Talk:French feminism theory: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(fabrication) |
(response & Delphy quotes) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
: I've just read Delphy's essay. The point cannot be made strongly enough that so-called "French Feminism" is a complete fabrication. --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:17, 10 March 2007 (PST) | : I've just read Delphy's essay. The point cannot be made strongly enough that so-called "French Feminism" is a complete fabrication. --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:17, 10 March 2007 (PST) | ||
Seriously, though, I never understood the phrase "french feminism" to be intended to refer to feminist thought broadly or the women's movement in France, but rather a particular strand of continental philosophy that was self-defined as feminist. I think there are clear connections between Cixous, Wittig, etc. You don't? | |||
I haven't read Delphy's essay - which one? (I don't know what you mean by fabrication; if you mean ''ex post'' analysis/definition, well, yeah.) | I haven't read Delphy's essay - which one? (I don't know what you mean by fabrication; if you mean ''ex post'' analysis/definition, well, yeah.) | ||
I do think it's very important to point out that the so-called French feminist school of thought has been critiqued by some feminists as anti-feminist ... --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 18:19, 10 March 2007 (PST) | I do think it's very important to point out that the so-called French feminist school of thought has been critiqued by some feminists as anti-feminist ... --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 18:19, 10 March 2007 (PST) | ||
: The essay by Delphy is the one I cite in the article. This is one of the examples she gives: | |||
:: Alison C. Young, dans un texte non daté (Institut de criminologie, Cambridge, Massachussetts), souhaite «Prendre les écrits d'une féministe matérialiste, comme Christine Delphy ou ceux du collectif de Question féministes», et les faire parler intertextuellement avec ceux de Julia Kristeva, ou de Monique Wittig, mettant ainsi Wittig avec Kristeva, et non à sa place... justemenent dans le collectif de ''Question féministes''! (''Penser le genre'', p. 357) | |||
: Delphy underlines how the Americans have been calling "feminists" writers who expressedly claim ''not'' to be feminists, like Cixous, and the imperialism of that contempt for these writers' opinions. | |||
: And yep, by "frabication", I do mean after-the-fact analysis. Another Delphy quote: | |||
:: ...le «texte» censé constituer l'original du French Feminism est une série de morceaux et de fragments (phrases, citations) extraits d'un univers hétérogène. Ces morceaux ne constituent pas un ensemble indépendemment du commentaire dans lequel ils sont insérés. Ceci justifie de considérer le corpus de commentaires comme une entité distincte de ses référents, de la même façon que le Talmud est à juste titre considéré comme distinct de la Torah. Mais nous ne disposons pas, comme dans le cas de la Torah, d'un autre texte original et homogène. (''Penser le genre'', pages 327-328.) | |||
: --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:39, 10 March 2007 (PST) | |||
Revision as of 19:39, 10 March 2007
What, you don't think "refers" was adequately glib? --LQ 18:14, 10 March 2007 (PST)
- I've just read Delphy's essay. The point cannot be made strongly enough that so-called "French Feminism" is a complete fabrication. --Ide Cyan 18:17, 10 March 2007 (PST)
Seriously, though, I never understood the phrase "french feminism" to be intended to refer to feminist thought broadly or the women's movement in France, but rather a particular strand of continental philosophy that was self-defined as feminist. I think there are clear connections between Cixous, Wittig, etc. You don't?
I haven't read Delphy's essay - which one? (I don't know what you mean by fabrication; if you mean ex post analysis/definition, well, yeah.)
I do think it's very important to point out that the so-called French feminist school of thought has been critiqued by some feminists as anti-feminist ... --LQ 18:19, 10 March 2007 (PST)
- The essay by Delphy is the one I cite in the article. This is one of the examples she gives:
- Alison C. Young, dans un texte non daté (Institut de criminologie, Cambridge, Massachussetts), souhaite «Prendre les écrits d'une féministe matérialiste, comme Christine Delphy ou ceux du collectif de Question féministes», et les faire parler intertextuellement avec ceux de Julia Kristeva, ou de Monique Wittig, mettant ainsi Wittig avec Kristeva, et non à sa place... justemenent dans le collectif de Question féministes! (Penser le genre, p. 357)
- Delphy underlines how the Americans have been calling "feminists" writers who expressedly claim not to be feminists, like Cixous, and the imperialism of that contempt for these writers' opinions.
- And yep, by "frabication", I do mean after-the-fact analysis. Another Delphy quote:
- ...le «texte» censé constituer l'original du French Feminism est une série de morceaux et de fragments (phrases, citations) extraits d'un univers hétérogène. Ces morceaux ne constituent pas un ensemble indépendemment du commentaire dans lequel ils sont insérés. Ceci justifie de considérer le corpus de commentaires comme une entité distincte de ses référents, de la même façon que le Talmud est à juste titre considéré comme distinct de la Torah. Mais nous ne disposons pas, comme dans le cas de la Torah, d'un autre texte original et homogène. (Penser le genre, pages 327-328.)
- --Ide Cyan 18:39, 10 March 2007 (PST)