메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국영미문학페미니즘학회 영미문학페미니즘 영미문학페미니즘 제23권 제3호
발행연도
2015.1
수록면
81 - 115 (35page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The aim of this essay is based on my belief in the possibility of using the critique of standpoint theories to strengthen feminist standpoint epistemology. Although Butler and Haraway criticize some existing feminists, they do so in order to overcome the limitations that some antecedents of feminist theory had. Both Butler and Haraway emphasize how the acknowledgment of plurality and inclusiveness prevents us from repeating preceding feminists’ mistake of reaffirming essentialism and exclusionism. Using Butler’s and Haraway’s emphasis on specificity, plurality, and inclusiveness as a theoretical framework, this paper seeks to do an immanent critique of three feminist standpoint theories: Alcoff’s concept of woman as positionality; Collins’s black feminist standpoint; and Mohanty’s third-world feminist standpoint. I critically examine how, despite their original intention to overcome preceding feminists’ limitations, they end up reiterating essentialism and exclusionism by attempting to overgeneralize their partial perspectives and their specific definitions of woman into universal explanations/truths for all women. I also argue that feminist standpoint theories should clearly acknowledge their epistemologically plural and partial status as analytical tools in order to be inclusive and connected enough to cross over the conventional boundaries between feminist theorists as subjects and women as objects.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (21)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0