Epistemology, Political Perils and the Ethnocentrism Problem in Feminism

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY
O. Davanger
{"title":"Epistemology, Political Perils and the Ethnocentrism Problem in Feminism","authors":"O. Davanger","doi":"10.1515/opphil-2022-0208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Nobody claims to be a proponent of white feminism, but according to the critique presented in this article, many in fact are. I argue that feminism that does not take multiple axes of oppression into account is bad in three ways: (1) it strategically undermines solidarity between women; (2) it risks inconsistency by advocating justice and equality for some women but not all; and (3) it impedes the ultimate function of feminism function by employing epistemological “master’s tools” that stand in antithesis to feminist emancipatory work. In investigating ethnocentrism in feminism, I develop the idea of latent ethnocentrism, which occupies the space between meaning that is generated from reference to the self and overt racism. I identify an epistemological prong in the ethnocentrism charge against feminism, where I draw on bell hooks’ interlocking axes-model of oppression to answer why the ethnocentrism problem is important for feminism and what its underlying epistemological causes are. I draw on Uma Narayan’s destabilization of cultural dualisms to argue that they do not serve emancipatory agendas. There is a mutually constitutive relation between language that informs our understanding, on the one hand, and the political agendas that produce this language to sustain the male and the western norm as center, on the other hand. I call this circular and reciprocally reinforcing mechanism the episteme-politic. I conclude that the ethnocentrism problem is not merely an issue of (1) strategy or (2) feminist consistency but of (3) shooting oneself in the foot by uncritically accepting patriarchal concepts for feminist politics.","PeriodicalId":36288,"journal":{"name":"Open Philosophy","volume":"5 1","pages":"551 - 569"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2022-0208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Nobody claims to be a proponent of white feminism, but according to the critique presented in this article, many in fact are. I argue that feminism that does not take multiple axes of oppression into account is bad in three ways: (1) it strategically undermines solidarity between women; (2) it risks inconsistency by advocating justice and equality for some women but not all; and (3) it impedes the ultimate function of feminism function by employing epistemological “master’s tools” that stand in antithesis to feminist emancipatory work. In investigating ethnocentrism in feminism, I develop the idea of latent ethnocentrism, which occupies the space between meaning that is generated from reference to the self and overt racism. I identify an epistemological prong in the ethnocentrism charge against feminism, where I draw on bell hooks’ interlocking axes-model of oppression to answer why the ethnocentrism problem is important for feminism and what its underlying epistemological causes are. I draw on Uma Narayan’s destabilization of cultural dualisms to argue that they do not serve emancipatory agendas. There is a mutually constitutive relation between language that informs our understanding, on the one hand, and the political agendas that produce this language to sustain the male and the western norm as center, on the other hand. I call this circular and reciprocally reinforcing mechanism the episteme-politic. I conclude that the ethnocentrism problem is not merely an issue of (1) strategy or (2) feminist consistency but of (3) shooting oneself in the foot by uncritically accepting patriarchal concepts for feminist politics.
认识论、政治危机与女性主义中的民族中心主义问题
摘要没有人声称自己是白人女权主义的支持者,但根据本文中提出的批评,许多人实际上是。我认为,不考虑多个压迫轴心的女权主义在三个方面是糟糕的:(1)它在战略上破坏了女性之间的团结;(2) 它冒着不一致的风险,主张为一些妇女而不是所有妇女伸张正义和平等;(3)它通过使用与女权主义解放工作相对立的认识论“大师工具”来阻碍女权主义功能的终极功能。在研究女性主义中的种族中心主义时,我提出了潜在的种族中心论,它占据了由对自我的提及和公开的种族主义产生的意义之间的空间。我发现了对女权主义的种族中心主义指控中的一个认识论方面,我利用贝尔胡克的压迫联动轴模型来回答为什么种族中心主义问题对女权主义很重要,以及其潜在的认识论原因是什么。我引用乌玛·纳拉扬对文化二元主义的破坏,认为它们不符合解放议程。一方面,我们理解的语言与产生这种语言以维持男性和西方规范为中心的政治议程之间存在着相互构成的关系。我把这种循环和相互强化的机制称为认识政治。我的结论是,种族中心主义问题不仅仅是一个(1)策略或(2)女权主义一致性的问题,而是(3)通过不加批判地接受父权制概念来进行女权主义政治的问题。
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
Open Philosophy
Open Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
20.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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