Somatophilic Rationality for Reproductive Justice

Rodante van der Waal, Inge van Nistelrooij, Deborah Fox, Elizabeth Newnham
{"title":"Somatophilic Rationality for Reproductive Justice","authors":"Rodante van der Waal, Inge van Nistelrooij, Deborah Fox, Elizabeth Newnham","doi":"10.54195/technophany.13801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A dominant strand of second wave feminism, represented in this essay by Firestone, is tied to a belief in technology to achieve reproductive justice, echoing Western somatophobic rationality. As such, it has difficulty formulating a critique of institutionalized reproductive technologies that have the capacity to perpetuate systemic racializing and misogynous violence, and envisioning a philosophy of reproductive justice where care for the body takes central stage. In this essay, we offer a perspective on achieving reproductive justice from an age-old position largely neglected by feminism: that of midwifery. Midwifery has always been wary of technology in the field of reproduction, having first-hand experience with its consequences in birth and pregnancy, and has developed a field of scholarship critiquing its misuse. Simultaneously, midwifery negotiates technology from a position that prioritizes experiential, embodied, and tacit knowledge. Midwifery’s epistemological standpoint is that of a somatophilic rationality of thinking with the body, guarding women and birthing people’s reproductive autonomy through a specific technē that uses both technology and nature. A certain tendency in midwifery is, however, developing more and more towards an anti-technological essentialism. This essay therefore brings into dialogue Firestone’s Marxist women’s liberation through the elimination of biological sex with the help of technology, and midwifery’s somatophilic epistemic standpoint, to develop a feminist rational engagement with nature that can achieve reproductive justice, on the basis of their shared biological materialism.","PeriodicalId":428251,"journal":{"name":"Technophany, A Journal for Philosophy and Technology","volume":"30 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technophany, A Journal for Philosophy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54195/technophany.13801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A dominant strand of second wave feminism, represented in this essay by Firestone, is tied to a belief in technology to achieve reproductive justice, echoing Western somatophobic rationality. As such, it has difficulty formulating a critique of institutionalized reproductive technologies that have the capacity to perpetuate systemic racializing and misogynous violence, and envisioning a philosophy of reproductive justice where care for the body takes central stage. In this essay, we offer a perspective on achieving reproductive justice from an age-old position largely neglected by feminism: that of midwifery. Midwifery has always been wary of technology in the field of reproduction, having first-hand experience with its consequences in birth and pregnancy, and has developed a field of scholarship critiquing its misuse. Simultaneously, midwifery negotiates technology from a position that prioritizes experiential, embodied, and tacit knowledge. Midwifery’s epistemological standpoint is that of a somatophilic rationality of thinking with the body, guarding women and birthing people’s reproductive autonomy through a specific technē that uses both technology and nature. A certain tendency in midwifery is, however, developing more and more towards an anti-technological essentialism. This essay therefore brings into dialogue Firestone’s Marxist women’s liberation through the elimination of biological sex with the help of technology, and midwifery’s somatophilic epistemic standpoint, to develop a feminist rational engagement with nature that can achieve reproductive justice, on the basis of their shared biological materialism.
生殖正义的嗜体理性
Firestone 在这篇文章中代表的第二波女权主义的一个主流分支,与技术实现生殖正义的信念相联系,呼应了西方的躯体恐惧症理性。因此,它很难对制度化的生殖技术提出批判,因为这些技术有可能使系统性的种族暴力和厌恶女性的暴力永久化,也很难设想一种以关爱身体为中心的生殖正义哲学。在这篇文章中,我们将从一个被女权主义忽视的古老岗位--助产士--出发,为实现生殖正义提供一个视角。助产士一直对生殖领域的技术保持警惕,因为她们亲身经历过技术在分娩和怀孕中造成的后果,并形成了一个批判技术滥用的学术领域。与此同时,助产士从优先考虑经验、体现和隐性知识的立场出发,与技术进行谈判。助产士的认识论立场是一种用身体思考的躯体亲身理性,通过一种既利用技术又利用自然的特殊技术(technē)来保护妇女和分娩者的生殖自主权。然而,助产学中的某种趋势正日益向反技术本质论发展。因此,这篇文章将费尔斯通的马克思主义妇女解放通过技术消除生物性别与助产士的躯体嗜血认识论立场进行对话,在两者共同的生物唯物主义基础上,发展出一种女性主义与自然的理性接触,从而实现生殖正义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信