#wgst330

[whatkatielsaid]

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

I am glad to see that these students choose to take what Eve Sedgwick calls the “universalizing” view of queer studies, rather than the “minoritizing” view. While the latter sees queer sexualities as relevant only to those who identify as queer, the former sees queer sexualities influencing all of human culture.

Douglas Ray,  How to Teach Queer Studies In Alabama

This quote inspired me do a little more research into the work of Eve Sedgwick, because I felt this was the core of this article, of queer theory and feminist theorizing, in general. Eve Sedgwick, author of Epistemology of the Closet, provided two approaches to understanding homosexuality. The “minoritizing” view others the queer community as a distinct population who are authentically, completely, and separately gay from the “rest.” Alternatively, Sedgwick suggests (in a very Kinsey fashion) the “universalizing” approach: that all people are personal affected by sexual diversity and fall on a spectrum of homosexuality AND all people all personally affected by the implications of how we marginalize, oppress, and other groups. So, these two terms were what intrigued me and I pulled out of the reading. 

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

My identity is multi-faceted and intersectional, and I suspect that most of you reading this feel the same way.

Patricia Valoy

Today I begin with an article that emphasis why transnational issues are important. The author of this article describes Transnational as: “We focus on intersections across nationality (including race and ethnicity), sex, gender, and class within the context of modern day imperialism and colonialism.” I like to think of this as “intersectionality on a global scale”. This term, in both theory and activism, can be messy (hey just like everything else!!) because we need to acknowledge and (try to) understand issues of differing cultures and historical contexts which sometimes includes acknowledgement of ones own privilege. 

I choose this article because I think it examines both what can be defined as “transnational” as well as gives examples and points out area’s where Western Feminism can or does fall short. The article addresses problems  in Western Feminism of exclusiveness intersectional. Though the article is of course not without flaw, I think it paints a pretty good picture of how to apply this term.

Kathrine Lilly

(Source)

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

There are some critics of ecofeminism, even within the feminist movement.  Some say that ecofeminists draw too heavily on the differences between women and men, therefore creating a dichotomy that some want to diminish or terminate all together.  These critics say that ecofeminists focus on the traditional binary of female versus male in relation to our connection to the environment.  This idea could also endorse women’s traditional role as the sole nurturer, and thereby caretaker, in relationships, our culture, the economy, etc.  Some also affirm that ecofeminism focuses too much on the “mystical” connection women have with nature, rather than on the actual concerns that women have in their day-to-day lives.    

-Jessica H. 

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

I chose this video talking about deception in relation to trans* people.  This video was pretty interesting to me.  It made me think of some of the terminology we (society at large) use when talking to/about trans* people.  This word "deception" or "deceive" makes it seem as if the person is setting out to harm others, rather than just express who they are, how they want to.  It perpetuates transphobia and hate.  As Emma brings up in the video, it also makes it seem like trans* people are simply acting in a role, instead of being themselves.  The video also starts a conversation about when it is or isn't "appropriate" or safe for genital disclosure, which is important.  I personally believe it really isn't anyone else's business what is underneath your clothes, and it should be left up to the person to decide if or when they feel comfortable disclosing to anyone. 

-Jessica

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

I also chose to look at term phallocentrism. First and foremost, I just want to say that Tabiya Ahmed made a damn good video (shoutout!) and Ivy already made a really interesting post about this here on our blog (second shoutout!). While Ivy was intrigued by this term as it relates to men, the phallis, and androcentric sexuality, I was most interested in the anthrolinguistics of the term. Tabiya talks about how men make the mold when it comes to bodies, and how our language is set up to define everything as a foil against the male standard. The idea of a foil definition perpetuates a binary. Phallocentrism is not just the literal translation of a phallis focus, but that women are defined as they relate to men. Think of the conversation we had the other day in class about rape culture campaign, "what if she was your sister? your mother? your daughter?" Phallocentrism in action, binaries sucking, and post-structuralism reiterating language sucks. 

Kay Samuelson

[wvuwgstfeministtheories]

In Theresa Lightfoot's piece, So What if We Didn't Call it "Feminism?!": Feminism and Indigenous People, she introduces a term I found interesting and extremely relevant: linguicide. Linguicide is defined in the piece as "the killing of languages without killing the speaker." Is this epistemic violence if I ever saw it... The relationship of mainstream feminism to "native issues" seems to happen in one of two ways: the dismissal indigenous women as a minority issue (think of Patricia Arquette relegating gay and black individuals as somehow completely separate from womanhood) or co-opting the movement to "save our indigenous sisters." In doing so, linguicide and white savior complex ensues. I'd like to discuss in class today, the conversation of structuralism, epistemic violence, access, and information within the feminist movement.  

Kay Samuelson