IGS Project Series 7

IGS Project Series 7

女性、宗教、暴力：国際的視点からの再考

国際シンポジウム

女性、宗教、暴力：国際的視点からの再考

International Symposium

Women, Religion and Violence in International Perspective〒112-8610 東京都文京区大塚 2-1-1
お茶の水女子大学 ジェンダー研究所
Institute for Gender Studies, Ochanomizu University
2-1-1 Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-8610 Japan
TEL: 03-5978-5846 FAX: 03-5978-5845
igsoffice@cc.ocha.ac.jp
http://www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp

Institute for Gender Studies
Research Organization for the Promotion of Global Women’s Leadership
Ochanomizu University

IGS Project Series 7ᅜ㝿ࢩ࣏ࣥࢪ࣒࢘

ዪᛶࠊ᐀ᩍࠊᭀຊ㸸ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ࠿ࡽࡢ෌⪃

International Symposium

Women, Religion and Violence in International Perspective

Institute for Gender Studies
Research Organization for the Promotion of Global Women’s Leadership
Ochanomizu University

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌㻌㻌䇷㻌 ┠㻌 ḟ㻌 䇷㻌㻌㻌ᐇ᪋ᴫせሗ࿌㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻟㻌㻌䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛾グ㘓㻌㊃᪨ㄝ᫂㻌 㻵㼚㼠㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸㻌 㻱㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㻮㼍㼒㼒㼑㼘㼘㼕㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻢㻌

ᇶㄪㅮ₇㻌䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁㻌 㻭㼠㼞㼑㼥㼑㼑㻌㻿㼑㼚㻌ዪᛶ䛸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺㐠ື䠖䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䛸⣮த䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾᪂䛧䛔どⅬ䜢᥈䜛㻌㻳㼑㼚㼐㼑㼞㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻾㼍㼐㼕㼏㼍㼘㻌㻹㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻦㻌㻱㼤㼜㼘㼛㼞㼕㼚㼓㻌㻺㼑㼣㻌㻼㼑㼞㼟㼜㼑㼏㼠㼕㼢㼑㼟㻌㼛㼚㻌㻳㼑㼚㼐㼑㼞㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼒㼘㼕㼏㼠㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻥㻌䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖䛻䜘䜛䝁䝯䞁䝖㻌䝁䝯䞁䝖䠍䠖㻌 ᯇᑿ⍞✑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼒㻚㻌㻭㼠㼞㼑㼥㼑㼑㻌㻿㼑㼚 䛾㆟ㄽ䜢ཷ䛡䛶㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻝㻣㻌䝁䝯䞁䝖䠎䠖㻌 ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ㻌᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻰㼂 䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻞㻝㻌㉁␲ᛂ⟅㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻞㻡㻌䛂㻵㻳㻿 ㏻ಙ䛃ᥖ㍕㛤ദሗ࿌㻌㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌㻟㻞㻌㻌

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌㻌ᐇ᪋ᴫせሗ࿌㻌㻌
2016 ᖺ 10 ᭶ 19 ᪥䚸ᅜ㝿䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛂ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃䠄Women, Religion
and Violence in International Perspective䠅䛃䛜㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯䚹ᮏ䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛿䚸䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸Ặ䠄ᮏᏛ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䠋䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅䛜௻⏬䛧䚸ሗ࿌⪅䛻䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁Ặ䠄䝁䝨䞁䝝䞊䝀䞁኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅䜢㏄䛘䚸䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖䛸䛧䛶ᯇᑿ⍞✑䠄ᅜ❧Ẹ᪘Ꮫ༤≀㤋෸ᩍᤵ䠅䚸ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ䠄᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄PD䠅䠋኱ጔዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䠅䛾୧Ặ䛜Ⓩቭ䛧䛯䚹⣙ 50 ྡ䛾ཧຍ⪅䜢ᚓ䛶䚸༑ศ䛻᫬㛫䜢䛸䛳䛶䛾㉁␲ᛂ⟅䞉ウㄽ䜒඘ᐇ䛧䛯䜒䛾䛸䛺䛳䛯䚹ᮏ௻⏬䛿䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䚸䝉䞁୧Ặ䛻䜘䜚㐍䜑䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛Ꮫ㝿ⓗ䛛䛴ᅜ㝿ⓗ䛺◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸ᵝ䚻䛺ศ㔝䛾◊✲⪅䛛䜙䛾䝣䜱䞊䝗䝞䝑䜽䜢ᚓ䜛䛣䛸䜢┠ⓗ䛾䜂䛸䛴䛸䛧䛶௻⏬䛥䜜䛯䚹䝔䞊䝬䛿䛂ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䛃䛷䛒䜛䛜䚸᪤Ꮡ䛾◊✲䛸䛿୍⥺䜢⏬䛧䚸⿕ᐖ⪅䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶ䛻↔Ⅼ䜢ᙜ䛶䛶䛔䜛䚹ዪᛶ䛜Ṋჾ䜢ᡭ䛻䛧䛯䜚䚸Ṋຊ⤌⧊䜈䛾ຍධ䜔ᨭ᥼䚸ᭀຊ䜢ᡭẁ䛸䛧䛯♫఍㐠ື䜈䛾ཧຍ䜢✚ᴟⓗ䛻䛩䜛♫఍⫼ᬒ䜔䚸ዪᛶゎᨺ㐠ື䜔䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮ᛮ᝿䛸䛾㛵䜟䜚䛺䛹ከゅⓗ䛻஦㇟䜢ぢ䛴䜑䛶䛔䜛䚹䛣䜜䜎䛷䛾⌮ㄽᯟ⤌䜏䛻䜘䜛◊✲⪅どⅬ䛾ศᯒᡭἲ䛻␲ၥ䜢ᢞ䛢䛛䛡䚸ᕷ஭䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾⪃䛘᪉䛻╔┠䛩䜛ඛ㐍ⓗ䛺ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛷䛒䜛䚹௒ᅇ䛾௻⏬䛿䚸◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾ᴫせ䜢♧䛩䛻䛸䛹䜎䜛㒊ศ䛜䛒䛳䛯䛜䚸௒ᚋ䛾◊✲ᒎ㛤䜢ᚅ䛱䚸෌ᗘ䚸ᮏᏛ䛻䛚䛔䛶ᡂᯝⓎ⾲䛾ᶵ఍䜢ᣢ䛴䛣䛸䛜ᮇᚅ䛥䜜䜛䚹

㻌

㻌

3

ࣰࢬ֕གྷๅࠄ

䛆䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮せ᪨䛇㻌㻌ᭀຊⓗ䛺ᨻ἞ᅋయ䜈䛾ዪᛶ䛾ཧຍ䛾ቑຍ䛿䚸୍⯡ᕷẸ䛾䜏䛺䜙䛪䚸ୡ⏺ྛᆅ䛾◊✲⪅䜔άືᐙ䚸ᨻ἞ᐙ䚸᐀ᩍᐙ䜙䛻䛸䛳䛶䜒㔜せ䛺㛵ᚰ஦䛸䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹እᅜேᡓ㜚ဨ䚸⮬⇿䝔䝻䚸཯ᨻᗓṊ⿦㞟ᅋ䛾රኈ䜔ᨭ᥼⪅䚸ᭀຊⓗ䛺ᨻ἞䝥䝻䝟䜺䞁䝎䛾ၐ㐨⪅䛸䛔䛳䛯ᙧ䛷䛾䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾㜚த䜈䛾✚ᴟⓗ䛺㛵୚䛿䚸ᚑ᮶䛾䚸ᡓத䜔ᭀຊ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶീ䜢そ䛩䜒䛾䛷䜒䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹ᮏ䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛷䛿䚸ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䚸䛭䛧䛶䚸⣮த䛸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䛾◊✲䛾䜰䝥䝻䞊䝏䜔᪉ἲㄽ䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸◊✲⪅䚸኱Ꮫ㝔⏕䚸୍⯡ཧຍ⪅䜢஺䛘䚸ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙㆟ㄽ䜢῝䜑䜎䛩䚹㻌㻌㻌㻌䛆᪥᫬䛇㻌 2016 ᖺ 10 ᭶ 19 ᪥䠄Ỉ䠅18:30䡚20:30㻌
䛆఍ሙ䛇㻌 䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ㻌 ඹ㏻ㅮ⩏Ჷ 2 ྕ㤋 102 ྕᐊ㻌䛆䝁䞊䝕䜱䝛䞊䝍䞊㻛ྖ఍䛇㻌 㻌䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䠄ᮏᏛ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䠋䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅㻌䛆䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛇㻌
䠷㛤఍䛾㎡䠹㻌 ▼஭䜽䞁䝒ᫀᏊ䠄ᮏᏛᇶᖿ◊✲㝔ᩍᤵ䠋䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤᡤ㛗䠅㻌䠷㊃᪨ㄝ᫂䠹㻌 䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸㻔ᮏᏛ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ㻛䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ㻕㻌䠷ᇶㄪㅮ₇䠹㻌 䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁䠄䝁䝨䞁䝝䞊䝀䞁኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅ዪᛶ䛸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺㐠ື䠖䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䛸⣮த䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾᪂䛧䛔どⅬ䜢ᚓ䜛
Women and Radical Movements: Exploring New Perspectives on Gender and Conflict䠷䝁䝯䞁䝖䠹㻌 䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖㻌 ᯇᑿ⍞✑䠄ᅜ❧Ẹ᪘Ꮫ༤≀㤋෸ᩍᤵ䠅

Prof. Atreyee Sen 䛾㆟ㄽ䜢ཷ䛡䛶䠖䝁䝯䞁䝖䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖㻌 ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ䠄᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ㻔㻼㻰㻕㻛኱ጔዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䠅㻌᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛡䜛 DV 䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅䠷ウㄽ䠹㻌 ྖ఍䠖䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸㻌䛆୺ദ䛇㻌 䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ㻌䛆ཧຍ⪅ᩘ䛇㻌 47 ྡ䛆㛤ദሗ࿌ᥖ㍕䛇㻌 䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ䜴䜵䝤䝃䜲䝖 IGS ㏻ಙ䛺䛹㻌
㻌

4

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

䛆Ⓩቭ⪅⤂௓䛇㻌

Atreyee Sen䠄䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁䠅㻌 䝁䝨䞁䝝䞊䝀䞁኱Ꮫே㢮Ꮫ㒊෸ᩍᤵ◊✲ศ㔝䛿༡䜰䝆䜰㒔ᕷ㒊䛾ᨻ἞ே㢮Ꮫ䚹䝻䞁䝗䞁኱Ꮫ䜰䝆䜰䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹◊✲Ꮫ㝔♫఍ே㢮Ꮫ༤ኈ䠄2003 ᖺ䠅䚹2004䡚2015 ᖺ䚸䝃䝉䝑䜽䝇኱Ꮫ䛸䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ䛻䛶◊✲䞉ᩍ⫱⫋䚹㒔ᕷ✵㛫䛻䛚䛔䛶ᭀຊⓗ䛺䝬䜲䜽䝻䞉䜹䝹䝏䝱䞊䜢స䜚ฟ䛩㌷஦ⓗ䛺ᨻ἞㐠ື䛻↔Ⅼ䜢ᙜ䛶䛯◊✲䜢⥆䛡䛶䛔䜛䚹ྑ⩼㐠ື䚸䝁䝭䝳䝙䝔䜱ෆ⣮த䚸᢬ᢠ㐠ື䚸䝀䝸䝷άື䠄䝮䞁䝞䜲䚸䝝䜲䝕䝷䝞䞊䝗䚸䜹䝹䜹䝑䝍䚸䝎䝷䝮䝃䝷䠅䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾Ꮫ㝿ⓗ◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛚䜚䚸䛭䜜䜙䛾㐠ື䛾䝇䝷䝮䜔㞴Ẹᒃ␃ᆅ䚸ฮົᡤෆ䛷䛾ᙳ㡪䛻䛴䛔䛶ㄪᰝ䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹௦⾲ⓗⴭస䛿䚸Shiv Sena Women: Violence and Communalism in a Bombay Slum (2007)䚸ඹ⦅ⴭ(with Dr David Pratten) of Global Vigilantes: New Perspectives on Justice and Violence(2008)䚹

ᯇᑿ㻌㻌 ⍞✑䠄䜎䛴䛚䞉䜏䛪䜋䠅㻌 ᅜ❧Ẹ᪘Ꮫ༤≀㤋෸ᩍᤵே㢮Ꮫ⪅䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿་⒪ே㢮Ꮫ䛸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲䚹䜲䞁䝗䛾䝸䝥䝻䝎䜽䝔䜱䝤䞉䝦䝹䝇䛸⏕Ṫ་⒪ᢏ⾡䛻㛵䛩䜛ከ䛟䛾ㄽᩥ䚸ⴭ᭩䜢Ⓨ⾲䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹௦⾲ⓗⴭ᭩䛿䚸䛄䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䛸䝸䝥䝻䝎䜽䝅䝵䞁䛾ே㢮Ꮫ䠖䜲䞁䝗㎰ᮧ♫఍䛻䛚䛡䜛୙ዷ䜢⏕䛝䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛅䠄2013 ᖺ䚸᫛࿴ᇽ䠅䚸䛄௦⌮ฟ⏘䛾ᩥ໬ㄽ䛅䠄2013 ᖺ䚸㢼㡪♫䠅䚹ᑠᕝ㻌㻌 ┿⌮Ꮚ䠄䛚䛜䜟䞉䜎䜚䛣䠅㻌 ᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄PD䠅/኱ጔዪᏊ኱Ꮫ
䜹䝹䝣䜷䝹䝙䜰኱Ꮫ䝻䝃䞁䝊䝹䝇ᰯ䠄UCLA䠅⤒῭Ꮫ㒊༞ᴗ䚹䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔ே㛫ᩥ໬๰ᡂ⛉Ꮫ◊✲⛉༤ኈᚋᮇㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹༤ኈ䠄♫఍⛉Ꮫ䠅䚹䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䝸䞊䝎䞊䝅䝑䝥㣴ᡂᩍ⫱◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ㅮᖌ䠄◊✲ᶵ㛵◊✲ဨ䠅䚸䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫᇶᖿ◊✲㝔䝸䝃䞊䝏䝣䜵䝻䞊䜢⤒䛶䚸⌧ᅾ䚸᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄PD䠅䚹⚄ዉᕝ኱Ꮫ䞉ᩥிᏛ㝔኱Ꮫ䜋䛛㠀ᖖ໅ㅮᖌ䚹ᑓ㛛㡿ᇦ䛿䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲䚸♫఍Ꮫ䚹2015 ᖺ➨ 11 ᅇᖹሯ䜙䛔
䛶䛖㈹ዡບ㈹ཷ㈹䚹ⴭ᭩䛻䚸䛄䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䛸Ẹ㛫䝅䜵䝹䝍䞊䠖⿕ᐖᙜ஦⪅ᨭ᥼䛾ᵓ⠏䛸ᒎ㛤䛅䠄ୡ⧊᭩ᡣ䚸2015 ᖺ䠅䜋䛛䚹

Erica Baffelli䠄䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䠅㻌䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ᪥ᮏᏛ෸ᩍᤵ
༤ኈྕྲྀᚓᚋ䚸᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍እᅜே≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄ἲᨻ኱Ꮫ䠅䚸䜸䝍䝂኱Ꮫ䠄䝙䝳䞊䝆䞊䝷䞁䝗䠅෸ᩍᤵ䜢Ṕ௵䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿⌧௦᪥ᮏ䛾᐀ᩍ䛷䛒䜚䚸1970 ᖺ௦௨㝆䛻๰タ䛥䜜䛯᪂⯆᐀ᩍ䛻↔Ⅼ䜢ᙜ䛶䛯◊✲䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹≉䛻䚸1980䡚90 ᖺ௦䛾䝯䝕䜱䜰䛸᪂⯆᐀ᩍ䛾┦஫స⏝䚸᐀ᩍᣦᑟ⪅䚸᐀ᩍ㐠ື䛾⏕ᡂ䛸⾶㏥䚸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺᐀ᩍ㐠ື䛻䛚䛡䜛ዪᛶ䛾ᙺ๭䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲ᐇ⦼䜢ᣢ䛴䚹㏆ᖺ䛾௦⾲ⓗⴭస䛿䚸Media and New Religions in Japan(2016); (with Ian Reader) Aftermath: the Impact and Ramifications of the Aum Affair. Special
Issue of the Japanese Journal of Religious Studies (2012); (with Ian Reader and Birgit
Staemmler) Japanese Religions on the Internet: innovation, Representation and Authority(2011) 䚹

5࢚࣭ࣜ࢝ࣂࢵࣇ࢙ࢵࣜ
㊃᪨ㄝ᫂

㊃᪨ㄝ᫂
Introduction䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䠄䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ䞉≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䠋䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅

Erica Baffelli(Ochanomizu University / The University of Manchester)
A couple of years ago, Atreyee and I were working at the same university, Manchester, and we
started a conversation over coffee. Atreyee was teaching a new course on Women Warriors inContemporary Religious Conflict, and she asked me to give a guest lecture. From that conversation
we started talking about a research network to look at religion, woman, and violence from acomparative perspective.
In particular, we are interested in looking at women who participate in radical religious andpolitical movements. Comparatively little academic attention has been paid to these women, despite
the increasing number of recent publications and research projects addressing the issue of religion
and violence. Women’s involvement in terrorism (for example as suicide bombers) is still discussed
as “exceptional” and “spectacular”, as actions that are “out of the ordinary”. We think that theseapproaches essentialize women’s wartime character: as nurturing, vulnerable and non-violent, andtheir reductionism often precludes the possibility of analyzing women’s roles as instigators of
brutalities.
Scholars from a range of disciplines have begun to challenge these assumptions, and we believethat through sharing methodologies and areas of study we will be able to develop nuanced notionsof female militarism and gender and conflict. Our conversation over that coffee two years ago led toa small workshop organized in the University of Manchester in December last year and a grant
proposal, on which we have been working together and is now under review for the Arts andHumanities Research Council in the UK.
In particular, in our research and projects, we areinterested in looking at three aspects. The one aspect isrole and motivation. What are women’s motivations forjoining violent communities, and what are their ascribedand chosen roles? Why are women from both
economically marginalized and affluent areas joining thismovement? Do women use this role to gain visibility,
agency and access to resources? This is one of our

6

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃questions. Then, the next aspect is representation. How are the images of women who perpetrated
violence shaped in policy documents, media discourse and other channels of dissemination, andhow does it impact the public opinion? At the same time, how do these women share information
with each other in different contexts? The final aspect is the memory. How are acts of violence
involving women participation re-elaborated and re-narrated in a post conflict context?
Regarding my research, I have been working on new religious movements for many years.
Therefore, I am particularly interested in looking at the role played by women in new religious
movements that turned into violence and how these women narrate their experiences. In particular, I
have been looking at the role played by female members in conceptualizing violence in Aum
6KLQULN\ǀ in particular during the early stage of development of the movement, and not only
violence toward external but also in the form of extreme ascetics practices.
Of particular interest is the role of some high ranked members as role models for other female
and male members as well. Also after the 1995 sarin gas attack members were faced with theviolence committed by the group. I’m particularlyinterested in investigating how violence is re-elaborated
through ex-members’ personal narratives and in particularthrough narratives related to their bodies.
Many academic study and non-academic works have
EHHQ SXEOLVKHG RQ $XP 6KLQULN\ǀ ERWK LQ -DSDQHVH DQGother languages. However, the role of women in the grouphas been overlooked. In the media, women who aremembers of Aum are often portrayed through three main
tropes, as “terrorist beauty”, Asahara’s lovers, orirresponsible mothers.
However, three out of five top ranked disciples were
women and, especially in the early stage of formation of
the movement, their role cannot be reduced to theabove-mentioned tropes. An interesting case is Ishii
Hisako who is considered Asahara’s first disciple. She isportrayed in members’ account as an example of devotion
to the leader and a model of ascetic training. In particular,
she was seen by members as someone capable ofperforming extreme ascetic practices, such as theunderground Samadhi meditation. She also gave lectures
and wrote on the group’s publications about her spiritualexperiences, contributing to create a common narrative
about “spiritual experiences” in the group.
Some members considered her charismatic and she was7࢚࣭ࣜ࢝ࣂࢵࣇ࢙ࢵࣜ
㊃᪨ㄝ᫂

able to perform the initiation ritual; she was also reported to have the ability to make prophecies.
This seems to indicate that her role was more than just being a support to the male leadership.
Furthermore, some recent publications by ex-members and some interviews I am currently
conducting seem to suggest that the conceptualization and justification of violence in the group wasa more complex process than often portrayed and more research is needed to understand whether
female members played a specific role in this process.
The idea of the workshop tonight is to continue our discussion about these issues by also
involving speakers working on violence and gender-related issues thereby broadening up the field
as well.

8

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌ᇶㄪㅮ₇ዪᛶ䛸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺㐠ື䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䛸⣮த䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾᪂䛧䛔どⅬ䜢᥈䜛

Gender and Radical Movement
Exploring New Perspectives on Gender and Conflict䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁䠄䝁䝨䞁䝝䞊䝀䞁኱Ꮫ෸ᩍᤵ䠅
Atreyee Sen (University of Copenhagen)I am interested in women and especially right wing
activism. I am going to try and give you an overview of
the current opinion, scholarship, and how it remains much
divided, about the mobilization of women into radical
religious movements across the world. What Erica and I
are trying to suggest is that we are at a very criticaljuncture in the history of the world where large scaleparticipation of women in religious armies, radical
movements, and civil war is being noted by human rights
activists and scholars all over the world. And, whether this actually gives us new perspectives ongender and conflict, which is because, historically, gender studies emerge from woman
victimologies. It was about looking at women suffering and being victims of war. So, what does itmean for gender studies, and for us to actually look at women who are participating in war,
supporting men in war and picking up arms?
How do we actually represent women as prosecutors and perpetrators of violence? Women who
torture and kill other women, women who are participating in war, killing and torturing other men.
Dara Kay Cohen’s work, for example, talks about how women in Sierra Leone organize rape andtorture of other women as well. How do we actually understand that? With the growing number ofreligious wars and macro and micro level violence across the world, there is a time in history rightnow, when women are joining militaries, paramilitaries, armies, terrorist groups, formal, andinformal militias, groups of people who are just self-styled freedom fighters, undergroundmovements, secessionist movements (both at international and local levels), and also formal andinformal street vigilantes.
What historians, anthropologists, sociologists are trying to see is that, again, we are living in aworld where the idea of violence has completely changed. Where violence, violent conflict,intercommunity clashes, large scale, and small scale global wars has penetrated and infiltrated into
every aspect of society. In this context when women in large numbers are joining these kinds offormal and informal armies, or joining this fight, what does it mean for academic scholarship?
9࢔࣮ࢺ࣮࣭ࣜࢭࣥ
ዪᛶ࡜ࣛࢹ࢕࢝ࣝ࡞㐠ືI am going to talk a little bit about modes ofrecruitment. There are different ways in which women are
getting recruited in these formal and informal armies.
Some of it is voluntary and spontaneous. If you actually
see religious leaders in action, they are often giving thiskind of indoctrinating speeches which are very easily
available over the internet. Women are joining theseorganizations after giving it a lot of thought. They arebeing seriously mobilized because they are considering
their options and they are well-informed women who are joining these organizations because they
really want to.
Because they feel that the cause is their own and they can identify with their cause. They feel asense of commitment to that cause. The idea that they have been brainwashed is being increasingly
dissipated. There are more women who are really engaging with radical religious rhetoric andjoining these movements. The other side of the story is that often these women are being welcomed
into these radical religious movements because of a crisis in manpower. Increasingly, the men are
either killed in battle or it is that more and more international organizations, for example, find it
easy to simply kill men. For example, if the US army were faced with a team of ISIS men, theywould actually not hesitate to kill, but if they are faced with a team of women, and you know they
have their guns trained in the direction of 500 women, they would hesitate to open fire. So, there isa particular crisis of manpower and that is one of the reasons why there is quite an acceptance of
women joining these armies.
Women are also being coerced and under many circumstances they are being raped, tortured, andcoerced into joining these movements. Sometimes it is a question of birth and motherhood, andagain there is some literature which is emerging in the context of Palestine, for example, wherechildren are just born in the context of violence. And, even if they are girl children, they are just
joining Hamas because that is what you do when you are born in that violent situation. You have noother option. The question of motherhood also becomes important. If you have sons who just go andjoin a local terrorist outfit, then as a mother you want to support your children, you want to lookafter your children. So, you join these groups. But, what is really interesting, and this for me has
been very interesting to watch in the context of right wing activism in India, is the role of informal
support. You have these radical religious movements, and, actually the person who does theircooking, washing, and looking after them is the women.
Therefore, women are not necessary at the forefront of war. They are not really, like, picking up
arms all the time and fighting. But, women show their sympathy and support. And, that becomesreally important in the context of sustaining these movements. And, then, you have the importanceof the female body. Tunisian women, for example, who are going into Syria marrying ISIS men,
getting pregnant, coming back to the safety of their country to deliver the next generation of Jihadist.
What they are doing is that they are offering their body. They are offering their body to the war. But,
10

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌having said that, what is important for us to know is that in this context, for example, these women
do not see themselves as terrorists. When they are joining, they do not want to be named as
terrorists. They want to be named as activists, militants, or freedom fighters, and then you have therange of affiliations to goddesses and they like to be called tigers or lions. So, you have, forexample, the Black Widows, the Suicide Bombers Chechen, and you have the Black Tigers, who are
the women suicide bombers in Sri Lanka. So, they don’t identify with the idea of being called aterrorist. They think they are doing something more than that.
Now, what are the sites of mobilization? Where arethese women found, the ones which join theseorganizations. You often find them in areas ofvulnerability—that is, in poor areas, urban slums, inghettos, and in areas of conflict. You often find them inschools, women madrasas, for example, are often targetedby radical movements. You find them in refugee camps,
and in areas where women are either suffering grief orloss because some foreign entity has killed their children,and they are in a state of vulnerability. But, there are also lots of women foreign fighters who are
joining these radical movements. Women who have been born in conditions of privilege, money,
education and freedom, and the other women who want segregation, they want reeling; they want tojoin these movements. So, what is going on there? Are they doing it because they want a sense ofcommunity? Is there some kind of romanticism associated with radical religious movements?
Denmark, for example, from where I am, has the highest rate of foreign fighters. And, they all are
not necessarily Muslim. They have the highest rate of foreign fighters in Egypt and they aren’t just
local everyday dames who are very attracted to this idea of joining radical religious movements.
I think it is time that we took into consideration, in
terms of academic scholarship, that we cannot only lookat these women through the lens of victimhood— that, it
is important for us to look at women through moreagential engagement with war and violence. Public
opinion, academic scholarship, including sort of media
representation, is fairly divided when it comes torepresenting or understanding why or how these women
are joining these movements. For example, you have now
the ‘right to fight feminists’ who believe that women should have the freedom to join violent
political organizations.
Whether it is like state-sponsored armies or not state-sponsored armies. Women should be equal
to men when it comes to fighting. Why is fighting historically considered to be a masculinist
domain? Why is it a man’s world? And, it is important for women if they want equality to also be apart of this aspect of just everyday life, which is that, if you want to be part of a society where you
11࢔࣮ࢺ࣮࣭ࣜࢭࣥ
ዪᛶ࡜ࣛࢹ࢕࢝ࣝ࡞㐠ື

have armies, whether they are formal armies or informal armies, it is important for women to be apart of it. But, it is interesting because the feminists, for example, they argue that if you are part ofthese armies, if you are part of state armies or radical religious movements, the presence of womencan change the nature of the movement. They can often soften the movement or take the movement
in a direction which is away from mindless violence. Therefore, according to this point of view, it isimportant for women to join these movements not because women should be just fighting with men,but the presence of women changes the nature of any institution, and any movement. Any maledominated movement—whether violent or non-violent— changes when it incorporates women.
Then, you have the “in-betweeners”. People who are
sitting on the fence saying that women should have thefreedom to join any kind of radical movement or formal
or informal armies, but it is important to recognize thedifference between the male and female bodies. The
female body, for example, is vulnerable in the context ofconflict. If a woman gets trapped, she will be raped, and if
she is raped and she is pregnant, that causes problems.
And, even if she is not raped, if she goes into war and she
has an affair with a local fighter, and she gets pregnant, a pregnant woman will not be able to fight.
So, let's face it that there is a difference in biology between men and women, and it is important for
us to take this into consideration that if women get pregnant then they should have the right towithdraw. Also, if women feel sexually vulnerable in a particular context, then they should have theright to withdraw from war. So, these are the in-betweeners, who said, yes let them participate, butthey should have the freedom of choice to retreat.
And, finally, you have the absolute critics who thinkthat it is outrageous that people should support women’s
engagement with war. Partly because, academics havehistorically believed that, if you don’t highlight women’s
victimologies and women’s suffering, then war will carryon forever. The role of women as peacemakers need to betaken into consideration. Historically, in many conditionsof conflict between men, it is women who haveintervened, and they have intervened very productively inpeace talks and, in informal ways, have brought peace within communities. So, if you glorify or
accept the fact that women should be participating in radical religious movements, without justjumping in and saying that “this is really bad”, “they shouldn’t be doing it”, then this takes away theimportance of women’s suffering—that women do suffer, that women are badly affected by war andconflict. So, the question that comes out of this kind of divided opinion is that who are the women
who are at peace when at war? Why do women want to participate in war? How can war be sold towomen as something which is beneficial for them or that which they can actually benefit from?
12

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

That becomes the controversial question. What are thedebates that emerge in response to that question? Most
academics, for example, are trying to talk about the factthat war gives women a sense of agency andempowerment—the act of carrying arms, the act of
freedom of mobility to walk around freely with guns.
Some women have actually said that women just likewearing uniforms. They think that it makes them feel very
cool about themselves. So, whatever it is, it is a sense inwhich women’s agency and empowerment often becomes tied to conditions of war because war
challenges normative conducts, war challenges patriarchy. Women who are, for example, usuallyused to being cooks and cleaners for their husbands and their responsibility has always been to lookafter the home, and look after the children, and stay at home. In conditions of war, they feel thatthey have the mobility to actually carry a gun and get into war with their husbands. So, there is away in which they can challenge patriarchy. They can step out of their homes They don’tnecessarily have to remain limited within the confines of their homes.
Because the idea of home itself becomes complicated in the context of war—homes are broken,
homes are torn apart. Women can be free. Women do not have to look after their homes anymore.
But, one of the interesting things is that how do you militarize the bodies of women if women are
cross-culturally taught to be honorable and respectable and their bodies are meant to be humble, toalways show respect towards others? How do you militarize that body of a woman to be actually
carrying guns? This is part of the training, which often becomes an important part of radical
religious movements. Training is directed towards changing the movement and body of the women
to make it far more aggressive. Another part of the controversial debate that arises is around what
Erica mentioned, which is around female suicide bombing.
This idea of female suicide bombing is something thathas really caught the attention of international policy
makers because the fact that women could use theirbodies as bombs and kill themselves and blast and destroy
to rip apart their bodies and take the lives of people withthem, is something that is so torturous for any kind of
public imagination. And this has led to an interesting
emergence of the politics of female martyrdom. Religious
movements are now saying that women can also bemartyrs.
Women who have given their bodies for the nation, who have sacrificed their beautiful bodies forthe nation–that is something which is being increasingly glorified. But, the women themselves in
the run up to the actual act of female suicide bombing, and again, there is some literature which is
emerging on it, can use that act; the fact that they are going to make the ultimate sacrifice as people13࢔࣮ࢺ࣮࣭ࣜࢭࣥ
ዪᛶ࡜ࣛࢹ࢕࢝ࣝ࡞㐠ື

know. It is not like the unpredictability of war, you are going as a soldier, you could come backalive if you are a soldier. But, with suicide bombing, you know you are going to die. That womenuse it as a powerful critic of local men. Saying that I am being forced to give my body to the nation
because the men could not serve the nation. The men could not save women. So, it is me, I have togo forward and do it. So, it is a particular form of emasculation which is related to female suicidebombing. But, having said that, there are new cultural discourses —that are emerging within theseradical movements—to support female suicide bombing. For example, there is the idea that it is lesslikely than a woman would be frisked because people would be unsuspicious of them. So, if you area woman and you are standing in a crowd, people wouldn’t look at you and think you are about toblast your body. But, what radical religious leaders are saying is that when women are willing to dothat, they become the brides of God. So, women are celebrated as brides. They are dressed up, they
are given spa treatments, they have make-up done, and they are considered to be beautiful. And, thiskind of radical change in the celebration of women is something that is being incorporated now inradical religious movements. Earlier, it was all about celebrating the men. Now, it is about, let’s
accommodate different ways in which we can celebrate these women.
From now on I would like to give you a flavor ofdifferent kinds of ethnographies which are emerging
especially in the context of anthropology, and I will begin
with a little bit of my own. I work with a radical Hindu
Nationalist Group in Mumbai and I especially look at
women’s involvement in this group.
One of the key debates which has emerged in thecontext of women’s participation in radical religious
movements, is that does it create solidarities between
women? In my area of research, for example, it does create solidarities within women. Even though
women join the movement, because they are Hindu nationalists and they are worried about thesurvival of the Hindu nation, they also coalesce around issues of rape and domestic violence andother kinds of sexual vulnerabilities. For example, the women who are part of this radical group, theShiv Sena, which I worked with, they distribute local small pocket knives for women travelling on
public transport. And, they say, if you are sexually harassed or you feel vulnerable towards rape,
feel free to use the knife. And, the party will actually save you. The organization will save you.
They will find a lawyer to protect you.
The Shiv Sena, the party, has also launched a smartphone application. If you download thesmartphone application and you ever feel sexually vulnerable or feel like you are about to be raped,
if you shake the phone hard enough, it starts ringing the local police station. So, you are a poor
woman and you are a woman at work and you are travelling on the train, and usually sexual
predators are predators who get on the train every day. They are always the same people. You know
who they are. And, when you feel vulnerable, you just start shaking your phone and you are rescued
immediately. So, these actually are solidarities which are built amongst women, in the context of14

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

right wing activism. So, superficially they are saying yes, this is about serving the Hindu nation, but
on a very practical level, it is about women serving each other.
And then, there are also women who go against women when they join radical religious
movements.
For example, in the context of the US, there areanthropologists and other scholars who are looking at
Christian radical fundamentalists’ women. Women who
joined these Christian fundamentalist groups targeted
women who are pro-abortion. They are burning downclinics when women are having abortions or terminating
their pregnancies. They are attacking immigrant women,
women who are coming in from Mexico and from otherplaces, and seeking refuge in asylum. Mary Romero, forexample, in her work, says that there is this idea that Christian radical fundamentalist American
women are the perfect mothers. And, all these other women, the ones who are terminating theirpregnancies or coming in from Mexico are unfit mothers. So, America should be a land for the fit
mothers and fit mothers which come through their engagement with Christianity. Furthermore, youhave another example from Kashmir, which is in the northern part of India.
It is a very violent and conflict stricken area, and thereis this radical women’s Islamic group called Dukhtaran-eMillat, and they target women who are either prostitutes
or women who are taking part in Valentine’s Day—
because it’s a foreign import. “What is this idea ofmodernity?” “Why celebrate love?” “Your parents should
be organizing an arranged marriage for you”. “You should
not have the freedom to love”. So, these women goaround, smearing the faces of that women with black ink
and sort of ripping their clothes off in public and making them be revealed. This idea of keeping asociety clean is also becoming part of these radical religious movements. Therefore, there is aproblem with gender solidarities. When are women joining these movements showing solidarity
towards other women or targeting and attacking them? What are the radical movements which
generate solidarities and the ones which really don’t?
In conclusion, when it comes to women in radical movements and looking at it from theperspective of conventional gender studies, can we actually look at it as a brand of soft feminism? If
feminist trajectories have dominated gender studies for a long period of time, then a lot of themarkers of women joining radical religious movements actually tick boxes which are related to
traditional liberal feminism. For example, women joining these movements they seek to sustain
women’s aggression that women are united and they are aggressive and they are sort of fighting
patriarchy. They increase the public presence of women, women move outside their homes, they no15࢔࣮ࢺ࣮࣭ࣜࢭࣥ
ዪᛶ࡜ࣛࢹ࢕࢝ࣝ࡞㐠ື

longer are segregated and home-bound and they are out.
And, carrying arms and engaging with radical movements
increases their self-pride. They contest notions ofsubmissive femininity in their body language, in theireveryday behavior. All kinds of femininity, which isrelated to submission to men, are challenged by women’s
participation.
Women learn how to protect themselves. In conditionsof war, it becomes important for them to protect theirbodies, so that they know how to use arms or develop comeback techniques which are aboutprotecting their bodies. And, one of the things which form a part of these movements is that they are
not really overtly challenging patriarchy. They are supporting patriarchy. They are going along with
it. They have temporary spaces which they are maneuvering to get some amount of freedom, butthey are not saying that they want a world with no men. They are not saying that they want a world
which is completely dominated by women. They want to still look at the broader ideology whichcomes with these movements. Parashar, who Erica mentioned before, talks about “creative
conformity”. And I thought this was an interesting thing to throw out there for discussion onwhether you agree with it or not. Parashar argues creative conformity explains best the actions andlived experiences of these women—the women I was talking about all this while.
And she says, ‘This “creative conformity” comprises actions that may not produce ends thatappear “feminist” within a secular-liberal framework, not necessarily align with the intentions of theagent, but nonetheless influence gendered norms about moral life’. Which is, women still manage tochallenge and transform conventional gender norms in mainstream society by participating inradical movements.

16

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌䝁䝯䞁䝖 㻝㻌㻌
㻼㼞㼛㼒㻚㻌㻭㼠㼞㼑㼥㼑㼑㻌㻿㼑㼚 䛾㆟ㄽ䜢ཷ䛡䛶㻌ᯇᑿ㻌 ⍞✑䠄ᅜ❧Ẹ᪘Ꮫ༤≀㤋෸ᩍᤵ䠅㻌
Mizuho Matsuo (National Museum of Ethnology)⚾䛿䜲䞁䝗䜢ㄪᰝᑐ㇟䛸䛩䜛ᩥ໬ே㢮Ꮫ䜢ᑓ㛛䛸䛧䛶䛚䜚䜎䛩䛜䚸௒᪥䛿䚸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲䛾どⅬ䛛䜙䚸䝁䝯䞁䝖䜢䛧䛶䜏䛯䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䜎䛪䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸ඛ⏕䛾䜲䞁䝖䝻䝎䜽䝅䝵䞁䛻䜒䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䜘䛖䛻䚸ዪᛶ䛸ᭀຊ䜢䛹䛾䜘䛖䛻⪃䛘䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䚸䛣䛾䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛾䜂䛸䛴䛾኱䛝䛺ၥ㢟ᥦ㉳䛰䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹ᡓத䚸䝔䝻䚸ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛸䚸ዪᛶ䛸䛾㛵䜟䜚䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸≛≅⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶ䚸䛸䛔䛖どⅬ䛜୰ᚰ䛷䛧䛯䚹䛭䛣䛛䜙䚸ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶ䚸䛸䛔䛖どᗙ䛜Ⓩሙ䛧䛶䛝䜎
䛩䚹80 ᖺ௦௨㝆䚸᪥ᮏ䛾ዪᛶྐ◊✲䛻䛚䛔䛶䜒䚸䛔䜟䜖䜛⿕ᐖ⪅ྐほ䛛䜙ຍᐖ⪅ྐほ䜈䛸どᗙ䛜㌿᥮䛧䛶䛔䛝䚸䛣䜜䜢ୖ㔝༓㭯Ꮚ䛿䛂཯┬ⓗዪᛶྐ䛾⌧䜜䛃䛸䜎䛸䜑䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ලయⓗ䛻䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛻䜘䜛䛣䜜䜎䛷䛾ᡓத䜈䛾ຍᢸ䜔䚸
ᡓத㈐௵䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢䚸ዪᛶྐ䚸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲䛾୰䛷ၥ䛔ጞ䜑䛯䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹᪥ᮏ䛾ᩥ⬦䛷䜒䚸䛣䛖䛧䛯◊✲䛿㠀ᖖ䛻䛯䛟䛥䜣䛾⵳✚䛜䛒䜚䚸ዪᛶ䛜Ṕྐ䛾୺య agency 䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䜢ㄆ䜑䜛䛾䛷䛒䜜䜀䚸ྠ᫬䛻䚸Ṕྐ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛㈐௵䜢㏨䜜䜛䛣䛸䜒䛷䛝䛺䛔䚸䛸఩⨨䛵䛡䜙䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹⚾⮬㌟䜢᣺䜚㏉䛳䛶䜏䜎䛧䛶䚸ዪᛶ䛸ᭀຊ䚸䛸䛟䛻ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶ䜢䚸ึ䜑䛶䛿䛳䛝䜚䛸ᛮ䛔▱䜙䛥䜜䛯䛾
䛿䚸2004 ᖺ䛾䚸䜲䝷䜽䛾䜰䝤䜾䝺䜲䝤ฮົᡤ䛷䛾䚸䜰䝯䝸䜹㌷䛾ዪᛶරኈ䛾ᫎീ䛷䛧䛯䚹䛤Ꮡ▱䛾᪉䜒䛯䛟䛥䜣䛔䜙䛳䛧䜓䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䛜䚸ฮົᡤ䛾཰ᐜ⪅䛻ᑐ䛩䜛ṧ⹢䛷㠀ே㐨ⓗ䛺⾜Ⅽ䜢⾜䛳䛶䛔䜛෗┿䛾୰䛻䚸ዪᛶරኈ䜒෗䛳䛶䛔䛶䚸䜒䛖 10 ᖺ௨ୖ๓䛾ฟ᮶஦䛷䛩䛡䛹䜒䚸ዪᛶ䜒䛣䛾䜘䛖䛺ᭀຊ䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛺䜛䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛻⾪ᧁ䜢ཷ䛡䜎䛧䛯䚹
䛣䛖䛧䛯ዪᛶ䛸ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛿䚸ᡓ㜚ဨ䞉රኈ䞉䝔䝻䝸䝇䝖䛸䛔䛳䛯䚸䝎䜲䝺䜽䝖䛻ᭀຊ䜔ᡓத䛸㛵䜟䜛䝺䝧䝹䛛䜙䚸䛔䜟䜖䜛㖠ᚋ䛸䛔䛖䛛䚸ᚋ᪉ᨭ᥼䛸䛧䛶䚸䛸䛟䛻䚸ኴᖹὒᡓதୗ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ዪᛶ䛜⾜䛳䛯䛣䛸䜒ྵ䜑䛶䛷䛩䛜䚸ᡓத

17

松尾瑞穂
Prof. Atreyee Sen の議論を受けて協力というかたちで、非常に消極的なものから積極的なものまで、暴力への協力という関りがあると思います。
さらには、知識人や運動家が、目的を達成するための手段として、暴力に加担することもあります。例えば私は、女性のリプロダクションの研究をしていますが、1920 年代の女性にとって、避妊や中絶をするということは、国家との闘いが求められる、女性にとっての権利獲得運動でした。それで女性の活動家たちは、当時は禁止されていた避妊をするために、例えば優生学思想のような、当時の国家体制と親和性の高い、質の高い良き市民を作るというイデオローグに自らのポリシーを関わらせながら、産児制限というものを達成する、ということを行っていました。このようなかたちで、女性の地位の向上、女性の参政権の獲得、産児制限の獲得、といった目的を達成するために、ある意味暴力に結果として加担していくということも、歴史的にはあったと思います。
さらには、女性と暴力の関わりを非常に見えにくくしているのが、家父長制の下での女性による女性への暴力を、どのように考えるかということです。
私は、インドの農村で、子どもができないことは半人前なことであり、女性性からの逸脱であるとする、ヒンドゥ
ーの規範的な考え方により、子どもができない女性たちが、家族や親族や夫、さらにより広いコミュニティから、劣った人間として扱われている中で、どのように自らの agency を発揮しているのか、ということをずっと研究しています。
その中で、非常に微細ではあるのですが、家庭内、あるいはコミュニティの中で、年長の女性による女性への暴力が、女性の suffering をさらに増長するようなかたちで存在しています。こうした微細な暴力をどのように捉えればいいのか、ということに私は関心を持っています。
セン先生のプレゼンテーションにもありましたように、女性と暴力との関りを、どのような立場から、だれの視点から考えたらいいのか、というのは、ジェンダーを研究している人間にとっても、とても難しい問題だと思います。
暴力行為 や radical movements への女性の動員を、これまでジェンダー研究の立場では、学問的に捉えるということは、おそらくほとんどしてこなかったと思います。そのような意味で、本日のシンポジウムの議論は大変興味深く、勉強になりました。そしてやはり、だれの立場、だれの視点で、こうしたことを語るのか、ということが、問題提起として、私の中に残っています。
女性と暴力との関りを、どのような視点から見ればよいのか、ということについて、インドの文脈で少し考えてみたいと思います。
女性による暴力や戦争への加担は、帝国列強への抵抗とか国家の独立、といった大義名分の下では、非常に英雄的な行為として称えられ、受け入れられる、と考えていいのでしょうか。

笠井亮平著『インド独立の志士「朝子」』（白水社）
表紙画像

例えばインドでは、1940 年代のイギリス植民地支配
下、イギリスからの独立を目指す、インド国民軍というものが一部の活動家によって組織されました。そこに、マレーシアやシンガポールに住んでいたインド系住民の女性たちが、志願兵として加わり、訓練を受けて、祖国の独立を海外からサポートする活動をしました。インパール作戦と呼ばれる、日本軍との協力の中で、ビルマを通ってアッサムに入り、そこでイギリス軍と戦いながら、インドの解放を目指す、といった活動をしたわけです。
実際にインド国民軍の中で、女性の部隊が具体的にどのような活動をし、どのように戦地で戦ったのか、ということは、ほとんど知られていません。しかし、日本の敗戦後、インド国民軍の将校たちがイギリスの裁判で戦犯として裁かれようとしたとき、インド国民は、彼らは愛国者であり、祖国のために戦った英雄として扱い、イギリスに対18

IGS Project Series 7
女性、宗教、暴力：国際的視点からの再考して抗議、抵抗をしました。こうしたことが、1947 年のインド独立を早めた、ナショナリズムを喚起するひとつのきっ
かけともなったとも言われています。ですから、インド国民軍に加わった女性兵士も、祖国の解放、イギリスの植民地からの解放のために戦った、ということに関しては、英雄的な行為として賞賛されたとも考えられます。
ところが、先ほどセン先生の発表にもありましたが、スリランカのシンハラ系とタミル系の国民の間の内戦で、タミル人民解放の虎、いわゆる LTTE と呼ばれる反政府組

ラジーブ・ガンディー
首相画像

織が、インドの首相やスリランカの首相を暗殺しています。その際に、女性の活動家による自爆テロ、自爆行為がとられています。

女性兵士画像この LTTE は、自爆テロ、自爆行為が非常に突出していると言われています。インドのラジーブ・ガンディー首相は、タミル少女による自爆行為によって 1991 年に暗殺されています。タミルナードゥ州というところで、花輪をガンディー首相に捧げようとした少女が、自爆したのです。この場合、彼女たちは「テロリスト」として、インドの文脈の中では犯罪者であり、批判され、報復を受けるべき対象となったわけです。
このように、どのような行為をテロや反政府的行為であり、また、どのような行為が愛国的で賞賛されるべきなのか、というのは、どのような視点から見るかによって、大きく変わってくると思います。
一方、インド国内の文脈の中では、マハトマ・ガンディーによるイギリスからの独立運動の中では、女性の動員が大規模に行われました。
女性は、男性よりも、より道徳的な力が強く、忍耐があり、そして、勇気があるのだと。だからこそ、女性が非暴力運動である独立運動のフロントに立って戦うことがふさ
わしい、とされました。このときが、インドの大衆女性にとって、初めて政治的な主体となる契機であったと言われています。
非暴力であるということが、女性性と大いに結びつけられ、そこに、女性というのは特別な精神性や道徳性がある、と見なされる。これはジェンダー研究において、今まで使われてきたレトリックだと思いますが、しかしそうしたものでは、もう語り得ないものがある、ということを、今日のセン先生の発表から、大いに考えさせられました。
一方、私自身の研究に引き付けて考えてみますと、よりもっと微細な、例えば家庭内とか、人間関係の親密な空間の中で行われる暴力をどのように考えたらよいだろうか、ということが、個人的な関心としてあります。
例えば、サティー（寡婦殉死）という、夫が亡くなったときの葬儀で、妻あるいは妻の一人が、夫の遺体と共に焚き木の火に焼かれるという、インドのごく一部の階層で行われていた「宗教」的行為があります。こうした行為は、
19

ᯇᑿ⍞✑
㻼㼞㼛㼒㻚㻌㻭㼠㼞㼑㼥㼑㼑㻌㻿㼑㼚㻌 䛾㆟ㄽ䜢ཷ䛡䛶㻌

19 ୡ⣖䛻䜲䜼䝸䝇᳜Ẹᆅୗ䛷䚸≢⨥䛒䜛䛔䛿ᭀຊ䛸䛧䛶⚗Ṇ䛥䜜䜎䛩䛜䚸ከ䛟䛾䝠䞁䝗䜳䞊䛾⏨ᛶ䛯䛱䛜䚸䛣䜜䛿䝠䞁䝗䜳䞊䛾ఏ⤫䛷䛒䜚䚸᐀ᩍ⾜Ⅽ䛷䛒䜚䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢䛩䜛ᶒ฼䛜䛒䜛䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿႐䜣䛷䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢䛩䜛䛸୺ᙇ䛧䚸䜲䜼䝸䝇䛻䜘䜛⚗Ṇ䛻ᑐ䛧䛶䚸᢬ᢠ䜢䛧䛶䛔䛟䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹䝇䝢䞂䜯䜽䛾᭷ྡ䛺䛄䝃䝞䝹䝍䞁䛿ㄒ䜛䛣䛸䛜ฟ᮶䜛䛛䛅䛸䛔䛖ᮏ䛾୰䛷䜒䚸䝇䝢䞂䜯䜽䛿䚸䛣䛾䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢ྲྀ䜚ୖ䛢䛶䚸䝃䝞䝹䝍䞁䛸䛧䛶ዪᛶ䛾ኌ䛿⪺䛛䜜䛺䛔䛸ゝ䛳䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䛜䚸⚾⮬㌟䛜㠀ᖖ䛻Ẽ䛻䛺䜛䛾䛿䚸䛣䜜䛿䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢ᥥ䛔䛯⤮䛷䛩䛜䚸䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢ぢᏛ䛧䛶䛔䜛ே䛯䛱䛾୰䛷䚸䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢䛩䜛ዪᛶ䛾࿘䜚䛻䛔䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾ኌ䜒䚸䜎䛯ྠ᫬䛻䚸⪺䛛䜜䜛䛣䛸䛿䛺䛔䛰䜝䛖䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹ᙼዪ䛯䛱䛿䚸䝃䝔䜱䞊䜢䛩䜛ዪᛶ䜢 encourage 䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛛䚸force 䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛛䚸䛭䜜䛸䜒䚸ᝒ䛧䜣䛷䛔䜛䛾䛛䚹࿘䜚䛻䛔䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿୍య䚸ఱ䜢䚸䛹䜣䛺ᙺ๭䜢ᯝ䛯䛧䛶䛔䛯䛾䛰䜝䛖䛛䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜒䚸ᡃ䚻䛿⪺䛟䛣䛸䛿䛷䛝䛺䛔䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹ᙼዪ䛯䛱䜒ᭀຊ䛾ຍᢸ⪅䛺䛾䛛䚸䛭䜜䛸䜒䜔䛿䜚䚸ᭀຊ䛾≛≅⪅䛸ゝ䛘䜛䛾䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿䛭䛾䜘䛖䛺஧ศἲ䛷ศ䛡䜛䛣䛸䛿䚸䜒䛧䛛䛧䛶䚸䜅䛥䜟䛧䛟䛺䛔䛛䜒䛧䜜䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢⪃䛘䜛䛸䛝䛻䚸ዪᛶ䛾 agency 䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢䚸䛹䛾䜘䛖䛺どⅬ䛛䜙⪃䛘䛯䜙䛔䛔䛾䛰䜝䛖䛛䚸䛸䛔䛖␲ၥ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛭䜜䛿⌧௦䛾䝎䜴䝸ẅே䜒ྠᵝ䛷䛩䚹䝎䜴䝸䛸࿧䜀䜜䜛ᣢཧ㈈䜢ዪᛶഃ䛜ᣢ䛳䛶䛔䛟䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䛾䝎䜴䝸䛜ᑡ䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜢⌮⏤䛻䚸䝃䝸䞊䛻ⅆ䜢䛴䛡䜙䜜䛶ẅ䛥䜜䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䚸䜲䞁䝗䛷䛿䛧䜀䛧䜀㉳䛣䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䛾㝿䛻䚸㛢䛨䜙䜜䛯ᐙᗞ䛸䛔䛖✵㛫䛾୰䛷䚸ከ䛟䛾ሙྜ䚸ዪᛶ䛜䛭䛾≢⨥䛾≢ே䛸䛧䛶᳨ᣲ䛥䜜䜛䛣䛸䛜ከ䛔䛷䛩䚹ྡ㄃ẅே䜒ྠᵝ䛷䛩䚹ፉ䛯䛱䛜䚸౛䛘䜀䝺䜲䝥䛻䛒䛳䛯䛸䛝䛻䚸䛭䛾ፉ䜢ᐙ᪘䛜ཷ䛡ධ䜜䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛿ྡ㄃䛻ၥ㢟䛜䛒䜛䛾䛷䚸䛭䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛷䛒䜛ፉ䜢䚸ᐙᗞෆ䛾ᖺ㛗⪅䛜ẅ䛧䛶䛧䜎䛖䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜒䚸䛧䜀䛧䜀㉳䛣䜚ᚓ䜎䛩䚹䛣䛖䛧䛯䚸౛䛘䜀䚸ẕぶ䛻䜘䜛ፉ䜈䛾ᭀຊ䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿䚸⩏ẕ䛻䜘䜛᎑䜈䛾ᭀຊ䛾䜘䛖䛻䚸intimate 䛺㛵ಀ䛾୰䛷䛾ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢䚸䛹䛾䜘䛖䛻ᤊ䛘䛯䜙䜘䛔䛾䛛䚹䛸䛟䛻䚸⚾䛿୙ዷ䛸䛔䛖ၥ㢟䜢ᢅ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸୙ዷ䛷䛒䜛ⱝ䛔ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛻䛸䛳䛶䚸䜒䛳䛸䜒ཝ䛧䛔Ꮡᅾ䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿䚸ከ䛟䛾ሙྜ䚸ᐙᗞෆ䛷䛾ᖺ㛗䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛺䛾䛷䛩䚹ᙼዪ䛯䛱䛜䚸୙ዷ䛷䛒䜛ⱝ䛔ዪᛶ䜢䛔䛛䛻ㄝᚓ䛧䚸」፧䛸䛔䜟䜜䜛䚸ኵ䛻஧ே┠䛾ጔ䜢䜑䛸䜙䛫䜛䛾䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿䚸㞳፧䜢ಁ䛩䛾䛛䚸䛸䛔䛳䛯䜘䛖䛺ᭀຊ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛯䛰䚸䛭䛾୰䛷䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜䚸䛩䜉䛶≛≅⪅䛷䛒䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䚸䛭䜜䛰䛡䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸ᐇ㝿䛻Ꮚ౪䛜䛔䛺䛔ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜䚸⮬䜙䚸஧ே┠䞉୕ே┠䛾ጔ䜢ኵ䛾䛯䜑䛻⏝ព䛩䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜒㉳䛣䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ᙼዪ䛯䛱䛜䛹䛖䛔䛖ே䜢㐃䜜䛶䛟䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䚸౛䛘䜀䚸㞀ᐖ䜢ᣢ䛳䛶䛔䜛ዪᛶ䛸䛛䚸㠀ᖖ䛻ᖺ䛾ⱝ䛔ዪᛶ䛸䛛䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖ே䜢➨஧፬ே䛸䛧䛶䚸ኵ䛾䛯䜑䛻⮬ศ䛜⏝ព䛩䜛䛸䚹䛭䛾୰䛷䛿䚸≛≅⪅䛷䛒䜛ዪᛶ䛸䚸䛥䜙䛻䚸≛≅⪅໬䛥䜜䛯ዪᛶ䛸䛔䛖ධ䜜Ꮚ≧䛻䛺䛳䛯ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛜䚸ᚤ⣽䛺᪥ᖖ⏕ά䛾୰䛷䛿䜏䜙䜜䜎䛩䚹⚾䛛䜙䛾ឤ᝿䛸䛧䛶䛿䚸䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮䚸ዪᛶ◊✲䛾୰䛷䚸䛣䛖䛧䛯ᵝ䚻䛺䛛䛯䛱䛾ᭀຊ䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛸䚸ዪᛶ䛾㛵䜟䜚䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢⪃䛘䜛䛝䛳䛛䛡䜢௒ᅇ୚䛘䛶䛔䛯䛰䛡䛯䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹

20

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌䝁䝯䞁䝖 㻞㻌 㻌᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻰㼂 䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅㻌ᑠᕝ㻌 ┿⌮Ꮚ䠄᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄㻼㻰䠅㻛኱ጔዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䠅㻌
Mariko Ogawa (JSPS/Otsuma Women’s University)
⚾䛿䚸DV䠄䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䠅⿕ᐖ⪅䛾ᨭ᥼䜔Ẹ㛫䝅䜵䝹䝍䞊䛾ㄪᰝ◊✲䜢䛧䛶䛚䜚䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸௒᪥䛿᪥ᮏ䛾 DV 䛾≧ἣ䛻ゐ䜜䛺䛜䜙䚸ᮏ䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛾䝔䞊䝬䛻㛵㐃䛧䛶ዪᛶ䛾 DV ຍᐖ⪅䛸
䛔䛖どⅬ䜒ྵ䜑䛶⪃䛘䜢㏙䜉䛥䛫䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䛯䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹᪥ᮏ䛾 DV 䛾ᐇែ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛷䛩䛜䚸ෆ㛶ᗓ䛾⤫ィ䛷䛿䚸㓄അ⪅䛛䜙䛾ᭀຊ䛿䚸⥲ᩘ䛸䛧䛶 5 ே䛻 1 ே䛜ᭀຊ䜢ཷ䛡䛯䛸䛔䛖⤖ᯝ䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ᛶู䛷ぢ䜎䛩䛸䚸ዪᛶ䛾⣙ 4 ே䛻 1 ே䛜㓄അ⪅䛛䜙⿕ᐖ䜢ཷ䛡䛯䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛭䛧䛶ዪᛶ䛾⣙ 10
ே䛻 1 ே䛿ఱᗘ䜒ཷ䛡䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹⏨ᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⤒㦂䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛾๭ྜ䠄23.7%䠅䜘䜚䜒ᑡ䛺
䛟 16.6%䛺䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸Ỵ䛧䛶ᑡ䛺䛟䛺䛔๭ྜ䛷䛩䚹䛂DV ஦௳⥲ᩘ䛸⿕ᐖ⪅䛾⏨ዪู๭ྜ䛃䛾⤫ィ䛷䛿䚸඲య䛾䛖䛱⣙ 9 ๭䛜ዪᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛷䛩䚹യᐖ䛸ᭀ⾜஦௳䛻䛚䛡䜛ዪᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛿≉䛻ከ䛟䚸䛸䜒䛻 9 ๭䜢༨䜑䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹୍᪉䚸ẅே䛻䛚䛡䜛ዪᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛿඲య䛾⣙ 6 ๭䚸⏨ᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛿⣙
4 ๭䛸䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹DV ஦௳䛻䛚䛡䜛ዪᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䛿䚸ẅே஦௳䛾๭ྜ䛜⣙ 6 ๭䛷䚸യᐖ䛸ᭀ⾜䛾๭ྜ䛸ẚ䜉䜛䛸ᑡ䛺䛟䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䛣䛷䚸䛺䛬ẅே஦௳䛷䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅ᩘ䛜ῶᑡ䛩䜛䛾䛛䚸୍᪉䛷䛺䛬ዪᛶ䛾ຍᐖ⪅ᩘ䛜ቑຍ䛩䜛䛾䛛䛸䛔䛖Ⅼ䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸䛒䜛஦௳䜢䛤⤂௓䛧䛯䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹

21ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ
᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻰㼂 䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅

1994 ᖺ䛻ጔ䛻䜘䜛ኵẅே஦௳䛜㉳䛣䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹䛣䛾஦௳䛾≉ᚩ䛿䚸㛗ᖺᭀຊ䜢ཷ䛡⥆䛡䛯ጔ䛜䚸ኵ䜢ẅᐖ䛧䛯䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛷䛩䚹
1994 ᖺ䛾኱ᬉ᪥䛻䚸ኵ䛿ᮅ䛛䜙㓇䜢㣧䜏䛺䛜䜙ጔ䛻ᇳᣉ䛺ᭀຊ䜢䜅䜛䛔⥆䛡䚸ጔ䛿⋞㛵䛛䜙㏨䛢䜘䛖䛸ヨ䜏䛯䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸ኵ䛻ᘬ䛝䛪䜚ᡠ䛥䜜䜎䛩䚹ኵ䛿ጔ䛾㤳䜢⤠䜑䚸䛥䜙䛻䚸䝂䝹䝣䜽䝷䝤䛷ጔ䜢ᚋ䜝䛛䜙ᙉᡴ䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹ጔ䛿䛣䛾䜎䜎䛷䛿ẅ䛥䜜䜛䛛䜒䛧䜜䛺䛔䛸⪃䛘䚸௮ྥ䛡䛻䛺䛳䛶ᶓ䛯䜟䛳䛶䛔䛯ኵ䛾㤳䜢䝘䜲䝣䛷่䛧䛶ẅᐖ䛧䛯䛸䛔䛖஦௳䛷䛩䚹䛣䛾஦௳䛾ุỴ䛷䛩䛜䚸⿢ุᡤ䛿䚸ே䛾䛔䛾䛱䜢ዣ䛳䛯⤖ᯝ䛿㔜኱䛷䛒䜛䛸䛧䛺䛜䜙䜒ฮච㝖䛸䛔䛖⤖ㄽ䜢ୗ䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛣䛾ุỴ䛿䚸㠀ᖖ䛻⏬ᮇⓗ䛷䛧䛯䚹⿢ุᡤ䛿䚸⿕࿌ே䛷䛒䜛ጔ䛜㛗ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜛ኵ䛛䜙䛾䛩䛥䜎䛨䛔ᭀຊ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䜢ㄆ䜑䚸ኵ䛾ᭀຊ䛻ཝ䛧䛔ุ᩿䜢ୗ䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹䛩䛺䜟䛱䚸ኵ䛾ᭀຊ䛜䛣䛾஦௳䛾ཎᅉ䛷䛒䜚䚸ጔ䛾⏕࿨౵ᐖ䛾༴㝤䛜㧗䛟䚸䛭䜜䜖䛘䚸ጔ䜢ᙉ䛟㠀㞴䛩䜛䛣䛸䛿䛷䛝䛺䛔䛸䛧䛶ฮච㝖䛾ุỴ䜢ゝ䛔Ώ䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹⿢ุ䛾தⅬ䛸䛺䛳䛯䛾䛜䚸ጔ䛾่ẅ⾜Ⅽ䛜ṇᙜ㜵⾨䛻䛒䛯䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛷䛩䛜䚸ุỴ䛷䛿䚸ጔ䛾㜵⾨⾜Ⅽ䛜䜒䛧ኻᩋ䛧䛯ሙྜ䛻䚸䛥䜙䛺䜛ᭀຊ⾜Ⅽ䛜ຍ䛘䜙䜜䜛ᜍ䜜䛜䛒䜚䚸ጔ䛾࿨䛾༴㝤䛜䜘䜚㧗䛟䛺䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜢ㄆ䜑䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ጔ䛾ᘚㆤഃ䜒䚸䛣䜜䜎䛷䛾ኵ䛾ᭀຊ䛾ᐇែ䜢ἲᘐ䛷᫂䜙䛛䛻䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸ᘚㆤഃ䛾ཧ⪃ே䛸䛧䛶ฟᘐ䛧䛯◊✲⪅䛿䚸ᙜ᫬䚸ኵ䜔ᜊே䛺䛹ぶᐦ䛺㛵ಀ䛻䛒䜛⏨ᛶ䛛䜙᣺䜛䜟䜜䜛ᭀຊ䛜䚸ዪᛶ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛ᭀຊ䛸䛧䛶ᅜ㝿ⓗ䛻ၥ㢟䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䜢ᣦ᦬䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹䛣䛖䛧䛯≧ἣ䜒ㄝ᫂䛧䛶ጔ䛾ᘚㆤഃ䛿⿢ุ䛷ᡓ䛳䛯䛾䛷䛩䚹䛣䛾ጔ䛻䜘䜛ኵẅ䛧஦௳䛜㉳䛝䛯䛾䛿 1994 ᖺ䛷䛩䛾䛷᪥ᮏ䛷 DV㜵Ṇἲ䛜ไᐃ䛥䜜䜛๓䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹ᙜ᫬䛾᪥ᮏ䛷䛿䚸ኵ፬䛾䜒䜑䛤䛸䛿䚸ಶேⓗ䛺ၥ㢟䛷䛒䜛䛸䛔䛖つ⠊䛜ᾐ㏱䛧䛶䛔䛶䚸ᭀຊ䜢᣺䜛䜟䜜䛯ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿ỿ㯲䜢䛫䛦䜛䜢ᚓ䛺䛔≧ἣ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹ᅜ㝿ⓗ䛻䛿䚸ᅜ㐃䛺䛹䛜 90 ᖺ௦௨㝆䚸ዪᛶ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛ᭀຊ䜢ዪᛶ䛾ேᶒၥ㢟䛸䛧䛶ྲྀ䜚ୖ䛢䚸᪥ᮏ䛷䜒 90 ᖺ௦ึ䜑Ẹ㛫ዪᛶ䜾䝹䞊䝥䛻䜘䜛඲ᅜึ䛾 DV ㄪᰝ䜢ዎᶵ䛻♫఍ⓗ䛺㛵ᚰ䛜㞟䜎䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸90 ᖺ௦ᚋ༙䛻䛿䚸ⲡ䛾᰿䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜 DV ⿕ᐖ⪅䜢ಖㆤ䞉ᨭ᥼䛩䜛䝅䜵䝹䝍䞊䜢タ❧䛩䜛ື䛝䛜඲ᅜⓗ䛻ᣑ䛜䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹ᅜ䛾ືྥ䛷䛿䚸1999 ᖺ䛻ึ䜑䛶⏨ዪ㛫䛻䛚䛡䜛ᭀຊ䛻㛵䛩䜛ㄪᰝ䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛣䛾ㄪᰝ⤖ᯝ䛷䛿 20 ṓ௨ୖ䛾ᡂேዪᛶ䛾 5
ே䛻 1 ே䛜⏕࿨䛾༴㝤䜢ឤ䛨䜛䜋䛹䛾ᭀຊ䜢⤒㦂䛧䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛜ሗ࿌䛥䜜䚸኱䛝䛺⾪ᧁ䜢୚䛘䜎䛧䛯䚹ጔ䛻䜘䜛ኵẅᐖ䛾஦௳䛜㉳䛣䛳䛯 90 ᖺ௦༙䜀䛿䚸䜎䛰 DV 䛜♫఍ⓗ䛻䜒ㄆ▱䛥䜜䛶䛔䛺䛔≧ἣ䛷䚸♫఍ⓗ䛺ᑐᛂ䛜䜋䛸䜣䛹䛺䛛䛳䛯

22

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌㡭䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹䛷䛩䛾䛷䚸ᘚㆤഃ䛿䚸ጔ䛜䛞䜚䛞䜚䜎䛷㏣䛔ワ䜑䜙䜜䛶䛧䜎䛳䛯䛻䜒䛛䛛䜟䜙䛪䚸ጔ䛜ຓ䛡䜢ồ䜑䜛䛣䛸䛜ฟ᮶䛺䛛䛳䛯䛾䛿䚸♫఍ⓗ䛺ᨭ᥼䜔ᑐᛂ䛾㐜䜜䛻䜒ၥ㢟䛜䛒䜛䛸୺ᙇ䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹䛭䛾ᚋ䚸Ẹ㛫ዪᛶ NGO 䜢୰ᚰ䛻 DV ⿕ᐖ⪅䜢ಖㆤ䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾ἲᚊ䜢స䜛䛣䛸䜢┠ⓗ䛸䛧䛯㐠ື䛜㉳䛣䜚䚸ከ䛟䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾ຊ䛜⤖㞟䛧
䛶 2001 ᖺ䛻 DV 㜵Ṇἲ䛜ᡂ❧䛧䜎䛩䚹DV 㜵Ṇἲ᪋⾜ᚋ䛻䛿䚸බⓗᶵ㛵䜢୰ᚰ䛻䛧䛶 DV ⿕ᐖ⪅ᨭ᥼ไᗘ䛜ᩚഛ䛥䜜䛶䛝䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹DV 㜵Ṇἲ䛿䛣䜜䜎䛷䛻 3 ᗘ䛾ᨵṇ䛜⾜䜟䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛡䜜䛹䜒䚸ᮍ䛰䛻 DV ஦௳䛿ᚋ䜢⤯䛯䛺䛔≧ἣ䛜⥆䛝䚸ᨭ᥼ไᗘ䛾୙ഛ䛻䛴䛔䛶䜒ᣦ᦬䛥䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛂DV 䛻䛚䛡䜛⿕ᐖ⪅䛸ຍᐖ⪅䛃䛻䛴䛔䛶䛷䛩䛜䚸ඛ⛬䚸㓄അ⪅䛛䜙䛾⿕ᐖ⤒㦂䛾๭ྜ䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛜 23.7%䛷⏨ᛶ䛜 16.6%䛸⏦䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹䛭䛧䛶ྠ䛨ㄪᰝ䛷䚸DV ⿕ᐖ䜢䛂┦ㄯ䛧䛺䛛䛳䛯䛃䛸ᅇ⟅䛧䛯䛾䛜䚸ዪᛶ䛿 44.9%䚸⏨ᛶ䛿 75.4%䛸䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛸䛟䛻⏨ᛶ䛾๭ྜ䛜㧗䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䜟䛛䜚䜎䛩䚹⏨ᛶ䛾⿕ᐖᐇែ䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿䚸䜎䛰䜎䛰ぢ䛘䛻䛟䛔≧ἣ䛷䛩䚹䛭䛾⌮⏤䛾䜂䛸䛴䛸䛧䛶䚸ጔ䛛䜙ᭀຊ䜢ཷ䛡䛶䛔䜛䛺䜣䛶᜝䛪䛛䛧䛟䛶ㄡ䛻䜒䛔䛘䛺䛔䛸୍ே䛷ၥ㢟䜢ᢪ䛘㎸䜐⏨ᛶ䛾ጼ䛜ᾋ䛛䜃ୖ䛜䜚䜎䛩䚹୍㒊䛾⮬἞య䛷䛿⏨ᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䜈䛾ᑐᛂ䜢ጞ䜑䛶䛔䛶䚸ᮾி䚸ி㒔䚸⚄ዉᕝ䛺䛹䛷䛿䚸⏨ᛶᑓ⏝䛾㟁ヰ┦ㄯ䜢㛤ጞ䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹DV 䛾≉ᚩ䛸䛿䚸➨ 1 䛻䚸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊໬䛥䜜䛯ᑐ❧䛾ᵓ㐀䛜䛒䜚䚸ᛶู䛻೫䛳䛯ຍᐖ䞉⿕ᐖ䛾ഴྥ䛜䛒䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹➨ 2 䛻䚸ᝎ䜣䛷䛔䜛ᮏே䜒⿕ᐖ⪅䞉ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶ㄆ㆑䛩䜛䛣䛸䛜㞴䛧䛔䛸䛔䛖ᙜ஦⪅ᛶ䛾႙ኻ䛸䛔䛖ၥ㢟䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹DV ຍᐖ⪅ྥ䛡䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸䜎䛰ከ䛟䛿䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䛜⏨ᛶ䛾 DV ຍᐖ⪅ྥ䛡䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛜Ẹ㛫ᅋయ䜢୰ᚰ䛻⾜䜟䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䜎䛯䚸䛭䛾఩⨨䛵䛡䛿䚸DV ⿕ᐖ⪅ᨭ᥼䛾୍⎔䛸䛧䛶䛾 DV ຍᐖ⪅ᩍ⫱䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ᅜ䛷䛿䚸ㄪᰝ䜢䛧䛯䜚ᐇ᪋䛧䛯䜚䛸䛔䛖ヨ䜏䜢䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䛜䚸DV ຍᐖ⪅ᩍ⫱䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛿䜎䛰ጞ䜎䛳䛯䜀䛛䜚䛷䛩䚹௒ぢ䛶䛝䛯䜘䛖䛻䚸ᐇែ䛸䛧䛶䚸DV ⿕ᐖ⪅䛾 9 ๭䛿ዪᛶ䛷䛒䜚䚸ᅜ㝿ⓗ䛺ഴྥ䛸䜒୍⮴䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ጔ䛻䜘䜛ኵ䛾ẅே஦௳䛿䚸ᖺ㛫 70 ௳๓ᚋ䜢ᩘ䛘䜛䛸ゝ䜟䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛣䛾୰䛻䛿䚸DV 䛻⪏䛘䛛䛽ኵ䜢ẅᐖ䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷ᭀຊ䛛䜙ゎᨺ䛥䜜䜛䜿䞊䝇䜒ከ䛔䛸◊✲⪅䛿ᣦ᦬䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹⏨ᛶ䛾 DV ⿕ᐖ䜒㢧ᅾ໬䛧䛶䛔䜛≧ἣ䛷䛿䛒䜛䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸DV 䛾ᐇែ䜢ぢ䜛㝈䜚䚸ዪᛶ䜈䛾ᨭ᥼䛾ᚲせᛶ䛸ᨭ᥼䛜䝇䝮䞊䝈䛻ཷ䛡䜙䜜䜛䜘䛖䛺ไᗘ䛾ᩚഛ䜢᪩ᛴ䛻㐍䜑䛶䛔䛟䛣䛸䛜㔜せ䛰䛸䛔䛘䜎䛩䚹ሗ࿌䛿௨ୖ䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌

23ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ
᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻰㼂 䛾ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅䛆ཧ⪃ᩥ⊩䛇㻌

ᑠᕝ┿⌮Ꮚ䚸2015䚸䛄䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䛸Ẹ㛫䝅䜵䝹䝍䞊䇷⿕ᐖᙜ஦⪅ᨭ᥼䛾ᵓ⠏䛸ᒎ㛤䛅ୡ⧊᭩ᡣኵ䠄ᜊே䠅䛛䜙䛾ᭀຊㄪᰝ◊✲఍䚸2000䚸䛄䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䛊᪂⿦∧䛋䛅᭷ᩫ㛶ᡄ⬟ẸỤⴭ䚸2002䚸䛄䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䛅୙☻᭩ᡣᡄ⬟ẸỤ⦅ⴭ䚸2013䚸䛄༴ᶵ䜢䛾䜚䛣䛘䜛ዪ䛯䛱䇷DV ἲ 10 ᖺ䚸ᨭ᥼䛾᪂ᆅᖹ䜈䛅ಙᒣ♫ෆ㛶ᗓ䚸2015䚸䛄ᖹᡂ 27 ᖺ∧⏨ዪඹྠཧ⏬ⓑ᭩䛅

24

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌㉁␲ᛂ⟅䛆Question 1䛇ዪᛶ䛜Ṋჾ䜢ᡭ䛻䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷ຊ䜢ᚓ䛶ᐙ∗㛗ไᗘ䜔ᐙᗞ䛛䜙ゎᨺ䛥䜜䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛰䛜䚸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺㐠ື䜔㌷㝲䛾୰䛻䛿䚸䜔䛿䜚ᐙ∗㛗ⓗ䛺ᵓ㐀䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䜟䜜䜛䚹䛭䛾୰䛷ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿▩┪䜢ឤ䛨䛶䛔䛺䛔䛾䛛䠛㻌

Atreyee Sen: I want to start by Erica mentioning how these women go through extreme asceticism
to show their involvement or commitment to their organization. And, how they have to spend hours
displaying the fact that they could be a very involved and committed member of a very hardcore
radical organization. I think that this is something which is interesting in terms of looking at
international perspectives on women’s participation in radical movements, a kind of extreme
violence that the women subject themselves to in order to show their loyalty or commitment to therhetoric.
Several scholars, for example, will argue that female suicide bombing is a very extreme example ofthat. Committing your body to be subjected to extreme violence or something that is more of asymbolic violence, this is a more dreaded form of violence. The fact that the women, the female
bodies in particular, can be offered to an organization through the path of violence is something thatis important. The question of victimhood and perpetrators is something that I found really, reallyfascinating in the context of Dr. Ogawa’s presentation. And, I think again what Erica and I are
trying to do in this project is that to step aside from this pattern of looking at women’s participationin violence exclusively through the lens of either victimology or rhetoric of suffering.
All the agencies involving women in the context is something that women articulate themselves asemancipatory. What we have emphasized on these trends is: What are actually women’s roles? How
do women themselves see their engagement in those roles? How are they being represented bythemselves? What are their own motivations? What are their memories once this violence is over?
How do they see their actions? We are returning women’s voices to a history of violence andconflict. But, it is always about women who are looking at themselves as victims or people
representing women as victims.
What you raised was a very important question which is that people don’t necessarily look at theirown actions as victims or perpetrators: heroic or non-heroic. It is about how people represent them.
The women belonging to the Indian National Army, for example, were really glorified by people.
Their heroism was something that was celebrated and glorified by people. The women wrote a letterin blood to the head of the Indian National Army and said that, as women, they wanted to also makea contribution because at the beginning, they were banned from participating. But when women
joined the Army, they were really celebrated. While it was accepted that men would do it, that men
25

㉁␲ᛂ⟅

would fight the colonizers, the fact that women chose all these different paths—whether it isGandhi’s nonviolence movement or the Indian National Army— it was people who attributed
heroism to them. And, I think, what is controversial about the way we are looking at radical
movements now is that local people continue to attribute heroism to women who joined radical
religious movements.
We look at it as terrorism. Women have joined up a terrorist group. But, somewhere, these womenare being celebrated, they are considered to be heroes and nationalists. What we look in imperialism,
women participating in the revolution, in Algeria, for example, where they were fighting thecolonizers, was like a part of history. But, if you look at it from the perspective of women now
taking part in the radical religious movements, they still think that they are fighting imperialism.
They are fighting western imperialism or some sort of imperialism. I think that this is what makes
this issue about victims and perpetrators look a bit complex.
There is limits of gender frameworks to understand women’s participation in radical movements.
We have to constantly think about the fact that; Are they challenging patriarchy, are they not
challenging patriarchy? Are they feminists, are they not feminists? Are they or aren’t they consciousof gender solidarities? But, if you look at it from the perspective of the women themselves, as I wasworking in the slum with these group of women, what they want is a brief reprieve. What they want
is a temporary state of being where they could just go to work freely without the fear of being
attacked or sexually abused in public space. They wouldn’t understand words like “patriarchy”;
they are just illiterate, average, and everyday women. For them, if you tell them, “Okay here aresome knives, and I am telling you that it is fine for you to use knives”, you are talking about thecase of self-defense. What the women feel from their perspective is power. Power is a word they
understand, but patriarchy is a word they don’t understand. It is complicated to look at it throughthe lens of scholars. We are saying, “yes they are re-enforcing patriarchy,” but, for the womenthemselves, they think they are challenging the men and getting more access to public space. I thinkthat is where the academic paradox really is. Can we actually explore this from the perspective of
the people who are joining these movements? There are obviously some benefits that they are
getting out of it.
Erica Baffelli: I just wanted to add on what Atreyee was saying about the central idea of the body,the asceticism and this kind of glorification. Although my case study is in a very different context
and I’m working on a relatively small group, something that I am starting to notice is the narrative
about the body glorified through the ascetic practices, to take one’s body to the extreme, purified by
the asceticism. Then, when women are re-elaborating their past and rejecting narratives about the
body change, some of them start talking about violence and of denying their femininity through theascetic practices. Or the bodies that were described as strong and purified are now seen as corrupted
and sick. This idea of bringing their voices, their narratives is quite fundamental for our project.
26

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

And, this can be probably one of the key terms and elements we can use to look from a comparative
perspective, tanking into consideration the different contexts.

䛆Question 2䛇

Professor Sen made a very compelling case on the way in which gender figures in theconstruction of these women’s identities as freedom fighters, terrorists, or even women who
defend themselves in public transportation. And, I wanted to ask whether gender is alsopart of the conversation, if and when these women are arrested or captured. Does it figurein the punishment decision as either an aggravating circumstance or extenuating
circumstance or not at all?
Atreyee Sen: This question of gender that very much comes into being; but, I think, what isinteresting is the fact that it comes into being, but not for Muslim or Christian or Buddhist women,
or women from any other religious groups, because they are not given that privilege. It is only the
women who are part of these radical religious movements who are going to get this privilege. It is away in which you also tend to mobilize women who maybe Hindu women, but are not interested inparty politics or religious radicalism. For example, if you ask these women how to spell“nationalism”, they don’t know, because they are that illiterate and poor—often like working as
domestic laborers and maids in factories. They are not women who actually know about theideology or nationalism, or anything like that. But, it is about these practical services of gendersolidarity, which are offered to these women, which work for them. So, they remain committed tothe party. Are they really concerned about the Hindu nation? I don’t think they care. You know they
are slum women, they don’t give a damn, but when it comes to saying that if you join the party thenwe will give you knives and you can actually protect yourself on the street and the police willprotect you as well, it is a fantastic deal for them. I am trying to say is the women are also strategicin the way that they engage with this kind of religious radicalism.

䛆Question 3䛇

There are three slides, about supporters, inbetweeners and critics of women participation,
and among the supporters, there was this argument that the women once joined state andinformal armies and organizations, their challenge its dominantly masculine practices. So, it
is an argument often made that when an organization gets diversity, something will change
and usually it is for the better. Can you elaborate a little bit on the gender side of this? I
mean, it is not just diversity, but we are talking about women. How do the organizations
change?
Atreyee Sen: I am going to give one example from my own work. The Shiv Sena, has been around
27

㉁␲ᛂ⟅

from the 1960s, and it has been a very prominent party. And, it was around for 25 years, when in
1985, they created their first women’s wing. For 25 years, they hadn’t even thought about diversity.
They didn’t even think that it was a party which was in any way made for women. But,
accommodation of women in the Shiv Sena, over time, transformed a lot of its political agendas.
The party incorporated the idea of women’s rights; what can we do for the Hindu women? what can
we do to protect everyday women on the street? It never had an agenda which was ever directed
towards women. Even though it is as narrow and parochial as only offering good things to Hindu
women, they still brought in women’s agendas into question. For example, the party leader, when
this whole thing about knife giving was becoming quite controversial in the press, was actuallydeveloping choices for women by saying that if you think that it makes you feel quite weird aboutcarrying a knife in your purse, carry things which you associate with your kitchen. Carry chili
powder in your purse, so you can actually throw into the eyes of the perpetrator. It gives you time torun. So, these are the ways in which the party increasingly sensitizes itself to the needs of its votebank, it is a female vote bank, frankly. They need the women to remain in power.
If you look at some studies which are looking at women joining the US Army, for example, which isa State sponsored army and not a radical religious movement. A lot of scholars look at the US Army
as a Christian fundamentalist organization. That it is a way in which they accommodate a load ofIslamophobic people and deploy them to work or fight wars in Islamic nations. But stepping awayfrom that, the incorporation of women in the US Army, for example, a lot of people have said, hasreduced the amount of bullying that went on within the Army. People are hesitant to do hazing infront of or in the presence of other women. I am not saying that there is no sexual abuse in the army.
There is quite a high rate of sexual abuse of women and rape in the army, as well. But, that was oneof the arguments which was put forward that because of the diversity, it changed all the very strong
masculine practices which had been there in the US Army for a long time.
Erica Baffelli: Going back to the question about punishment, I was thinking about a point that wehaven’t mentioned which came up in studies on Northern Ireland IRA members. Miranda Alison,for example, looks at IRA women combatants and says that in post-conflict situation female
combatants were more stigmatized than men for being part of it. This is one of the other elements
we are quite interested in looking at in this project. How these women are seen in the society in the
post-conflict context and what are the differences between female and male combatants. Even if
they haven’t been in prison, they are being stigmatized for having chosen to be a part of thesegroups, for not having a family, for renouncing to motherhood in order to be part of radical
movements and so on.
Atreyee Sen: Just to add a little bit to that is that historically, once women had an opportunity to be
non-domestic in the context of violence, and in the post-conflict time, they found it really hard to
get back to domesticity. It was like tasting the freedom that came with violence and conditions of28

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

violence and conflict. You see it in the World War I and II, where the women went to fight. Men too
went to fight in the trenches; and women had to take up the banks, post office, and as factory
workers. When the men came back from work, women hated going back to domesticity and they
fought to keep their jobs. The men were absolutely outraged by the fact that women became soorganized in trying to retain their economic activities and freedom. This is something which keeps
on coming back in the context of the post-conflict areas. That is why we have given a lot ofemphasis on this idea of memory. Which is that, how do women remember the violence and relate it
to what is going on with them now.

䛆Question 4䛇

I would like to know your opinion about the idea that some women act for or play for sociallydominant ideology or perception which often tend to be masculine and I think this is a kindof issue of women members of the Aum cult, right? So, some women killed or hurt other
women as an agent. What do you think about this kind of idea? You touched upon this I
believe but I would like you to clarify on that again.
Atreyee Sen: It depends on to what extent women see themselves as culturalised or committed tothe organization. If you are somebody who is very, very committed to a socially dominantmasculinist radical religious movement, you would often see killing as not necessarily act of taking
a life or you might not face any ethical challenges because you see it as defeating an enemy. But
having said that, there is a lot counter literature which is emerging right now, which looks at
women's participation in violence as sport that they are doing it because they enjoy it. And thequestion is that what is the psychosocial impact of that for other women or for the next generation?
When I was working with this group, for example, the fact that often male children saw womencarrying arms created a very confused masculinity in them. It does have a certain kind of
psychological impact on the next generation.
Erica Baffelli: I think in Aum there is an interesting element that is the idea of being part of an elite.
During interviews, some women said that it was easier to renounce to the beliefs and to renounce tothe leader than to renounce the idea that they were a chosen elite and they were going to save theworld. This idea of being “special”, which even women, if doing the ascetic practice properly, could
reach higher spiritual levels, gave them authority in a sense. And then, at one point, the beating
became part of it. Beating was acceptable because it was seen as helping the other person to reachliberation. Even before the killing started, the beating had already started, together with the idea ofgaining power in the movement through extreme ascetic practices. I think this idea of “elite” issimilar in other radical organizations and it’s a key element to understand what kind of violence(and toward whom) is accepted in the group.

29

㉁␲ᛂ⟅

䛆Question 5䛇

What happens to media images of women fighting? You probably know 20 years ago, there
was a movie called G.I Jane and more recently there has been popular movies of Mixed
Martial Arts fighting. Some of these women, may look good for Hollywood, are quite violent.
There must be a gap between what men think of women in the army and the women who
were actually in the army and that you interviewed. Has there been any influence between
each other and is there going to change? Is there anything more recent you want research
about?
ᯇᑿ䠖䛄GI 䝆䜵䞊䞁䛅䛾䛣䜝䛾ዪᛶරኈ䛾䜲䝯䞊䝆䛿䛩䛤䛟≉ู䛺ዪᛶ䛸䛔䛖ឤ䛨䛰䛳䛯䛜䚸᭱㏆ほ䛯䝻䝬䞁䝏䝑䜽䝁䝯䝕䜱ᫎ⏬䛷䚸⏨ᛶ䛾ዟ䛥䜣䛜䜰䝣䜺䞁䛷ᡓṚ䛧䛯රኈ䛷䛒䜛䛸䛔䛖タᐃ䛜䛒䜚䚸䛭䜜䛜᪥ᖖ䛾䝰䝏䞊䝣䛸䛧䛶ฟ䛶䛝䛶䛔䜛䛾䜢ぢ䛯䛸䛝䛻䚸ዪᛶරኈ䛾⾲㇟䛸䛔䛖䜒䛾䛜䚸䛄GI 䝆䜵䞊䞁䛅䛾᫬௦䛛䜙䛿኱䛝䛟ኚ䜟䛳䛶䚸ዪᛶරኈ䛾Ꮡᅾ䛜䛭䜜䛰䛡᪥ᖖ໬䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸䛔䛖༳㇟䜢ཷ䛡䛯䚹ᑠᕝ䠖DV ⿕ᐖ⪅䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸⬤ᙅ䛺ዪᛶ䛸䛔䛖䜲䝯䞊䝆䛜䛔䜎䛰䛻኱䛝䛔䛸ᛮ䛖䚹1960 ᖺ௦ 70 ᖺ௦䛻䜰䝯䝸䜹䛷䚸battered women’s movement 䛜㉳䛣䜚䚸䛭䛾ᚋ䚸䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮䛾୰䛷䚸䛂victimization-agency ㆟ㄽ䛃䛜ᒎ㛤䛥䜜䛯䚹䜰䝯䝸䜹䛾䝣䜵䝭䝙䝇䝖ἲ⌮ㄽ䛾ᇶ♏䜢⠏䛔䛯◊✲⪅䛷䛒䜚ᘚㆤኈ䛾䜻䝱䝃䝸䞁䞉䝬䝑䜻䝜䞁䛿䚸DV ⿕ᐖዪᛶ䜢⿢ุ䛷ᘚㆤ䛧䛯㝿䛻䚸ዪᛶ䜢⬤ᙅ䛺Ꮡᅾ䛷䛒䜛䛸ᤊ䛘⿢ุ䜢㜚䛳䛯䚹䛡䜜䛹䜒䚸ዪᛶ䜢⬤ᙅ䛺䛂⿕ᐖ⪅䛃䛰䛸ᤊ䛘䜛
どⅬ䛿䚸ዪᛶ䜢ᚑᒓⓗ䛺❧ሙ䛸୙ྍศ䛺䜒䛾䛸䛧䛶ᤊ䛘䜛䛣䛸䛻䛺䜛䛸䛧䛶ᢈุ䜢ཷ䛡䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜛䚹䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮䛾㆟ㄽ䛷䛿䚸⿕ᐖ⪅䛸⾲᫂䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻䜘䜛⿵ൾ䜔ᨭ᥼䛿⿕ᐖ⪅䛾㜵ᚚ⟇䛸䛧䛶㔜せ䛰䛸䛔䛖ពぢ䛜䛒䜛୍᪉䛷䚸ዪᛶ䜢᝺䜑䛺⿕ᐖ⪅䛻㑏ඖ䛩䜛䛣䛸䛿䚸ከ䛟䛾ዪᛶ䛾య㦂䜢཯ᫎ䛧䛶䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖ᢈุ䛜䛒䛳䛯䚹䜶䞊䝆䜵䞁䝅䞊䛾ほⅬ䛷䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛿↓ຊ䛷⬤ᙅ䛺Ꮡᅾ䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸ಶே䛾⪃䛘䛻ᇶ䛵䛔䛶ᡂ㛗䛧⾜Ⅽ䜢㉳䛣䛩⬟ຊ䜢䜒䛴Ꮡᅾ䛷䛒䜚䚸ኚ໬䛾୺య䛸䛺䜛ྍ⬟ᛶ䛜䛒䜛䛸ᣦ᦬䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹䛭䜜䜖䛘䚸᪤Ꮡ䛾⛛ᗎ䛾୰䛷⏕䛝ᘏ䜃䛶䛝䛯 DV ⿕ᐖ⪅䛿䜶䞊䝆䜵䞁䝅䞊䛷䛒䜚⬟ືⓗ䛺Ꮡᅾ䛸䛔䛘䜛䚹䛣䛾䜘䛖䛺㆟ㄽ䛜䛒䛳䛯䛾䛷䚸䜰䝯䝸䜹䛷䛿䚸DV ⿕ᐖዪᛶ䛾䜲䝯䞊䝆䛜⩻䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛ഃ㠃䛜䛒䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹

Atreyee Sen: I am going to say a couple of things. One of the key categories of representing
women fighting, or women fighters, is of hyper-sexualization. That sort of fighting women’s bodycarrying arms is sexualized. It is a very attractive, desirable, female body. There is a particular sortof return to the hyper sexualization of it. The second thing is that if you look at the media
representations of women who are fighting—if they are fighting for the nation, a nation which isconsidered to be legitimate by the media itself, then it is still something which is glorified orsomething which is accepted. But, if it is a woman fighting for a cause, which the media considers
to be illegitimate and unjustified, then the same woman is considered to be who I had put one slide,“the hybrid monster,” which is that she remains neither man nor woman, and she has no spacewithin the sort of mainstream society.
Because you mentioned Lynndie England, I was thinking about that. This term “hybrid monster”
was actually developed in the context of the Lynndie England controversy. When images of her
30

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃㻌

torturing prisoners in Abu Ghraib actually hit the media. Women in army are entering into this
hyper competitive space, where they have to show that they are as good as men when it comes todisplaying violence. Are we actually creating these hybrid monsters who are not sure whether they
are women anymore and are aware of the fact that they can’t be the same as men? One of the things
about Abu Ghraib, which again, sort of in terms of its representational politics, became muchgendered as there were a lot of women in Abu Ghraib. They were the women who wereinterrogators, torturers, soldiers, but somehow only the character of Lynndie England got attention.
And, she was severely punished for it; she received a media trial, was chucked out of the army,
never given another job, never returned to mainstream civil life. So it is like the media holds thetrial as to who they think are the legitimate participants in any kind of violent organization.

31

ࠕ,*6 ㏻ಙࠖᥖ㍕㛤ദሗ࿌㻌䛂㻵㻳㻿 ㏻ಙ䛃ᥖ㍕㛤ദሗ࿌㻌 ྜྷཎබ⨾䠄䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉௵ 㻾㻲䠅㻌
㻌
2016 ᖺ 10 ᭶ 19 ᪥䠄Ỉ䠅䚸䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䛻䛶䚸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ୺ദ䛻䜘䜛ᅜ㝿䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛂ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃䛃䛜㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯䚹ᮏ䝅䞁䝫䝆䜴䝮䛿䚸䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ䛾䜶䝸䜹䞉䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䛾௻⏬❧᱌䛷䛒䜚䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸Ặ䛾ඹྠ◊✲⪅䛷䛒䜛䝁䝨䞁䝝䞊䝀䞁኱Ꮫ䛾䜰䞊䝖䝸䞊䞉䝉䞁෸ᩍᤵ䜢ᇶㄪㅮ₇䛻䚸ᅜ❧Ẹ᪘Ꮫ༤≀㤋䛾ᯇᑿ⍞✑෸ᩍᤵ䛸᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍≉ู◊✲ဨ䠄PD䠅䛾ᑠᕝ┿⌮ᏊẶ䜢䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖䛸䛧䛶䛚ᣍ䛝䛧䛯䚹ᮏ௻⏬䛿䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䚸䝉䞁୧Ặ䛻䜘䜚㐍䜑䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸Ꮫ㝿ⓗ䛛䛴ᅜ㝿ⓗ䛺䝣䜱䞊䝗䝞䝑䜽䜢ᚓ䜛䛣䛸䜒┠ⓗ䛾䜂䛸䛴䛷䛒䛳䛯䚹▼஭䜽䞁䝒ᫀᏊ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ㛗䛻䜘䜛㛤఍ᣵᣜ䛻⥆䛟䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸Ặ䛾㊃᪨ㄝ᫂䛷䛿䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸Ặ䛸䝉䞁Ặ䛻䜘䜛䚸㐣⃭䛺᐀ᩍ䞉ᨻ἞ᅋయ䚸㐠ື䜈䛾ዪᛶ䛾㛵୚䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾ඹྠ◊✲䜢㛤ጞ䛧䛯⤒⦋䛜⤂௓䛥䜜䛯䚹୧Ặ䛸䜒䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜Ṋჾ䜢ᡭ䛻䛧䛯䜚䚸ᭀຊⓗ䛺⾜Ⅽ䛻✚ᴟⓗ䛻ཧຍ䛧䛶䛔䜛஦ᐇ䛜䛒䜛䛻䜒䛛䛛䜟䜙䛪䚸䛔䛴䜎䛷䜒ዪᛶ䛾⿕ᐖ⪅ᛶ䛜ᙉㄪ䛥䜜䛯䜚䚸⮬⇿ᨷᧁ䛺䛹䜈䛾ཧຍ䛿䛂౛እⓗ䛃䛸≉ูど䛥䜜⥆䛡䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛻␲ၥ䜢ᣢ䛱䚸◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䜢❧䛱ୖ䛢䛯䛸䛾䛣䛸䛷䛒䜛䚹䜎䛯䚸ྠ䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾㐣⃭άືཧຍ䛾ືᶵ䞉䛭䛾⾲㇟䞉䛭䛾ᚋ䛾グ᠈䛾 3 䛴䛾せ⣲䛻ὀ┠䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹䛭䛧䛶䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸Ặ䛛䜙䛿䚸⮬㌟䛜◊✲䜢⥆䛡䛶䛔䜛䜸䜴䝮┿⌮ᩍෆ䛷䛾䚸ዪᛶᣦᑟ⪅䛾ᙺ๭䛜䛹䛖䛷䛒䛳䛯䛛䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾ゎㄝ䛜ຍ䛘䜙䜜䛯䚹ዪᛶ䛾ྑ⩼άື䛾◊✲䜢㐍䜑䛶䛝䛯䛸䛔䛖䝉䞁Ặ䛾ᇶㄪㅮ₇䛷䛿䚸㐣⃭䛺㐠ື䛻㛵䜟䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾ከᵝ䛺ືᶵ䜔ཧຍᙧែ䛾౛䜢ᣲ䛢䚸䛭䜜䜙䛜䚸ᚑ᮶䛾䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊ศᯒ䛾ᯟ⤌䜏䜔䝯䝕䜱䜰⾲㇟䛷䛿ㄝ᫂䛧䛝䜜䛺䛔䜒䛾䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䜢♧䛧䛯䚹౛䛘䜀䚸㐣⃭䛺᐀ᩍᅋయ䛻ຍධ䛩䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿䚸ຍධ๓䛻䛭䛾άື䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾༑ศ䛺᝟ሗ䜢ᚓ䛶䛚䜚䚸」ᩘ䛾㑅ᢥ⫥䜒᳨ウ䛧䚸⇍៖䛾ୖ䛷䛭䛾㐨䜢㑅䜣䛷䛔䜛䚹䝣䜵䝭䝙䝇䝖䛷䛒䜜䜀䚸ዪᛶ䛻䜒⏨ᛶ䛸ྠᵝ䛾䛂ᡓ䛖ᶒ฼䛃䛜䛒䜛䛸䛾ពぢ䜢ᣢ䛴䛣䛸䜒䛒䜛䚹ᑐ↷ⓗ䛻䚸⏨ዪ䛾㌟యⓗᕪ␗䜢㔜せど䛧䚸㖠ᚋ䛾ᨭ᥼䛸䛔䛖䛂ዪᛶ䛾ᙺ๭䛃䜢ㄳ㈇䛖⪅䜒䛔䜛䚹䛣䛖䛧䛯஦ᐇ䛿䚸ዪᛶ䠙⿕ᐖ⪅䚸ዪᛶ䠙䝢䞊䝇䝯䞊䜹䞊䛸䛔䛖⌮ゎ䛾ᯟ䛻䛿཰䜎䜙䛺䛔䚹䜎䛯䚸㔜せ䛺䝫䜲䞁䝖䛸䛧䛶䚸⏨ᛶ୺ᑟ䛾㐠ື䛻ዪᛶ䛜ຍ䜟䜛䛣䛸䛷ᚲ䛪䛭䛾άື䛻ኚ໬䛜㉳䛝䜛䛣䛸䚸䜎䛯䚸ᡓ᫬䛸䛔䛖≧ἣ䛜䚸᪤Ꮡ䛾♫఍つ⠊䜔ᐙ∗㛗ไᗘ䜢ᦂ䛥䜆䜚䚸ዪᛶ䛾䜶䞁䝟䝽䝯䞁䝖䜢䜒䛯䜙䛩䛣䛸䜒ᣦ᦬䛥䜜䛯䚹䛥䜙䛻䚸㐣⃭䛺㐠ື䛻䛚䛡䜛ዪᛶྠኈ䛾㛵ಀᛶ䛾䛒䜚᪉䛾౛䛸䛧䛶䚸䜎䛪䚸䝉䞁Ặ䛜ㄪᰝ䜢㐍䜑䛶䛝䛯䝠䞁䝗䜳䞊䞉䝘䝅䝵䝘䝸䝇䝖ᅋయ䝅䞂䞉䝉䝘䛾㐠ື䛻䛚䛡䜛༠ຊ㛵ಀ䛜⤂௓䛥䜜䛯䚹ᅋయ䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾㐃ᖏ䛿䚸䛭䛾ᛮ᝿䛾䜏䛷䛺䛟䚸බඹ஺㏻ᶵ㛵䜢฼⏝䛩䜛䛸䛝䛻ᣢ䛱Ṍ䛟ᑠᆺ䛾䝘䜲䝣䜔䝺䜲䝥⿕ᐖ䜢㜵䛠䛯䜑䛾ᑓ⏝䛾䝇䝬䞊䝖䝣䜷䞁䜰䝥䝸䛺䛹䚸⮬⾨ᡭẁ䜢౪⤥䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻䜘䛳䛶ᙉ໬䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛸䛔䛖䚹䜎䛯䚸ዪᛶ㛫䛾ᩛᑐ䚸ᭀຊ䛾䜿䞊䝇䛸䛧䛶䛿䚸⡿ᅜ䛾䜻䝸䝇䝖ᩍཎ⌮୺⩏ᅋయ䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜䚸⮬䜙䛾᐀᪨䛻ᇶ䛵䛟⌮᝿䛜၏୍䛾䜰䝯䝸䜹䛾ẕぶീ䛷䛒䜛䛸䛧䛶䚸୰⤯䜢⾜䛖䜽䝸䝙䝑䜽䛾↝䛝ウ䛱䜔䚸⛣Ẹዪᛶ䜢Ṛയ䛥䛫䛯䜚䛩䜛౛䜔䚸䜲䞁䝗䞉䜹䝅䝭䞊䝹ᆅ᪉䛾䜲䝇䝷䝮ᩍዪᛶᅋయ䛜䚸♫఍䜢䜽䝸䞊䞁䛻䛩䜛䛸⛠䛧䛶䚸බ䛾ሙ䛷䚸すὒ䛾⩦័䛷䛒䜛䞂䜯䝺䞁䝍䜲䞁䝕䞊䜢ᴦ䛧䜐ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾㢦䛻䜲䞁䜽䜢ሬ䜚䛴䛡䛯䜚䚸╔⾰䜢◚䛟䛺䛹䛾㎯䜑䜢୚䛘䜛䛺䛹䛧䛶䛔䜛౛䛜♧䛥䜜䛯䚹⤖䜃䛷䛿䚸䛂ዪᛶ䛾㞟ᅋᭀຊ䛿䛄䝋䝣䝖䞉䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮䛅䛛䠛䛃䛸䛔䛖タၥ䛜ᢞ䛢䛛䛡䜙䜜䛯䚹䝣䜵䝭䝙䝈䝮䛸䛔䛖どⅬ䜢ᣢ䛳䛶䜏䜛䛸䚸㐣⃭䛺㐠ື䜈䛾ዪᛶ䛾ཧຍ䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䜢ᐙ䛾እ䜈㐃䜜ฟ䛧䚸Ṋჾ䜢ᣢ䛯䛫䚸⮬ᑛᚰ䜢㧗䜑䜛⤖ᯝ䜢䜒䛯䜙䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹䛯䛰䛧䚸䛭䛖䛧䛯୰䛷䜒䚸ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿䚸㠃䛸ྥ䛛䛳䛶⏨ᛶ䜔ᐙ∗㛗ไᗘ䛻ᣮ䜐䛾䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸䜐䛧䜝䝋䝣䝖䛻䚸䛂๰㐀ⓗ᭹ᚑ䛃䛸䜒࿧䜉䜛᪂䛧䛔㡰ᛂ䛾ᙧែ䜢๰䜚ฟ䛩䛣䛸䛷䚸♫఍඲య䛾䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊つ⠊䛻ኚ໬䜢䜒䛯䜙䛭䛖䛸䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸䛾⤖ㄽ䛜㏙䜉䜙䜜䛯䚹32

IGS Project Series 7ዪᛶ䚸᐀ᩍ䚸ᭀຊ䠖ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ䛛䜙䛾෌⪃

http://www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp/igs ㏻ಙ/igs ㏻ಙ-2016/2016/12/1018/䝕䜱䝇䜹䝑䝃䞁䝖䛾ᯇᑿẶ䛛䜙䛿䚸ᡓதຍᢸ䜔ᨻ἞㜚த䜢⫼ᬒ䛻䛧䛯ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ዪᛶ䛾Ꮡᅾ䛿䚸Ṕྐⓗ䛛䛴⥅⥆ⓗ䛻ぢ䜛䛣䛸䛜䛷䛝䜛䛜䚸䛭䛾ᭀຊ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛ホ౯䛿䚸䛔䛴䚸ㄡ䛾どⅬ䛷ㄒ䜛䛾䛛䛻䜘䛳䛶䚸኱䛝䛟␗䛺䛳䛶䛟䜛䛰䜝䛖䛸䛾ᣦ᦬䛜䛒䛳䛯䚹౛䛘䜀䚸ᡓᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛻䛚䛔䛶䛿⿕ᐖ⪅ྐほ䛜ඛ⾜䛧䛶䛔䛯䛜䚸80 ᖺ௦௨㝆䚸ᡓ᫬୰䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾ᚋ᪉ᨭ᥼⪅䛸䛧䛶䛾ᡓதຍᢸ䛻┠䛜ྥ䛡䜙䜜䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜚䚸ຍᐖ⪅ྐほ䜈䛾㌿᥮䛜ぢ䜙䜜䛯䚹⮬㌟䛾◊✲䝣䜱䞊䝹䝗䛷䛒䜛䜲䞁䝗䛛䜙䛾౛䛸䛧䛶䛿䚸⊂❧㐠ື䛾⌧ሙ䛻䛚䛔䛶䚸ዪᛶ≉᭷䛾㐨ᚨᛶ䜔ᚸ⪏ᛶ䛜㠀ᭀຊ㐠ື䛻䜅䛥䜟䛧䛔䛸䛔䛖䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䞉䝺䝖䝸䝑䜽䛻䜘䜛ዪᛶືဨ䛜⾜䜟䜜䛯䛜䚸䛣䛖䛧䛯䝺䝖䝸䝑䜽䛿䝉䞁Ặ䛾ሗ࿌䛻ぢ䜙䜜䜛⌧௦䛾஦㇟䛻䛿䜒䛿䜔ᙜ䛶䛿䜎䜙䛺䛔䚹⤖፧᫬䛻᎑䛾ᣢཧ㈈䠄䝎䜴䝸䠅䛜ᑡ䛺䛔ሙྜ䛻䚸䝃䝸䞊䛻ⅆ䜢䛴䛡䛶ẅ䛧䛶䛧䜎䛖䜿䞊䝇䛷ዪᛶ䛜ẅே⪅䛸䛧䛶㐊ᤕ䛥䜜䛯䜚䚸䝺䜲䝥䛻䛒䛳䛯ፉ䜢ᐙᗞෆ䛾ᖺ㛗䛾ዪᛶ䛜ẅ䛧䛶䛧䜎䛖ྡ㄃ẅே䛜⾜䛺䜟䜜䛯䜚䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹㛢䛨䜙䜜䛯ᐙᗞෆ䛷Ⓨ⏕䛩䜛ᭀຊ䛾⫼ᬒ䛻䛿䚸ẕ䛸ፉ䚸⩏ẕ䛸ፉ䛸䛔䛳䛯ዪᛶྠኈ䚸䛭䛧䛶⏨ᛶ䜒ྵ䜑䛯ᐙ᪘ෆ䛾䚸䜟䛛䜚䜔䛩䛔ຍᐖ⪅䛸⿕ᐖ⪅ീ䛻ᙜ䛶䛿䜎䜙䛺䛔䚸ධ䜜Ꮚ≧䛻䛺䛳䛯」㞧䛺ᭀຊᵓ㐀䛜䛒䜛䛰䜝䛖䛸䛾ᣦ᦬䜒䛺䛥䜜䛯䚹⥆䛔䛶䚸ᑠᕝẶ䛛䜙䛿䚸ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛷䛒䜛䝗䝯䝇䝔䜱䝑䜽䞉䝞䜲䜸䝺䞁䝇䠄DV䠅䛾᪥ᮏ䛾⌧≧䛻↷䜙䛧䛶䛾䝁䝯䞁䝖䛜䛒䛳䛯䚹DV 䛻㛵䛧䛶䛿䚸യᐖ䞉ᭀ⾜䛸䜒䚸⏨ᛶຍᐖ⪅䞉ዪᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䛾䜿䞊䝇䛜 9 ๭䜢༨䜑䜛䛜䚸ẅே䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸ዪᛶຍᐖ䛜 4 ๭䛻ୖ䜛䚹ጔ䛻䜘䜛ኵẅᐖ䛷䛿䚸㛗ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜛ኵ䛛䜙䛾ᭀຊ䛻⪏䛘䛛䛽䛶䛾ẅே䛸䛔䛖䜿䞊䝇䜒ከ䛟䚸ຍᐖ⪅䞉⿕ᐖ⪅䛾ᭀຊᵓ㐀䛿༢⣧䛷䛿䛺䛔䚹ᮍ䛰ዪᛶ䛜⿕ᐖ⪅䛻䛺䜛䜿䞊䝇䛜ᅽಽⓗከᩘ䛷䛿䛒䜛䛜䚸⏨ᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䛾Ꮡᅾ䛻䜒┠䛜ྥ䛡䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹䛧䛛䛧䚸DV ⿕ᐖ䜢ㄡ䛻䜒┦ㄯ䛧䛺䛛䛳䛯๭ྜ䛿䚸ዪᛶ䛜 44.9%䛷
䛒䜛䛾䛻ᑐ䛧䚸⏨ᛶ䛿 75.4%䛸䛺䛳䛶䛚䜚䚸ጔ䛛䜙䛾ᭀຊ䛻䛴䛔䛶᜝䛪䛛䛧䛟䛶ே䛻ヰ䛫䛺䛔䛸䛔䛳䛯䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䝞䜲䜰䝇䛜䚸⏨ᛶ䛾⿕ᐖᐇែ䜢ぢ䛘䛻䛟䛟䛧䛶䛔䜛㠃䛜䛒䜛䛸䛾ᣦ᦬䛜䛺䛥䜜䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸⏨ᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䜒㢧ᅾ໬䛧䛶䛔䜛≧ែ䛷䛿䛒䜛䛜䚸ᅽಽⓗከᩘ䛷䛒䜛ዪᛶ⿕ᐖ⪅䛻ᑐ䛩䜛ᨭ᥼ไᗘ䛾ᵓ⠏䛜ᛴົ䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䚸⿕ᐖ⪅ᨭ᥼䛸ྠ᫬䛻ຍᐖ⪅ᩍ⫱䜢䛩䜛ᚲせᛶ䜔䚸ᙜ஦⪅䛜⿕ᐖ⪅䜔ຍᐖ⪅䛸䛧䛶⮬㌟䜢ㄆ㆑䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻ᅔ㞴䛜䛒䜛䛸䛔䛖⌧ᐇ䛜♧䛥䜜䛯䚹㉁␲ᛂ⟅䛸ウㄽ䛿䚸ᑠᕝẶ䛜䝁䝯䞁䝖䛾᭱ᚋ䛻ᣲ䛢䛯䚸䝉䞁Ặ䜈䛾㉁ၥ䛷㛤ጞ䛥䜜䛯䚹䛂ዪᛶ䛜Ṋჾ䜢ᡭ䛻䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷ຊ䜢ᚓ䛶ᐙ∗㛗ไᗘ䜔ᐙᗞ䛛䜙ゎᨺ䛥䜜䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛰䛜䚸䝷䝕䜱䜹䝹䛺㐠ື䜔㌷㝲䛾୰䛻䛿䚸䜔䛿䜚ᐙ∗㛗ⓗ䛺ᵓ㐀䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䜟䜜䜛䚹䛭䛾୰䛷ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛿▩┪䜢ឤ䛨䛶䛔䛺䛔䛾䛛䛃䛸䛔䛖㉁ၥ䛻ᑐ䛧䚸䝉䞁Ặ䛿䚸㐣⃭䛺㐠ື䛻ཧຍ䛩䜛ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛜ᐇ㝿䛻䛂ᐙ∗㛗ไᗘ䛃䛺䛹䛾ᴫᛕ䜢౑䛳䛶䜒䛾䜢⪃䛘䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸䛭䛣䛻᪤Ꮡ䛾Ꮫၥ㡿ᇦ䛻䛚䛡䜛䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊䞉䝣䝺䞊䝮䝽䞊䜽䛾㝈⏺䛜䛒䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸䛾ᣦ᦬䛷ᛂ䛨䚸᪤Ꮡ䛾⌮ㄽᯟ⤌䛻䜘䜛◊✲⪅どⅬ䛾ศᯒᡭἲ䛻␲ၥ䜢ᢞ䛢䛛䛡䚸ᕷ஭䛾ዪᛶ䛯䛱䛾⪃䛘᪉䛻╔┠䛩䜛䛸䛔䛖䚸䝞䝑䝣䜵䝑䝸䚸䝉䞁୧Ặ䛻䜘䜛◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾ጼໃ䛜♧䛥䜜䛯䚹䛭䛾ᚋ䜒⫈⾗䛛䜙䛾㉁ၥ䛿⥆䛝䚸Ⓩቭ⪅䞉⫈⾗㛫䛾䛸䛶䜒඘ᐇ䛧䛯ウㄽ䛜ᣢ䛯䜜䛯䚹௒ᅇ䛾௻⏬䛿䚸◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾ᴫせ䜢♧䛩䛻䛸䛹䜎䜛㒊ศ䛜䛒䛳䛯䛜䚸௒ᚋ䛾◊✲ᒎ㛤䜢ᚅ䛱䚸෌ᗘ䚸ᮏᏛ䛻䛚䛔䛶ᡂᯝⓎ⾲䛾ᶵ఍䜢ᣢ䛴䛣䛸䛜ᮇᚅ䛥䜜䜛䚹33ᅜ㝿ࢩ࣏ࣥࢪ࣒࢘

ዪᛶࠊ᐀ᩍࠊᭀຊ㸸ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ࠿ࡽࡢ෌⪃䛆䝁䞊䝕䜱䝛䞊䝍䞊䛇㻌࢚࣭ࣜ࢝ࣂࢵࣇ࢙ࢵࣜ
䠄䛚Ⲕ䛾ỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫ䝆䜵䞁䝎䞊◊✲ᡤ≉ูᣍ⪸ᩍᤵ䠋䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ෸ᰯᩍᤵ䠅㻌䛆㐠Ⴀ䝇䝍䝑䝣䛇㻌ྜྷཎබ⨾㸦࠾ⲔࡢỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫࢪ࢙ࣥࢲ࣮◊✲ᡤ≉௵ࣜࢧ࣮ࢳࣇ࢙࣮ࣟ㸧࡯࠿ IGS ࢫࢱࢵࣇ䛆୺㻌 ദ䛇㻌
࠾ⲔࡢỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣝዪᛶ࣮ࣜࢲ࣮⫱ᡂ◊✲ᶵᵓࢪ࢙ࣥࢲ࣮◊✲ᡤ

IGS Project Series 7ᅜ㝿ࢩ࣏ࣥࢪ࣒࢘ࠕዪᛶࠊ᐀ᩍࠊᭀຊ㸸ᅜ㝿ⓗどⅬ࠿ࡽࡢ෌⪃ࠖ
International Symposium " Women, Religion and Violence in International Perspective "ࠓ⦅㞟ᢸᙜࠔ

ྜྷཎබ⨾࣭࿴⏣ᐜᏊⓎ⾜㸸࠾ⲔࡢỈዪᏊ኱Ꮫࢪ࢙ࣥࢲ࣮◊✲ᡤ
ࠛ112-8610 ᮾி㒔ᩥி༊኱ሯ 2-1-1
Tel: 03-5978-5846
igsoffice@cc.ocha.ac.jp
http://www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp
2016 ᖺ 12 ᭶ห⾜IGS Project Series 7

IGS Project Series 7

女性、宗教、暴力：国際的視点からの再考

国際シンポジウム

女性、宗教、暴力：国際的視点からの再考

International Symposium

Women, Religion and Violence in International Perspective〒112-8610 東京都文京区大塚 2-1-1
お茶の水女子大学 ジェンダー研究所
Institute for Gender Studies, Ochanomizu University
2-1-1 Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-8610 Japan
TEL: 03-5978-5846 FAX: 03-5978-5845
igsoffice@cc.ocha.ac.jp
http://www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp

Institute for Gender Studies
Research Organization for the Promotion of Global Women’s Leadership
Ochanomizu University