explained through their common commitment to critical theory. In the end, the epistemological differences manifest themselves primarily in the style of writing and making claims to represent reality. The focus on women and the relationship between gender conceptions and violence on the one hand and on representations and the constitution of identity on the other hand proves to be a highly productive approach to the field of security and conflict studies.