Where Are All the Women?

IF 0.6 1区 哲学 0 RELIGION
Rhiannon Graybill
{"title":"Where Are All the Women?","authors":"Rhiannon Graybill","doi":"10.15699/jbl.1404.2021.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many feminist conversations about the ethics of citation begin by asking, Where are all the women? Sometimes this question is an innocent inquiry, but more frequently it signals suspicion, frustration, or doubt. Often, there is work written by women or nonbinary scholars on the topic at hand; it is simply not included.1 Frustration about the issue is well earned: our erasure is common enough to have spawned its own nomenclature; thus manel (an all-male panel) and manthology (ditto, but an edited volume) have entered the lexicon.2 Where are all the women? offers a concise way of summing up these dynamics, as well as making absence visible. It is a simple, necessary question to put to texts and their authors, and one that feminist scholarship has begun to ask with increasing frequency. This, in turn, broaches the larger issue of what citation does—what it does now, and what it can do, when we take it seriously as a feminist practice. Building on the work of my feminist colleagues who have asked, Where are all the women?, and have used this inquiry to gather data, excoriate bias, and demand new ways of doing scholarship,3 I want to explore the broader possibilities of a","PeriodicalId":15251,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biblical Literature","volume":"140 1","pages":"826 - 830"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biblical Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1404.2021.10","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many feminist conversations about the ethics of citation begin by asking, Where are all the women? Sometimes this question is an innocent inquiry, but more frequently it signals suspicion, frustration, or doubt. Often, there is work written by women or nonbinary scholars on the topic at hand; it is simply not included.1 Frustration about the issue is well earned: our erasure is common enough to have spawned its own nomenclature; thus manel (an all-male panel) and manthology (ditto, but an edited volume) have entered the lexicon.2 Where are all the women? offers a concise way of summing up these dynamics, as well as making absence visible. It is a simple, necessary question to put to texts and their authors, and one that feminist scholarship has begun to ask with increasing frequency. This, in turn, broaches the larger issue of what citation does—what it does now, and what it can do, when we take it seriously as a feminist practice. Building on the work of my feminist colleagues who have asked, Where are all the women?, and have used this inquiry to gather data, excoriate bias, and demand new ways of doing scholarship,3 I want to explore the broader possibilities of a
所有的女人都在哪里?
许多关于引用伦理的女权主义对话都是以这样的问题开始的:所有的女性都在哪里?有时,这个问题是一个无辜的询问,但更多的时候,它表示怀疑、沮丧或怀疑。通常,有女性或非二元学者就手头的主题撰写的著作;它根本不包括在内对这个问题的失望是理所当然的:我们的抹除已经足够普遍,以至于产生了自己的术语;因此,manel(全男性小组)和manthology(同上,但是编辑过的卷)已进入词典女人都去哪儿了?提供了一种简洁的方式来总结这些动态,以及使缺席可见。对于文本及其作者来说,这是一个简单而必要的问题,女权主义学者也开始越来越频繁地提出这个问题。反过来,这又引出了一个更大的问题,即引用是做什么的——当我们把它作为一种女权主义实践来认真对待时,它现在做了什么,它能做什么。基于我的女权主义同事的工作,他们问,所有的女性都在哪里?,并利用这一调查来收集数据,谴责偏见,并要求新的方式来做学术研究,我想探索一个更广泛的可能性
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
30
×
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