妇女的权利

Françoise Vergés
{"title":"妇女的权利","authors":"Françoise Vergés","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvwvr2vr.32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1971, French white male doctors were found not-guilty of having practiced thousands of abortions and sterilizations without consent upon poor women of color in Reunion Island, a French overseas territory. I analyze why, though it was still a crime severely punished in France, abortion was encouraged by the State in a French ‘postcolony’ and why the French Women’s Liberation Movement, despite being aware of the scandal, never confronted the dual politics of the State nor sought to understand what it meant for their struggle for rights. I see in this blindness the legacy of an indifference connected to what Aimé Césaire called the ‘shock in return’ of slavery and colonialism onto Europe, which has shaped even progressive movements such as feminism. I conclude that ‘the situation of poor and non-white women in overseas territories was ignored because it did not fit the narrative of a universal patriarchy that treated women in a similar way despite their race, ethnicity, age, ability, sexuality and class. The struggles of overseas feminist movements were also ignored because they did not fit the narrative of European women’s struggle for emancipation: they insisted too much on colonialism and anti-racism’.","PeriodicalId":291835,"journal":{"name":"Postcolonial Realms of Memory","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women’s Rights\",\"authors\":\"Françoise Vergés\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctvwvr2vr.32\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1971, French white male doctors were found not-guilty of having practiced thousands of abortions and sterilizations without consent upon poor women of color in Reunion Island, a French overseas territory. I analyze why, though it was still a crime severely punished in France, abortion was encouraged by the State in a French ‘postcolony’ and why the French Women’s Liberation Movement, despite being aware of the scandal, never confronted the dual politics of the State nor sought to understand what it meant for their struggle for rights. I see in this blindness the legacy of an indifference connected to what Aimé Césaire called the ‘shock in return’ of slavery and colonialism onto Europe, which has shaped even progressive movements such as feminism. I conclude that ‘the situation of poor and non-white women in overseas territories was ignored because it did not fit the narrative of a universal patriarchy that treated women in a similar way despite their race, ethnicity, age, ability, sexuality and class. The struggles of overseas feminist movements were also ignored because they did not fit the narrative of European women’s struggle for emancipation: they insisted too much on colonialism and anti-racism’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":291835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Postcolonial Realms of Memory\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Postcolonial Realms of Memory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvwvr2vr.32\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postcolonial Realms of Memory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvwvr2vr.32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1971年,法国白人男性医生被判无罪,他们在法国海外领地留尼旺岛上未经同意对贫穷的有色人种妇女进行了数千次堕胎和绝育手术。我分析了为什么,尽管堕胎在法国仍然是一种受到严厉惩罚的罪行,但在法国的“后殖民”时期,国家鼓励堕胎,为什么法国妇女解放运动尽管知道这一丑闻,却从未面对国家的双重政治,也没有试图理解这对她们争取权利的斗争意味着什么。在这种盲目中,我看到了一种冷漠的遗产,这种冷漠与艾姆斯·卡萨伊所说的奴隶制和殖民主义对欧洲的“冲击回报”有关,这种冷漠甚至塑造了女权主义等进步运动。我的结论是,海外领地的贫困和非白人女性的处境被忽视了,因为它不符合普遍的父权制的叙述,这种父权制不分种族、民族、年龄、能力、性别和阶级,都以类似的方式对待女性。海外女权运动的斗争也被忽视了,因为它们不符合欧洲妇女争取解放的叙述:它们过于坚持殖民主义和反种族主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Women’s Rights
In 1971, French white male doctors were found not-guilty of having practiced thousands of abortions and sterilizations without consent upon poor women of color in Reunion Island, a French overseas territory. I analyze why, though it was still a crime severely punished in France, abortion was encouraged by the State in a French ‘postcolony’ and why the French Women’s Liberation Movement, despite being aware of the scandal, never confronted the dual politics of the State nor sought to understand what it meant for their struggle for rights. I see in this blindness the legacy of an indifference connected to what Aimé Césaire called the ‘shock in return’ of slavery and colonialism onto Europe, which has shaped even progressive movements such as feminism. I conclude that ‘the situation of poor and non-white women in overseas territories was ignored because it did not fit the narrative of a universal patriarchy that treated women in a similar way despite their race, ethnicity, age, ability, sexuality and class. The struggles of overseas feminist movements were also ignored because they did not fit the narrative of European women’s struggle for emancipation: they insisted too much on colonialism and anti-racism’.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信