Just as I’d been reflecting that my feminism had been in abeyance for several months, not gone so much as displaced by concerns about ecological degradation, peak oil, species extinction etc., along comes a major kick in the gut from the U.S. It has been a while since body politics and incursions into women’s reproductive rights have provoked a visceral reaction in me, but the news that Virginia is set to become the seventh state to require women to undergo ultrasounds prior to an abortion left me reeling. See Feminist Philosophers for some discussion and commentary.
Once again the Onion has a wonderful reductio ad absurdum of this, with the proposal that women be required to paint the nursery and name the baby before undergoing an abortion. Terrifyingly, as with many Onion stories, one can imagine it being true.
5 comments:
Hi Paul,
I love your work but just thought I'd point out that "concerns about ecological degradation, peak oil, species extinction etc." are actually feminist concerns.
The proposed mistreatment of women by the legislature in question is driven by the same unexamined patriarchal ideology that mistreats and exploits anything that is not associated with the 'rational-individual-male-human' perspective.
I guess my point is: all of these things are probably best considered from a viewpoint cognizant of the intrinsically masculinised social perspectives and discourse that produces such blatant eco-sociopathic outcomes.
Goodvibes to you, Ben
Ben,
Thanks for the comment, I did hesitate when I wrote about my feminist commitments being in abeyance. While I am certainly aware that ecological degradation, species extinction etc. are feminist concerns, much of my earlier work being in ecofeminism, my point was rather one of emphasis. Although ecological and socio-political problems are systemic and inteconnected, I have, for the moment, moved away from feminism necessarily being my guiding or starting hermeneutic in analysing them; it’s always a part of my thinking, but not necessarily the primary one. So, yes, masculinised social perspectives suck, but I’m currently looking more and more at ontological, posthumanities, speculative realist, vibrant and new materialist and actor-network theoretical style approaches. These are frequently inclusive of the feminist, but don’t begin with the feminist.
None of this is mean’t to imply that my feminism is something I can pick up or put down, like some useful theoretical tool, it’s pretty much always there, affecting and influencing all of my decisions, perceptions and values.
Cheers,
Paul
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your reply.
I didn't mean to suggest that we all should maintain an active awareness of "feminism", per se, at all times, rather I think it helps us to be aware when patriarchal perspectives proceed having mistaken an abstracted "mankind" for humanity. The domination of women and nature go hand in hand where this occurs. A reading which misses such a link may be aware of "feminism" but will miss the patriarchal ideology in play.
You're going to think me a terrible smartarse but are there any women I could read that are currently contributing to the approaches you mention? Haha.
All the best, Ben
Ben,
You might consider Jane Bennett (Vibrant Matter, The Enchantment of Modern Life), Diana Coole & Samantha Frost (New Materialisms), Karen Barad (Meeting the Universe Halfway), Sara Ahmed (Queering Phenomenology) and Isabelle Stengers (Cosmopolitics I and II, Thinking with Whitehead). Similarly, work by Elizabeth Grosz, Donna Haraway and Rosi Braidotti would also be relevant.
Thanks Paul, I've a background in politics and the history and philosophy of science from a past life. More recently did a degree in ecological agriculture leading to restoration ecology; now harbouring a desire to move into an anthropological genre. To be honest, I was just being a smartarse, hoping to avoid delving too far into the fields you mentioned but I'll definitely keep an eye out for some of these works when I get the time.
All the best, Ben
Post a Comment