Protocol and Gender

Research Article
  • Evgenia Aleksandrovna Maier Bashkir Academy of Public Administration and Management under the Head of the Republic of Bashkortostan e.a.mayer@ya.ru
How to Cite
Maier E.A. Protocol and Gender. Vlast’ (The Authority). 2022. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 152-156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v30i1.8799 (in Russ.).

Abstract

The article aims at studying the norms of the diplomatic protocol regulating relations among countries through persons representing them in negotiation processes. However, the representatives are prone to their own subjectivity because of their job hierarchy, gender, social status, etc. There is still a tendency to divide negotiating styles into «male» and «female», while some ultra-conservative men refuse to conduct negotiations with women, being skeptical about them and deliberately showing their unreasonable superiority. Such a non-diplomatic attitude towards women in negotiation processes, their discrimination in the political and business environment in Muslim countries, as well as contradictions between the legal rights of women and religious restrictions on the same rights are no longer acceptable in the modern business world. The art of diplomacy is aimed to provide a constructive dialogue between people of different subjective views, and the diplomatic protocol is to be the document that keeps records and regulates the norms, rules of conduct, and the tone of negotiations.
Keywords:
protocol; gender; negotiation; sofagate; frame; stereotypes; principles; religion; politics; hierarchy

Author Biography

Evgenia Aleksandrovna Maier, Bashkir Academy of Public Administration and Management under the Head of the Republic of Bashkortostan
Master's Student of the educational program «Political Management»

References

Mokshantsev R.I. 2002. Psikhologiya peregovorov: uchebnoe posobie. M.: INFRA-M; Novosibirsk: Sibirskoe soglashenie. 352 s.
Article

Received: 28.02.2022

Citation Formats
Other cite formats:

APA
Maier, E. A. (2022). Protocol and Gender. Vlast’ (The Authority), 30(1), 152-156. https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v30i1.8799
Section
POLITICAL SCIENCE