The article argues that gender can be understood to cause violent conflict, although the literatures on civil war and conflict transformation are largely silent on the matter. The problem is an understanding of causation as explaining regularities, which fails to grasp how gender, in intersection with other markers of difference, is productive and performative. Building on philosophical realism, the article introduces the concept of social mechanisms and reformulates it to become compatible with constructivist and poststructuralist theorizing. It develops the notion of ‘intersectionally-gendered mechanisms’ to bring into view the productive force of gender and proposes that gender, in intersection with other axes of differentiation, operates as a causal driver of violent conflicts. It suggests a pragmatist approach that understands causes as the reasons people provide for why things are happening, which connects to feminist methodologies that are committed to change and to understanding the world from situated contexts. Drawing on existing feminist literature it then identifies three exemplary intersectionally-gendered mechanisms driving conflict dynamics: masculinist protection, masculinist competition, and mobilization for survival. It concludes by drawing out the implications of this approach for mainstreaming gender into peacebuilding and conflict prevention.

中文翻译：

---

性别是暴力冲突的一个原因

文章认为，性别可以被理解为导致暴力冲突，尽管有关内战和冲突转变的文献基本上对这个问题保持沉默。问题在于将因果关系理解为解释规律，而未能理解性别与其他差异标记的交叉如何产生生产力和表现力。本文以哲学现实主义为基础，引入了社会机制的概念，并对其进行了重新表述，以使其与建构主义和后结构主义理论兼容。它发展了“跨性别机制”的概念，以考虑性别的生产力，并提出性别与其他分化轴的交叉，是暴力冲突的因果驱动因素。它提出了一种实用主义的方法，将原因理解为人们为事情发生的原因提供的原因，这与致力于改变和从情境中理解世界的女权主义方法论相关。然后，根据现有的女权主义文献，它确定了驱动冲突动态的三种典型的跨性别机制：男性主义保护、男性主义竞争和生存动员。最后，它阐述了这种方法对于将性别观点纳入建设和平和预防冲突主流的影响。然后，根据现有的女权主义文献，它确定了驱动冲突动态的三种典型的跨性别机制：男性主义保护、男性主义竞争和生存动员。最后，它阐述了这种方法对于将性别观点纳入建设和平和预防冲突主流的影响。然后，根据现有的女权主义文献，它确定了驱动冲突动态的三种典型的跨性别机制：男性主义保护、男性主义竞争和生存动员。最后，它阐述了这种方法对于将性别观点纳入建设和平和预防冲突主流的影响。