Page 25 - Political science
P. 25

‫ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻝﻨﺨﺏ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻭﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻤﻨﺎﺼﺏ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻴﺜﻴﺭ ﺃﻱ ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺃﻭ ﻴـﺯﻋﺞ ﺒـﺎﺤﺜﻲ ﺍﻝﻌﻠـﻭﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﺇﻥ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﺘﻤﺜﻴل ﺍﻝﻤﺭﺃﺓ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻝﻨﺨﺏ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻝﻡ ﻴﺼﺒﺢ ﻤﺴﺄﻝﺔ ﺠﺩﻴﺭﺓ ﺒﺎﻝﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺇﻻ ﺒﻌـﺩ‬

                                        ‫ﺤﻠﻭل ﺍﻝﻨﺯﻋﺔ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﻭﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻝﻌﻠﻡ ﺃﻭ ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺇﻥ ﻁﺭﻕ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﺭﻭﺽ ﺒﺎﺤﺜﻲ ﺍﻝﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺍﻝﺴﻠﻭﻜﻴﺔ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺒل ﺍﻝﻨـﺴﻭﻴﺔ ﺘﺒـﺩﻭ ﺃﻜﺜـﺭ‬
‫ﻭﻀﻭ ‪‬ﺤﺎ ﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺒﻜﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻝﻤﺴﻠﻙ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻲ ﻝﻠﻨﺴﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻝﻘﺩ ﻜﺭﺴﺕ ﺍﻝﻨﺎﻗﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻝﻨـﺴﻭﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻫﺘﻤﺎ ‪‬ﻤﺎ ﻜﺒﻴ ‪‬ﺭﺍ ﻝﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻕ ﺃﺴﺎﻝﻴﺏ ﺍﻝﺒﺤﺙ ﺍﻝﻤﻭﻀﻭﻋﻲ ﺍﻝﻤﻔﺘﺭﺽ ﻋﻠـﻰ ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺔ ﺍﻝﻤـﺴﻠﻙ‬

                           ‫ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻲ ﻝﻠﻨﺴﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻤﺒﺎﺩﺉ ﺍﻹﻤﺒﻴﺭﻴﻘﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﻝﻜﺎﺩ ﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻥ ﻴﺨﻠﻭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻝﻘﻴﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﺸﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﻭﻴﺎﺕ ﺇﻝﻰ ﻋﺩﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻝﻁﺭﻕ ﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼﻝﻬﺎ ﺍﺘﻬﺎﻡ ﺒـﺎﺤﺜﻲ ﺍﻝﻌﻠـﻭﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺒﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ "ﻋﻠﻡ ﺴﻲﺀ" ﻝﺘﻘﺼﻲ ﺍﺘﺠﺎﻫﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﻤﺭﺃﺓ ﻭﻤﺸﺎﺭﻜﺘﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺩﻤﺕ ﺍﻝﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤـﻥ ﺍﻝﺒﺎﺤﺜـﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺃﻤﺜﻠﺔ ﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﻤﺒﺎﻝﻐﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﺔ ‪ -‬ﺃﻭ ﺤﺘﻰ ﺴﻭﺀ ﺒﻨﺎﺀ ﻨﺘـﺎﺌﺠﻬﻡ – ﺒﻤـﺎ ﻴﺘﻨﺎﺴـﺏ ﻭﺃﻓﻜـﺎﺭﻫﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻝﻤﺩﺭﻜﺔ ﺴﻠﹰﻔﺎ ﺤﻭل ﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﻘﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻝﺭﺠﺎل ﻭﺍﻝﻨﺴﺎﺀ )ﻋﻠﻰ ﺴـﺒﻴل ﺍﻝﻤﺜـﺎل‪:‬‬

                                       ‫‪.(Goot and Reid 1975; Bourque and Grossholtz 1974‬‬
‫ﻭﻋﻨﺩﻤﺎ ﻭﺠﺩ ﺍﻝﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﺍﺨﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﻤﺸﺭﻭﻋﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻹﻨﺎﺙ ﻭﺍﻝﺫﻜﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﻤﻭﺍ ﺒﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺤﻭ‬
‫ﻴﺠﻌل ﺍﻹﻨﺎﺙ ﻻﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻝﻤﺜﺎل‪ ،‬ﺤﻴﻥ ﺴـﺄل ﻓـﺭﺩ ﺠﺭﻴﻨـﺸﺘﺎﻴﻥ )‪(Fred Greenstein‬‬
‫ﺍﻷﻁﻔﺎل ﺤﻭل ﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻜﻨﻬﻡ ﺍﻝﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻪ ﻝﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﺍﻝﻌﺎﻝﻡ‪ ،‬ﺃﺸﺎﺭ ﺇﻝﻰ ﻤﻴل ﺍﻝﺒﻨـﺎﺕ ﺇﻝـﻰ ﺍﻗﺘـﺭﺍﺡ "ﺘﻐﻴﻴـﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻻﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻤﺘﻤﺎﻴﺯﺓ" ﻤﺜل "ﺍﻝﺘﺨﻠﺹ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻤﻴـﻊ ﺍﻝﻤﺠـﺭﻤﻴﻥ ﻭﺍﻷﺸـﺭﺍﺭ" ) ;‪Greenstein 1965, 116‬‬
‫‪ .(Bourque and Grossholtz 1974, 243‬ﻭﺒﺎﻝﻤﺜل‪ ،‬ﺘﺸﻴﺭ ﻜل ﻤﻥ ﺴﻭﺯﺍﻥ ﺒﻭﺭﻙ ﻭﺠﻴﻥ ﺠﺭﻭﺴﻬﻭﻝﺘﺯ‬
‫ﺇﻝﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻝﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﺘﻭﻀﺢ ﺍﻨﺨﻔﺎﺽ ﻤﺴﺘﻭﻯ ﺍﻝﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻝﺩﻯ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﺎﺀ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﺒﺎﻝﺭﺠﺎل ﻜﺎﻨـﺕ‬
‫ﹸﺘﻔ ‪‬ﺴﺭ ﻜﻌﻼﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻝﺭﺠﺎل ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻭﻋﺩﻡ ﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﺎﺀ‪ .‬ﻝﻜﻨﻬﻤﺎ ﺍﻗﺘﺭﺤﺘﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻤﻘﺎﺒل‪ ،‬ﺃﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻝﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺘﻌﻜﺱ ﻓﻁﻨﺔ ﺍﻝﻨﺴﺎﺀ ﻓﻲ "ﺘﻘﻴﻴﻡ ﺍﻝﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ"‪ ،‬ﻭﺭﺒﻤﺎ ﺍﻝﺭﺠﺎل "ﻴﻌﺒـﺭﻭﻥ ﻋـﻥ ﻤﻌـﺩﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻤﺭﺘﻔﻌﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻝﻜﻔﺎﺀﺓ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺤﻭ ﻻ ﻋﻘﻼﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﻨﻅ ‪‬ﺭﺍ ﻝﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﻴﺔ ﺩﻭﺭﻫﻡ ﻜﺭﺠﺎل‪ ،‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻤـﻭﻥ ﺃﻨﻬـﻡ‬

 ‫ﻴﻤﺘﻠﻜﻭﻥ ﺒﺭﺍﻋﺔ ﻭﻗﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻝﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ" )‪.(Bourque and Grossholtz 1974, 231‬‬
‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻷﺤﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻝﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭﻥ ﻴﻭﺠﻬﻭﻥ ﺃﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻤﺘﺤﻴﺯﺓ ﺒﻭﻀﻭﺡ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻨﺤﻭ ﻴﺘﻴﺢ ﻝﻬـﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻨﺘﺯﺍﻉ ﺇﺠﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻔﺴﻴﺭﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻝﺫﻜﻭﺭ ﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﻹﻨﺎﺙ ﻻﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻝﻤﺜﺎل‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﺤﺼﺕ ﻝﻴﻥ ﺇﻴﺠﻠﻴﺘﺯﻴﻥ )‪ (Lynne B. Iglitzin‬ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺒﻴﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﻤﺴﺘﺨﺩﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺜﻼﺙ ﺩﺭﺍﺴـﺎﺕ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻴـﺔ‬
‫ﺤﻭل ﺍﻝﺘﻨﺸﺌﺔ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ )‪ ،(Greenstein 1965; Hess and Torney 1968; Andrain 1971‬ﻭﺨﹸﻠـﺼﺕ‬
‫ﺇﻝﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻝﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻜﺎﻥ "ﻴﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﺔ ﻋﺎﻝ ‪‬ﻤﺎ ﻴﻘﺘﺼﺭ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻝﺫﻜﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺫﻝﻙ ﺒﺎﻻﺴﺘﻌﺎﻨﺔ ﺩﻭ ‪‬ﻤـﺎ‬
‫ﺒﺎﻝﺫﻜﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺍﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺼﻭﺭ ﺒﻌﻴﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺎﻻﺨﺘﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻝﻨﻤﻁﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻝﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ ﻝﻺﺠﺎﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﻤﻘﺩﻤﺔ" ) ‪Iglitzin,‬‬

                                                                                  ‫‪.(1974, 33‬‬
‫ﻭﺃﺨﻴﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻨﺨﺭﻁ ﺒﺎﺤﺜﻭ ﺍﻝﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻝﻤﻤﺎﺭﺴﺔ ﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﺍﺼﻁﻠﺤﺕ ﺒﻭﺭﻙ ﻭﺠﺭﻭﺴﻬﻭﻝﺘﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺘﺴﻤﻴﺘﻬﺎ "ﺍﻝﺘﻼﻋﺏ ﺒﺎﻝﺤﻭﺍﺸﻲ" )‪ .(1974‬ﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﺃﺩﺕ ﺒﺒﻌﺽ ﺒﺎﺤﺜﻲ ﺍﻝﻌﻠﻭﻡ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺇﻝﻰ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺒﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻤﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻝﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺤﻭل ﺍﻝﻤﻭﺍﻗﻑ ﻭﺍﻝﺴﻠﻭﻜﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻝﻠﻨﺴﺎﺀ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﻋﻨﺩ ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭﻫـﺎ ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﺤﺩﺩ ﺒﺎﻝﻔﻌل ﻤﺎﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻥ ‪‬ﻴﻌﺯﻯ ﻝﻬﻥ‪ .‬ﻭﻋﻠﻰ ﺴﺒﻴل ﺍﻝﻤﺜﺎل‪ ،‬ﺃﺸﺎﺭﺘﺎ ﺇﻝﻰ ﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﺭﻭﺒـﺭﺕ ﻝـﻴﻥ ) ‪Robert‬‬
‫‪ (Lane‬ﺒﻌﻨﻭﺍﻥ "ﺍﻝﺤﻴﺎﺓ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ" )‪ ،(Political Life‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺠﺎﺩل ﺃﻥ ﺤل ﺍﻝﺨﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻝـﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﺒـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻝﺯﻭﺠﻴﻥ ﻏﺎﻝ‪‬ﺒﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻋﺒﺭ ﺇﻗﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﻝﺯﻭﺝ ﻝﺯﻭﺠﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻫﻭ ﺍﻷﻤﺭ ﺍﻝﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﻨﺎﻗﺽ ﻭﺍﻝﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻝﺘﻲ ﻴﺸﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺩﻋﻡ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﻨﻅﺭﻩ‪ .‬ﻓﻔﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﺒل ﺇﻗﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﻝﺯﻭﺝ ﻝﺯﻭﺠﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺘﻁﺭﺡ ﺍﻝﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﺘﺒﺎﺩل ﺒـﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺯﻭﺍﺝ ﻭﺍﻝﺯﻭﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﻴل ﻝﺩﻯ ﺍﻷﻁﻔﺎل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﺘﺒﺎﻉ ﺘﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻤﻬﺎﺕ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﻼﻑ‬
‫ﺒﻴﻥ ﺘﻔﻀﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﻝﻭﺍﻝﺩﻴﻥ ﻝﻠﺤﺯﺏ ﺍﻝﺴﻴﺎﺴﻲ )‪ .(1974, 234-5‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺒـﻭﺭﻙ ﻭﺠﺭﻭﺴـﻬﻭﻝﺘﺯ ﺃﻤﺜﻠـﺔ‬

                                                      ‫‪٢٣‬‬
   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30