Hodgson, Natalie, “Gender Justice or Gendered Justice? Female Defendants in International Criminal Tribunals” – 2017

In this article, legal scholar Natalie Hodgson explores the implications of gendered narratives for the prosecution of perpetrators. She begins by explaining the traditional perspectives on mass violence that argue that perpetration is a male-dominated activity. In binary opposition to this view is the argument that women are peace-loving, a trait that renders them incapable of committing violence. Hodgson indicates that such a perspective is not only dated, but harmful to the attainment of gender justice, as well as to the prosecution and punishment of women who engage in acts of mass violence. Subsequently, she indicates the lack of research currently available on women as perpetrators, as well as their underrepresentation in court cases in which they feature as defendants. Nevertheless, Hodgson makes use of the little information available and by investigating the trials of six women in international court tribunals, she sets out to underline the role of gender narratives in understanding and punishing violence perpetrated by women.

         The article suggests that the gendered narratives involved in the trials of women perpetrators represent them as mothers, monsters, or wives. These categories are informed by patriarchal norms and stereotypes of femininity. Conducting a feminist discourse analysis based on selected documents from the cases of each of the six women, Hodgson indicates that the defendants are on trial not for their crimes, but for committing those crimes as women. As mothers and wives, women are discursively constructed as peaceful caregivers inherently incapable of harm. Throughout the trials that Hudgson focuses on, the defendants’ roles as mothers and wives are scrutinized, as well as deemed influential for their perpetration of violence. In other words, women do not become perpetrators through their own agency, but motivated by their role in the family or forced to do so by their husbands. The category of the monster further complicates questions of agency. What it entails is that women only commit violence if they are mentally unwell, as patriarchal narratives of femininity equating peace do not allow for the possibility of women’s aggression. Hodgson explains that as a result of such narratives, patriarchal tendencies to differentiate women from men and to undermine their agency are reinforced by the field of international criminal law.

         Hodgson’s work provides significant insights for perpetrator studies because it challenges societal discourses that argue that participation in mass violence is incompatible with femininity. She concludes that patriarchal perceptions of womanhood inhibit nuanced investigations of events of mass violence, as a significant number of perpetrators might be overlooked because they are women. As the article indicates, more research into the role of women as perpetrators is required to better understand the gendered nature of prosecution.

Author of this entry: Sabria Schouten

Hodgson, Natalie, “Gender Justice or Gendered Justice? Female Defendants in International Criminal Tribunals,” Feminist Legal Studies 25,  no. 3 (2017): 337-357, doi.org/10.1007/s10691-017-9359-7.