DOCSLIB.ORG

Intersectionality, Feminist Theory, and Global History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intersectionality, Feminist Theory, and Global History Intersectionality, Feminist Theory, and Global History Jana Tschurenev (Zürich) This demand to think contemporary power in its complexity and interarticulations remains incontro- vertibly important even in its impossibility. (Butler 1993: 19) 1. Introduction Post-structuralism, it seems, is currently sharing the fate of the grand narratives which the cultural turn set out to bury. Reduced to its gaps and inconsistencies, it ap- pears now as feminism’s impasse (Alaimo/Hekman 2008: 1). In their volume “Mate- rial Feminisms”, Stacy Alaimo and Susan Hekman thus called for a “material turn” in feminist theory. Instead of taking refuge from a dangerous biology in discourse and language, feminism should again try to grasp the full materiality of the human body and the natural environment. Within the diverse cluster of debates emerging around the “buzzword intersectionality” (Davis 2005), Cornelia Klinger and Gudrun Axeli Knapp (2008) at the same time called for a “social re-turn.” Intersectionality would be a perspective to revive the (feminist) Critical Theory tradition that has been in cri- sis due to the historical constellation which Fraser (1997) summarized as “the post- socialist condition” – most prominently the crisis of Marxism and the cultural turn’s challenge to societal macro-narratives. At the same time, they suggest, the debates on intersectionality would profit from a social theory which looks at the history and interrelations between modern structures of domination. Cultural analysis, Knapp and Klinger argue, the study of complex identities and experiences, needs to be com- plemented with structural accounts of inequality. The “social re-turn” they propose seeks to take seriously and at the same time go beyond the reflexivity achieved by the cultural turn. Knapp thus invites researchers to the ‘construction site’ of critical social theory. The aim is nothing less than a fundamental “re-vision” of European modernity. “European societies”, she argues, “historically emerged as simultaneous- ly modern, expansive-capitalist, bourgeois-patriarchal, nationalist and – in different degrees – imperial ones.” (Knapp 2008a: 56-7; transl. JT). And it is the critical heu- ristic device of intersectionality which can offer orientation for this project of revis- ing the fundamental patterns of societal organization as well as domination in mod- ern European societies, and which, moreover, would help bridging the gap between critical social theory and the politics of deconstruction (Knapp 2008a,b; Klinger/ Knapp 2008: 12). V. Kallenberg et al. (Hrsg.), Intersectionality und Kritik, DOI 10.1007/978-3-531-93168-5_13, © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013 266 Jana Tschurenev In this paper1, I contrast Klinger’s and Knapp’s project with another current of research which aims at re-visioning modernity, the emergent field of global histo- ry. After a short review of how some earlier feminist theories have dealt with the core problem of intersectionality, i.e., the problem of different “vectors of power require[ing] and deploy[ing] each other” (Butler 1993: 18) in complex modern socie- ties, I argue that a current feminist social theory should take serious the interven- tions of post-colonial studies – one of the ‘post’-currents often associated with the ‘cultural turn’ – and the new approaches to writing global history inspired by it. I particularly refer to their efforts to overcome Eurocentric models of world histori- cal development which can be found in different versions of classical social theory, including Weberian accounts of rationalization and modernization theories, as well as some Marxist or historical materialist approaches. I suggest that the development of modern technologies and institutions of control and domination in Europe can- not be studied in isolation from the framework or a global modernity. I will conclude with some remarks on the question of how to deal with the infinite complexity of the global “informatics of domination” (Haraway 1991) when analyzing particular historical constellations of power and difference. 2. Linking Systems of Oppression Generations of feminists and other critical scholars have already “bit their teeth off ” (Winker/Degele 2008: 194) trying to conceptualize structural relations between dif- ferent forms of domination.2 The tricky question of how to theoretically grasp the relation between capitalism and patriarchy has been a major preoccupation of Marx- ist and materialist versions of feminism. In his “Ursprung der Familie, des Privat- eigentums und des Staates” (orig. 1884), Friedrich Engels identified the invention of private property as the common source of class domination, state power and patri- archy (for a critique, see Lerner 1987). Engels’ implicit expectation that, with the re- moval of the common source, all domination would disappear haunted the left for a long time. Moreover, Engels’ formulation of the materialist conception of history was both fundamentally challenged and further elaborated on in materialist feminist thought. On one hand, his assumption of the “production of means of subsistence” 1 Some of the issues raised here have been previously discussed with my friend and colleague Urs Lindner. I want to thank Patricia Purtschert and Christine Whyte for their comments on this paper. 2 Within the more or less orthodox Marxist framework deployed by many critical theorists of the 1970s, the debates were often centered on capitalism, i.e. the relation between capitalism and patri- archy, capitalism and racism. Significantly less attention was paid to the intersection of racism, class, and gender (Davis 1982). Intersectionality, Feminist Theory, and Global History 267 and the “production of people” as determining force of history3, was critically refor- mulated as the need to give equal explanatory weight to ‘material reproduction’ and ‘generative reproduction’ when it comes to understanding the dynamics and patterns of societal development (Beer 1990, 1993). More recent accounts usually add a third form that can be summarized as ‘symbolic reproduction’ (Jackson 2001, 2006). On the other hand, Engels’ dichotomous contrasting of labor and family, though heavily criticized, could be associated with ‘dual systems theories’.4 Feminist accounts which applied such a dual systems framework (for instance: Hartmann 1981), often associ- ated one mode of reproduction with one gendered social space: material reproduc- tion taking place in the male-gendered capitalist economy; generative reproduction in the female-gendered household. Within such a framework, the question was how to grasp the relation between the two systems, capitalism and patriarchy. The argument developed and contested within a broad international debate on the productivity of domestic labor (connect- ed to the ‘wages for housework’ movement) was the notion of a functional necessity of women’s unpaid domestic labor for capitalist economy, or at least, an enhance- ment of capitalists’ profit rate by their indirect (and within the family: direct) op- pression of women (Dalla Costa/James 1973). These debates stimulated feminist research and produced important insights, for instance on the historical emergence and contingent coupling of modern forms of domestic labor and the rise of capital- ist labor markets (Bock/Duden 1977). However, as Angela Davis critically pointed out, with their concentration on the figure of the housewife, they took the norma- tive femininity of white and/or middle class women of the second half of the 20th century as the paradigm of female experience in general. Pointing at a policies aim- ing at the “deliberate dissolution of [black] family life” in Apartheid South Africa, she argues that “domestic life” could actually “be dispensed with by the South Afri- can version of capitalism,” a fact disproving the assumption “that the services per- formed by women in the home are an essential constituent of wage labour under capitalism.” (Davis 1981). As Beer (1996: 24) suggested, feminist theory’s inability to prove the productive character of women’s domestic labor was not so much seen 3 „Nach der materialistischen Auffassung ist das in letzter Instanz bestimmende Moment in der Ge- schichte: die Produktion und Reproduktion des unmittelbaren Lebens. Diese ist aber selbst wieder doppelter Art. Einerseits die Erzeugung von Lebensmitteln, von Gegenständen der Nahrung, Klei- dung, Wohnung und den dazu erforderlichen Werkzeugen; andrerseits die Erzeugung von Menschen selbst, die Fortpflanzung der Gattung. Die gesellschaftlichen Einrichtungen, unter denen die Men- schen einer bestimmten Geschichtsepoche und eines bestimmten Landes leben, werden bedingt durch beide Arten der Produktion: durch die Entwicklungsstufe einerseits der Arbeit, andrerseits der Familie.“ (Engels 1892: 27-28) 4 Another factor for the development of dual systems theories might be a Victorian preoccupation with women’s ‘separate sphere’ which found its way into feminism (Bock 2006: 53). 268 Jana Tschurenev as a positive result of social scientific research, but rather as a failure of feminist so- cial theory itself. Other feminists suggested breaking free from the theoretical (and political) union with Marxism. They stressed that there was no necessary connection, but a political alliance of patriarchy and capitalism. Sexism, in this view, appeared as an instrument for creating fission in the labor class and for buying laboring men’s consent by means of gender privileges (Hartmann 1981). This was an important argument for feminist empowerment
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Perception of the Experience of Domestic Violence by Women With
    Perception of the Experience of Domestic Violence By Women with a Physical Disability by Jennifer Margery Mays BSocSci (Human Services) A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts (Research) Centre for Social Change Research School of Humanities and Human Services Queensland University of Technology February 2003 Declaration I, Jennifer Mays, declare that the work contained in this thesis is to the best of my knowledge and belief, original, except as acknowledged in the text and that the material has not been submitted, either in whole or part, for a degree at this or any other university. Signed: __________________________ Date: __________________________ i Abstract The disability movement drew attention to the struggle against the oppression of people of disability. The rise of disability activism contributed to increased awareness of the need for a social theory of disability, in order to account for the historical, social and economic basis of oppression. Emerging studies of disability issues by disability theorists, such as Sobsey (1994), highlighted the higher prevalence and nature of violence against people with a disability, in comparison to the general population. However, the limited research concerning women with a physical impairment experiencing domestic violence contributes to this social problem being underestimated in the community. Contemporary theoretical conceptualisations of both domestic violence and disability fail to explain the causal framework that leads to women who have a disability experiencing violent situations. Similarly, by explaining domestic violence as a solely socially constructed gender inequality and power differential, feminism provides insufficient recognition of the structural dimension of disability.
    [Show full text]
  • Tesis Oct Draft 20.Pdf
    A Manolo y Maruchi 2 Index Acknowledgments …………………………………………………………... 9 Introduction 1. Research topic, objectives and research questions…………………… 11 2. Research motivations…………………………………………………….. 14 3. Methodological strategies ………………………………………………. 15 4. Structure of the thesis…………………………………………………… 17 Chapter 1. Drawing cartographies, building epistemologies 1.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………. 22 1.2. Feminist (in)visible alliances: the importance of methodological bridges between the Humanities and the Social Sciences…………………………………. 24 1.2.1. Writing a scholarly piece in between the Social Sciences and the Humanities………………………………………………………… 25 1.2.2. Conceptual and political benefits of such a methodological bridge… 27 1.3. From post-modernist paradoxes for literary studies to post-humanist and post- colonial contributions: mapping literary theory………………………………….. 28 1.4. Literature and feminism: an overview………………………………………… 33 1.5. Entangling literature, technology and feminism ………..…………………… 37 1.5.1. Cyberfeminism: going political through the social net……………. 39 3 1.5.2. Feminist Science and Technology Studies: How might we theorize bodies as lived and/or as socially situated? ……………………………………….. 41 1.5.3. Third wave feminism: reinforcing dichotomies? …………………….. 43 1.6. New materialism: third wave feminist epistemology…………………………… 45 1.6.1. New materialist conversations: engaging with the critiques. ………. 46 1.6.2. Putting new materialism to work: implications for the relation between Toni Morrison and Facebook. ……………………………………………… 49 1.7. Conclusions………………………………………………………………… 51 Chapter 2. Diffractive methodology: relating gendered fluxes 2.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………. 53 2.2. Diffractive methodology……………………………………………………….. 54 2.3. Objective and research questions……………………………………………….. 56 2.4. Selecting the participants ……………………………………………………….. 57 2.4.1. Toni Morrison: performing feminist politics in the information society 58 2.4.2. Social Networking Sites: the case of Facebook………………………… 59 2.4.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Materialist Feminism
    9­ / MATERIALIST FEMINISM A Reader in Class, Difference, and Women's Lives Edited by Rosemary Hennessy and Chrys Ingraham ROUTLEDGE New York & London Introduction Reclaiming Anticapitalist Feminism Rosemary Hennessy and Chrys Ingraham THE NEED FOR ClASS ANALYSIS OF WOMEN'S DIFFERENT LIVES We see this reader as a timely contribution to feminist struggle for transformative social change, a struggle which is fundamentally a class war over resources, knowledge, and power. Currently the richest 20 percent of humanity garners 83 percent of global income, while the poorest 20 percent of the world's people struggles to survive on just 1 percent of the global income (Sivard 1993; World Bank 1994). During the 1990s, as capitalism triumphantly secures its global reach, anticommunist ideologies hammer home socialism's inherent failure and the Left increasingly moves into the professional middle class. many of western feminism's earlier priorities-commitment to social transformation, attention to the political economy of patriarchy, analysis of the perva­ sive social structures that link and divide women~have been obscured or actively dismissed. Various forms of feminist cultural politics that take as their starting point gender, race, class, sexuality, or coalitions among them have increasingly displaced a systemic perspective that links the battle against women's oppression to a fight against capitalism. The archive collected in Materialist Feminism: A Reader in Class, Difference, and Women's Lives is a reminder that despite this trend feminists have continued to find in historical materialism a powerful theoretical and political resource. The tradi- . tion of feminist engagement with marxism emphasizes a perspective on social life that refuses to separate the materiality of meaning, identity, the body, state, or nation from the requisite division of labor that undergirds the scramble for profits in capitalism's global system.
    [Show full text]
  • WGSS Draft Syllabus 692B Spring 2013 Ann Ferguson
    WGSS syllabus 692C Spring 2014 History of Feminist Theory Professor emerita Ann Ferguson Mondays 2:30-5 pm Office hours by appointment. [email protected] Phone: 413-367-2310 Texts 1. Linda Nicholson, ed. (1997)The Second Wave: A Reader in Feminist Theory (Routledge) 2. Hester Eisenstein (2009) Feminism Seduced: How Global Elites Use Women’s Labor and Ideas to Exploit the World (Paradigm) 3. Rachel Alsop, Annette Fitzsimmons and Kathleen Lennon (2002) Theorizing Gender (Polity) Optional: Silvia Federici (2004) Caliban and the Witch: Women and Primitive Accumulation (Autonomedia) Eva Illouz (2012) Why Love Hurts: A Sociological Explanation (Polity) Other readings for the course available on UMass UDrive (www. udrive.oit.umass.edu/xythoswfs/webview/xythoslogin.action, password given in seminar) Class Requirements and Grading Policies There are 3 components through which the course will be graded: class participation (which includes a class report and online postings), short paper, and final term paper. The work done by each student for each of these components will be weighted as follows: class participation (including class report) 30%, short paper 30%, and final term paper 40%. A. Class Participation (30%): (1) All students will be expected to do the reading before the class for which they are assigned and to contribute to the discussion about them. This will include posting discussion questions on something in the reading for the week suitable for a class discussion. These questions should be clarified by several lines which locate the issue in the reading. They should be posted by noon of the day before the seminar.
    [Show full text]
  • Materialist Feminism and Composition Studies
    Chapter One Materialist Feminism and Composition Studies The Practice of Critique and Activism in an Age of Globalization EILEEN SCHELL As a doctoral student in rhetoric and composition in the early nineties, my interest in Marxism and materialist feminism was peaked in a course on crit- ical theory. As I read the assigned critical theory texts, I was most intrigued by the theories that attempted to connect the intellectual work of theory to the struggle for material resources. Throughout the course, I attempted to understand what Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe have deemed the shift from Marxism to post-Marxism, which they characterize as a gradual flow in other directions, “in the way that river waters, having originated at a common source, spread in various directions and mingle with currents flowing from other sources” (5). A year later, as the fall merged into winter, I proposed an independent study on the discourses of radical feminists, Marxist feminists, and socialist feminists that emerged out of the New Left: Shulamith Fire- stone, Michele Barrett, Christine Delphy, Zillah Eisenstein, and others. The year before my doctoral exams, over winter break, huddled in front of the heat vent in my family’s farmhouse in eastern Washington, I struggled through Robert Tucker’s Marx-Engels Reader and later through volume 1 of Capital. 31 32 EILEEN SCHELL As I began a feminist dissertation on gender, writing instruction, and contin- gent labor in English departments, I read the work of Stanley Aronowitz, Erik Olin Wright, Nicos Poulantzas, and others who had debated theories of class relations and labor.
    [Show full text]
  • Sex in Question: French Materialist Feminism
    Sex in Question Feminist Perspectives on The Past and Present Advisory Editorial Board Lisa Adkins, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK Harriet Bradley, University of Bristol, UK Avtar Brah, University of London, UK Barbara Caine, University of Sydney, Australia Mary Evans, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK Gabriele Griffin, Leeds Metropolitan University, UK Jalna Hanmer, University of Bradford, UK Maggie Humm, University of East London, UK Sue Lees, University of North London, UK Diana Leonard, University of London, UK Terry Lovell, University of Warwick, UK Maureen McNeil, University of Birmingham, UK Ann Phoenix, University of London, UK Caroline Ramazanoglu, University of London, UK Sue Scott, University of Stirling, UK Penny Summerfield, University of Lancaster, UK Martha Vicinus, University of Michigan, USA Christine Zmroczek, Roehampton Institute of Higher Education, UK Sex in Question: French materialist feminism Edited by Diana Leonard and Lisa Adkins UK Taylor & Francis Ltd, 1 Gunpowder Square, London, EC4A 3DE USA Taylor & Francis Inc., 1900 Frost Road, Suite 101, Bristol, PA 19007 First published 1996 This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” © of collection, Diana Leonard and Lisa Adkins, 1996 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
    [Show full text]
  • On the Liberation of All Women: Socialist Feminism and Materialist Ecofeminism Gina Gaebl St
    Acta Cogitata: An Undergraduate Journal in Philosophy Volume 5 Article 2 2018 On the Liberation of All Women: Socialist Feminism and Materialist Ecofeminism Gina Gaebl St. Mary's College of Maryland Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.emich.edu/ac Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Gaebl, Gina (2018) "On the Liberation of All Women: Socialist Feminism and Materialist Ecofeminism," Acta Cogitata: An Undergraduate Journal in Philosophy: Vol. 5 , Article 2. Available at: http://commons.emich.edu/ac/vol5/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History and Philosophy at DigitalCommons@EMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Acta Cogitata: An Undergraduate Journal in Philosophy by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@EMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. On the Liberation of All Women: Socialist Feminism and Materialist Ecofeminism Gina Gaebl, St. Mary’s College of Maryland Abstract Feminists of the Western world claim to be striving for the liberation of all women, yet face a number of challenges in the pursuit of truly acting upon this objective. One of these challenges is the way in which western structures, such as capitalism, thrive off of the exploitation of women in developing countries. Other related challenges include the unintentional belittling of the cultures and feminist movements of developing countries through cultural imperialism and culture-blaming. In this paper, I argue that the only version of feminism that truly works for the liberation of all women is socialist feminism. Furthermore, this must be a version of socialist feminism that allows for feminists to approach the dismantling of capitalism in whatever way is most feasible and effective for them to do as such.
    [Show full text]
  • The Elusive Quality of the Material in Feminist Thought
    What Really Matters?: the elusive quality of the material in feminist thought Abstract The concept of the material was the focus of much feminist work in the 1970s. It has always been a deeply contested one, even for feminists working within a broadly materialist paradigm of the social. Materialist feminists stretched the concept of the material beyond the narrowly economic in their attempts to develop a social ontology of gender and sexuality. Nonetheless, the quality of the social asserted by an expanded sense of the material - its 'materiality' - remains ambiguous. New terminologies of materiality and materialisation have been developed within post-structuralist feminist thought and the literature on embodiment. The quality of 'materiality' is no longer asserted - as in materialist feminisms - but is problematised through an implicit deferral of ontology in these more contemporary usages, forcing us to interrogate the limits of both materialist and post-structuralist forms of constructionism. What really matters is how these newer terminologies of 'materiality' and 'materialisation' induce us to develop a fuller social ontology of gender and sexuality; one that weaves together social, cultural, experiential and embodied practices. keywords: material, materiality, materialisation, the social, ontology, gender, sexuality, effectivity. 1 What Really Matters?: the elusive quality of the material in feminist thought Introduction In this paper we explore some of the ways in which the concept of the material has inflected feminist thought, and consider this term in relation to the newer terms of materiality and materialisation. Its debut performance in feminist thought was in the 1970s within a current of feminism that was both social constructionist (in the sense of relentlessly sociological) and materialist (although the sense of this is not quite as clear).
    [Show full text]
  • Materialist Feminism
    9-­ ",k 0tl~e..S$ID"" o f vJ C) """"a..V\ ,,: .. MATERIALIST FEMINISM A Reader in Class, Difference, and Women's Lives Edited by Rosemary Hennessy and Chrys Ingraham ROUTLEDGE New Vork & London 8 The Oppression of Wonlen A Structuralist Marxist View Martha Gimenez Modern feminism has led to the emergence of an ever-growing body of literature seek­ ing to ascertain, using social science and Marxi~t theories, the origin of the oppression of women, the reasons for its perpetuation throughout history, its functions in contem­ porary society, and the conditions that would bId to its demise. The heterogeneous class and ethnic composition of the women's l110vement as well as the differences in the academic training of individual writers arc reflected in the political splits within the movement and in the theoretical and methodological heterogeneity of these writings. More importantly, as intellectual productions rooted in a historically specific political and ideological conjuncture, these writings have been affected by the hegemony of ide­ alist and empiricist assumptions underlying current common-sense views of the world, social science paradigms, and dominant interpretations of Marxism. Indeed, idealist (i.e., Hegelian, phenomenological, humanistic, existentialist, psychological, voluntaris­ tic) versions of Marxism seem to be more acceptable and respectable within feminist, Marxist, and non-Marxist academic and nonacademic circles in the United States. On the other hand, theoretical devdopmenb that claim to maintain the dialectical materi­ alist outlook of classical Marxism and stress the nonsubjective dimension of social processes arc generally ignored or criticized and dismissed on the grounds of their alleged determinism, economism, or functionalism.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Spot Terf Ideology
    HOW TO SPOT TERF IDEOLOGY Trans-exclusionary radical feminist ideology puts our feminist movement at risk, and trans and non-binary people in danger. We have compiled this quick guide on how to spot these ideas so we can make sure that our movements are safe and inclusive for everyone. WHAT IS IT? ‘TERF’ stands for ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminism’. Terf ideology is a specific form of transphobia, and more specifically transmisogyny, as terfs mostly target trans women and transfeminine people. According to terf ideology, trans women are excluded from womanhood and should accordingly be excluded from women-only spaces. Womanhood is supposedly defined exclusively by “sex-based” oppression, aka oppression as a result of being what terf ideology terms “biologically female”. This idea weaponises a reductive understanding of "biology" to argue that 'women' - or those assigned female at birth - all experience gendered oppression in the same way, which erases our diverse experiences of gender as it intersects with race, class, sexuality, disability, and many other structural factors. WHY IS IT WRONG? Terfs often dub themselves “gender critical”, which on the surface of it seems very reasonable - however, the problem arises in the failure of terf ideology to be similarly “sex critical”. While the gender binary is obviously a societal construction that is important to criticise and denaturalise, the same is equally true of the sex binary (the assumption that everyone can be split into two discrete biological sexes, “male” and “female”) - check out our reading list for more info on this. Terf ideology fails to recognise that women are not homogeneous, and face many different kinds of intersecting oppressions; Black ‘womanhood’ and white ‘womanhood’ are not the same, just as straight ‘womanhood’ and queer ‘womanhood’ are not the same, just as trans ‘womanhood’ and cis ‘womanhood’ are not the same.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminist Periodicals
    The U n vers ty o f W scons n System Feminist Periodicals A current listing of contents WOMEN'S STUDIES Volume 21, Number 1, Spring 2001 Published by Phyllis Holman Weisbard LIBRARIAN Women's Studies Librarian Feminist Periodicals A current listing ofcontents Volume 21, Number 1 Spring 2001 Periodicallilerature is the cutting edge ofwomen's scholarship, feminist theory, and much ofwomen's culture, Feminisf Periodicals: A Current Listing of Contents is published by the Office of the University of Wisconsin System Women's Studies Librarian on a quarterly basis with the intent of increasing public awareness of feminist periodicals, It is our hope that Feminist Periodicals will serve several purposes: to keep the reader abreast of current topics in feminist literature; to increase readers' familiarity with a wide spectrum of feminist periodicals; and to provide the requisite bibliographic information should a reader wish to subscribe to ajournal or to obtain a particular article at her library or through interlibrary loan, (Users will need to be aware of the limitations of the new copyright law with regard to photocopying of copyrighted materials.) Table ofcontents pages from current issues ofmajorfeministjournals are reproduced in each issue of Feminist Periodicals, preceded by a comprehensive annotated listing of all journals we have selected, As publication schedules vary enormously, not every periodical will have table of contents pages reproduced in each issue of FP. The annotated listing provides the following information on each journal: 1, Year of first publication, 2. Frequency of pUblication, 3. U.S, subscription price(s), 4, SUbscription address, 5. Current editor.
    [Show full text]
  • File (. Lause B)
    3 4 Keep it Simple, Make it Fast! An approach to underground music scenes (vol. 4) Paula Guerra and Thiago Pereira Alberto (eds.) First Published July 2019 by Universidade do Porto. Faculdade de Letras [University of Porto. Faculty of Arts and Humanities] Via Panorâmica, s/n, 4150-564, Porto, PORTUGAL www.letras.up.pt Design: Wasted Rita and Marcelo Baptista Credits illustrations of book’s parts: Esgar Acelerado ISBN 978-989-54179-1-9 All the content presented in texts are solely the responsibility of the authors. The ideas presented do not necessarily represent the opinion of the editors. Attribution CC BY 4.0. International This book is Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. International License (CC BY 4.0). It is allowed to share, redistribute, adapt, remix, transform and build upon the content of this book. The appropriate credit must be given to the authors and editors. More informations: https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0 489 10.1 German punk feminist festivals’ gender politics and social space: between identity and anti-identity politics Louise Barrière242 Abstract: Growing out of diverse influences, including for example the Riot Grrrl scene, intersectional feminism and queer movements, punk-feminist festivals associate theory, activism and art, and act as platforms and forums for a multidisciplinary subcultural feminism. This article draws on the study of archives and on participant observation to analyze the ambivalent approach of gender that develops within the punk-feminist festivals network in Germany. I will more precisely demonstrate that, while it is true that there are specific connexions between punk-feminism, queer-feminism and anti-identity politics, it doesn’t necessarily mean that material feminist analyzes and identity politics have completely been forgotten by the new feminist movements of the 2000s.
    [Show full text]