Traumatic masculinities: the gendered geographies of Georgian IDPs from Abkhazia

Over 200,000 people became internally displaced after several violent conflicts in the early 1990s in Georgia. For many internally displaced persons (IDPs), gender relations have been transformed significantly. This translates to many women taking on the role of breadwinner for their family, which often is accompanied by the process of demasculinization for men. In this article, we examine the construction of masculinities and analyze the gendered processes of displacement and living in post-displacement for Georgian IDPs from Abkhazia. We identify the formation of ‘traumatic masculinities’ as a result of the threats to, though not usurpation of, hegemonic masculinities. Drawing on interviews, we highlight how IDPs conceptualize gender norms and masculinities in Georgia. Despite the disruptions that displacement has brought about, with the subsequent challenges to IDPs' ideal masculine roles, the discourses of hegemonic masculinities still predominate amongst IDPs. We further illustrate this point by identifying two separate gendered discourses of legitimization that attempt to reconcile hegemonic masculinities with the current contexts and circumstances that IDPs face. These new traumatic masculinities do coexist with hegemonic masculinities, although the latter are reformed and redefined as a result of the new contexts and new places within which they are performed.     

Recent Research on “Incumbency Advantage” in House Elections: Part II

Research before 1978 on elections for U.S. Representative persistently raised the question of just what factors yield the advantage incumbents enjoy (Beth, 1982; Goldenberg and Traugott, 1980: 62; Fiorina, 1982: 35-38; Hinckley, 1980a: 645-646). To illuminate this question, the 1978 national election survey by Michigan's Center for Political Studies, taking the congressional district as the primary sampling unit, included extensive questions on voter contact with awareness of, and evaluation of, House candidates (Mann and Wolfinger, 1980: 133). A side effect of this design was uneven coverage of Senate races; it also happened that incumbents ran more strongly in sampled races than overall, and among respondents than in the electorate (Mann and Wolfinger: 133-136; Jacobson, 1981a: 240-242; 1981b: 185; Fiorina, 1982: 42). This essay surveys recent articles on the subject, especially those using this data.     

Truth and reconciliation? The experience of Truth Commissions1

Do truth commissions achieve truth? Do they achieve reconciliation? This article will consider these two questions in turn. I argue that truth commissions have failed to discern and report accurate and complete records of past atrocities, but they are socially and politically purposive. To reach this conclusion requires examining some theoretical concerns about the nature of truth and consideration of the accuracy and completeness of commissions’ reports. I argue that truth commissions do not achieve reconciliation, but they can catalyse it. I develop this argument through examining meanings of reconciliation, its (contested) relationship with truth and issues that complicate and advance its achievement. In this article I differentiate between truth as a product—a commission's report—and truth seeking as a process. I examine the contribution of both product and process to the achievement of truth and reconciliation.