This study contends for a social-psychological lens to understand why some feminist movements resort to violence. Literature from feminist peace studies has argued that women are most likely to be...Show moreThis study contends for a social-psychological lens to understand why some feminist movements resort to violence. Literature from feminist peace studies has argued that women are most likely to be peaceful, and scholarship in criminology suggests women are more likely to choose nonviolent coping behaviors. A large body of social movement literature has argued for rationalist approach to understanding the choice to utilize violence vis-a-vis nonviolence as a method of resistance. However, literature within the field of political science has not entirely explored underlying individual-level behaviors to explain why women within a feminist movement utilize violence as a method of resistance. Thus, introducing the research question: Why do some feminist movements resort to violence? Cases of feminist movements increasingly utilizing violence is puzzling because it contradicts arguments made by rationalist studies and feminist peace studies. I apply Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory and argue that some feminist movements resort to violence because of a highly negative perception of the lack of governmental support to address a grievance in gender inequality, which generates negative emotions of anger and frustration that then leads to the likelihood of utilizing violent methods of resistance. I evaluate the argument using qualitative research in the single-case study of the Ni Una Menos (NUM) Movement in México. This study process traces data from semi-structured online interviews to analyze the causal mechanism of negative emotions through language utilized by activists of NUM to answer the research question.Show less
I appeal to analytic functionalism and the ability hypothesis to address the problems posed by inversions arguments. I argue that it is reasonable to reject inversion arguments if we accept a...Show moreI appeal to analytic functionalism and the ability hypothesis to address the problems posed by inversions arguments. I argue that it is reasonable to reject inversion arguments if we accept a combination of analytic functionalism and the ability hypothesis, and that alternative theories are fundamentally more problematic.Show less
