The article draws attention to the consequences of simplistically equating gender, sex and women when doing peacebuilding. Drawing on the ambivalent nature of security architecture interventions from the African continent, I make a case for keeping a variety of conceptual approaches to gender mainstreaming in mind in order to avoid a narrow fixation on adding women. I show through selected examples how institutional frameworks and commitments may appear progressive but could have potentially exclusionary effects. Gender is an important lens to analyse peacebuilding practices and commitments, but only if viewed as an action or means of ‘doing’ that disrupts additive liberal approaches to peacebuilding. As an alternative, the article proposes a gender-relational and intersected analysis of everyday securities and peacebuilding. A focus on lived, gendered and racialised experiences of insecurity and peacebuilding at the everyday level offsets the abstract and universalised approach adopted by states as well as regional and continental players. The article concludes that approaches to gender mainstreaming through sameness, difference and diversity should be seen as complementary to allow space for a context-specific, thick analysis of gender relations on the ground as well as gendered processes of structural or institutional change.

该条提请注意在进行建设和平时，将性别，性别和妇女简单地等同起来的后果。考虑到非洲大陆的安全架构干预措施的矛盾性，我提出一个案例，牢记各种将性别观点纳入主流的概念性方法，以避免狭fix地关注增加女性。我通过一些例子来说明制度框架和承诺如何表现出渐进性，但可能具有排他性的影响。性别是分析建设和平做法和承诺的重要镜头，但前提是将其视为破坏采取附加自由主义方法进行建设和平的行动或“做”的手段。作为替代方案，本文提出了对日常安全与建设和平的性别关系和相交分析。专注于生活 每天在不安全和和平建设方面的性别和种族化经历，抵消了各国以及区域和大陆参与者所采用的抽象和普遍化的方法。该文章的结论是，通过相同，差异和多样性将性别观点纳入主流的方法应被视为补充，以便为根据实际情况对社会性别关系以及社会结构或制度变迁的社会性别过程进行特定背景的深入分析提供空间。