Talk:Post-structural feminism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information To-do list:, Associated task forces: ...
Close

This is just feminism with some examinations of post structuralism

I know feminists love to tag all kinds of adjectives onto feminism to carve out a piece of the feminism namespace with the application of a theory that is in vogue, but just because some of them read some philosophy of post-structuralism, does not make this a whole new field, there is in fact very little to establish its WP:NotabilityEthanpet113 (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for posting this comment, Ethanpet113, and sorry if my edit seemed at all hostile, which was not my intent; it was the end of the day for me and I was rather exhausted. Anyway, in postmodern discourses specifically, but political discourses more generally, qualified positions like this are commonplace. One only needs to look at the anarchist schools of thought to see an example of this (post-anarchism, also known as poststructuralist anarchism, is among them). This can also be found in liberalism and socialism and many other ideology clusters. Much of this is the product of people exploring how different ideologies intersect and interact; it is not limited to feminism, though feminism is also prolific in this regard.
On the matter of poststructural feminism, that term in particular is used with regularity in contemporary feminist literature, but not only feminist literature. Simply checking for hits on Google Books (hyphenated, not) or Google Scholar (hyphenated, not) demonstrates its currency as a term for a specific type of feminist discourse and analysis. (Also, check "post[-]structural feminis[t/ts]", as well.) The results of those searches moreover yield literature which either describes poststructural feminism as distinct from other feminist perspectives or otherwise treats them as such. For example, just from the top results of "post-structural feminism" in Google Books:

Post-structural feminism is primarily concerned with identity politics and the construction of power relations that position those who are gendered female in a subordinate position to those who are gendered male. Post-structural feminists articulate that our understanding of everyday knowledge is constructed through power relations that are gendered.
— Donna Seto, No Place for a War Baby: The Global Politics of Children born of Wartime Sexual Violence (2016), "Gendering International Relations", p. 55

The relativism of post-structural feminism is seen by some critics as incapable of provoking any action to improve the lives of women. If "women" as a coherent category has been deconstructed and "power" is seen as a capillary and localized operation, then how and where can feminists work to improve social worlds? Critics suggest that social theory that does not foreground radical social action and that problematizes agency is suspect for feminist purposes. This position is evidence in some critiques of postmodern and post-structural feminism, critiques that see the focus on discourse as inconsistent with an orientation to social change.
— Susanne Gannon, Bronwyn Davies, "Part I – Feminist Perspectives on Knowledge Building"; Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber (ed.), Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis (2012), p. 80

My approach starts from post-structural feminism and gives weight to structural components of gender relations, reproduced when individuals perform within institutions.
— Annica Kronsell, "Methods for studying silences: gender analysis in institutions of hegemonic masculinity"; Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, Jacqui True (eds.), Feminist Methodologies for International Relations (2004), p. 108

I can continue, but you can see for yourself. I will note that poststructural feminism has a history dating back to at least 1979, with publications talking about it as a specific kind of feminism in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1994, and so on and so forth with greater frequency the closer to 2018. Is this sufficient to indicate this neologism is notable? If not, then when?
Perhaps postructural feminism is ultimately just feminism with poststructuralist elements, but that is equivalent to saying that democratic socialism is just socialism with democratic elements or national liberalism is just liberalism with nationalist elements or clerical fascism is just fascism with clericalist elements. In the end, they are all distinct perspectives with both historic and contemporary meanings whose defining characteristics are precisely as the intersections of those perspectives. Within this context, I do not see how the problem here is that of a non-notable article subject; rather, I think it is one of insufficient article development and sourcing, hence my edit. —Nøkkenbuer (talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI