Proponha uma tradução ao português para o texto abaixo. In her essay “Humanism, Gynocentrism, and Feminist Politics,” Iris Marion Young provides a convenient articulation of long-standing debates within feminist theory. Humanist feminists, such as Simone de Beauvoir, argue for the equality of women and against the discriminatory practices of the past and present. De Beauvoir’s standard for equality and the grounds for opposition come from the action and language of men. As Young says, “Humanist feminism defines women’s oppression as the inhibition and distortion of women’s human potential by a society that allows the self- development of men” (Feminist 1990, 231). De Beauvoir’s The Second Sex shows how fruitful this approach can be, as she exposes the debased images and myths that men have created about women and the ways that the Western tradition has forced them to act as the passive, ornamental, and subordinate other to men. De Beauvoir argues that women ought to be thought of as free and equal agents, and her notions of “free” and “equal” come from the dominant male culture. The result is that women are separated from any gender-specific practices and that the existing value system is left in place. Gynocentric feminism, on the other hand, sees, in Young’s words, “women’s oppression as the devaluation and expression of women’s experience by a masculinist culture that exalts violence and individualism”(Feminist 1990, 231-32). Gynocentric feminism thus affirms women’s practices against those of men. It does not ask for equality by male standard and access to a man’s ”world,” as humanist feminists do. Rather, gynocentrism rejects these norms, which, in this view, have produced an exploitive, destructive, and egoistic world. Gynocentric feminists attack de Beauvoir for despising women’s activities and accepting the patriarchy’s view of what a human being is. STEELE, Meili. Critical confrontations: literary theories in dialogue. Columbia, University of South Carolina Press, 1997. .