Accueil
https://philosophy.la.psu.edu/people/ara17/
"Insofar as feminists are interested in studying power, it is because we have an interest in understanding criticizing, challgenign, subverting, and ultimately overturning the multiples axes of stratification affecting women in contemporary Western societies, including (but not limited to) sexism, racism, heterosexism, and class oppression.
[...] There are at least three specific interests that a feminist account of power must attempt to adress. First, feminists have an interest in making visible and making sense of the systematic relations of sexist, racist, heterosexist, and class-based domination and subordination that charactrize late capitalist Western pluralist societies. This concern requires an adequate feminist conception of power that shed light on power understood as domination. Indeed, it is this interest that motivates much of feminist research.
However, as both academic feminists and popular writers such as Katie Roiphe and Naomi Wolf have pointed out, a discussion of domination will not satisfy all of the interests that feminists have in studying power. By focusing too narrowly on domination, this critics maintain, feminists have obscured the power than women can exercice and have unwittingly portrayed women as victims. Let me set aside for the moment the validity of these claims about feminist theory (i shall return to consider them in detail in chapter 1) and note that they highlith a second interest in thinking about the power that not only makes day-to-day living bearable and even pleasurable, but also makes resistance to domination possible. This interest requires a feminist conception of power to be able to adequately theorize empowernment and resistance.
However, given the incredibly complex and insidious forms that the subordination of women takes, it seems clear that the overturning of such subordination cannot be achieved simply through a bunch of individual acts of resistance. A collective feminist movement is also neccerary [...] to resist domination. Thus, feminists bring a third interest to the study of power, the interest in thinking about the collective power that binds the feminist movement together and allies it with related social movements. This interest requires a feminist conception to theorizy power undestood as solidarity." (p.2)
"I begin in Chapter 1 by critically assessing existing feminist conceptions of power. I examine three different conceptions of power that have been influential in feminist theory: power as resource, power as domination, and power empowerment. I argue that, although each of these conceptions has provided important insights into women's experience, each is ultimately inadequate. The first is inadequate because it misconstrues the nature of power by understanding it as that which can be possessed, distributed, and redistributed, and the second and third are unsatisfactory because each of these conceptions emphasizes only one aspect of the multifaceted power relations that feminists are trying to understand. I argue that a better feminist conception would construe power as a relation rather than a possession, but it would also avoid the tendancy to mistake one aspect of power for the whole ot it. Instead, it would highlight the complicated interplay between domination and empowerment." (p.3)
"In Chapter 5, I conclude by bringing together the elements of a feminist conception of power that emerge from my reading of Foucault, Butler, and Arendt. [...] I offer a definition of power that brings together the insights of these theorists but avoids the pitfalls of their conceptions of power as well." (p.4)
[Chapter 1 : Feminist Conceptions of Power : A Critical Assessment]
"Power is clearly a crucial concept for feminist theory. [...] However, assessing feminist conceptions of power is not an easy task, since these conceptions tend to be implicit in feminist writings, rather than explicitly discussed and defended. Thus, the first task involved in assessing these conceptions is to reconstruct the conceptions of power that have been presupposed by feminist theorists.
The first conception understand power as a positive social good, a resource, the distribution of which among men and women is currently unequal. It thus sees the goal of feminism to be a redistribution of this positive resource so that women will have power in amounts roughly equal to men.
The second understands power not as a resource that can be possessed, distributed, or redistributed but, rather, as a relation -specifically, a relation of (male) domination and (female) subordination. This view equates power with domination and domination with a set of pervasive, dyadic, master / subject relations through which gender is created and reinforced. From this perspective, the goal of feminism is not enable women to have power in amounts rougly equal to men but to dismantle the system of domination entirely.
The (p.7)
-Amy Allen, The Power of Feminist Theory. Domination, Resistance, Solidarity, Routledge, 1999, 150 pages.
"Insofar as feminists are interested in studying power, it is because we have an interest in understanding criticizing, challgenign, subverting, and ultimately overturning the multiples axes of stratification affecting women in contemporary Western societies, including (but not limited to) sexism, racism, heterosexism, and class oppression.
[...] There are at least three specific interests that a feminist account of power must attempt to adress. First, feminists have an interest in making visible and making sense of the systematic relations of sexist, racist, heterosexist, and class-based domination and subordination that charactrize late capitalist Western pluralist societies. This concern requires an adequate feminist conception of power that shed light on power understood as domination. Indeed, it is this interest that motivates much of feminist research.
However, as both academic feminists and popular writers such as Katie Roiphe and Naomi Wolf have pointed out, a discussion of domination will not satisfy all of the interests that feminists have in studying power. By focusing too narrowly on domination, this critics maintain, feminists have obscured the power than women can exercice and have unwittingly portrayed women as victims. Let me set aside for the moment the validity of these claims about feminist theory (i shall return to consider them in detail in chapter 1) and note that they highlith a second interest in thinking about the power that not only makes day-to-day living bearable and even pleasurable, but also makes resistance to domination possible. This interest requires a feminist conception of power to be able to adequately theorize empowernment and resistance.
However, given the incredibly complex and insidious forms that the subordination of women takes, it seems clear that the overturning of such subordination cannot be achieved simply through a bunch of individual acts of resistance. A collective feminist movement is also neccerary [...] to resist domination. Thus, feminists bring a third interest to the study of power, the interest in thinking about the collective power that binds the feminist movement together and allies it with related social movements. This interest requires a feminist conception to theorizy power undestood as solidarity." (p.2)
"I begin in Chapter 1 by critically assessing existing feminist conceptions of power. I examine three different conceptions of power that have been influential in feminist theory: power as resource, power as domination, and power empowerment. I argue that, although each of these conceptions has provided important insights into women's experience, each is ultimately inadequate. The first is inadequate because it misconstrues the nature of power by understanding it as that which can be possessed, distributed, and redistributed, and the second and third are unsatisfactory because each of these conceptions emphasizes only one aspect of the multifaceted power relations that feminists are trying to understand. I argue that a better feminist conception would construe power as a relation rather than a possession, but it would also avoid the tendancy to mistake one aspect of power for the whole ot it. Instead, it would highlight the complicated interplay between domination and empowerment." (p.3)
"In Chapter 5, I conclude by bringing together the elements of a feminist conception of power that emerge from my reading of Foucault, Butler, and Arendt. [...] I offer a definition of power that brings together the insights of these theorists but avoids the pitfalls of their conceptions of power as well." (p.4)
[Chapter 1 : Feminist Conceptions of Power : A Critical Assessment]
"Power is clearly a crucial concept for feminist theory. [...] However, assessing feminist conceptions of power is not an easy task, since these conceptions tend to be implicit in feminist writings, rather than explicitly discussed and defended. Thus, the first task involved in assessing these conceptions is to reconstruct the conceptions of power that have been presupposed by feminist theorists.
The first conception understand power as a positive social good, a resource, the distribution of which among men and women is currently unequal. It thus sees the goal of feminism to be a redistribution of this positive resource so that women will have power in amounts roughly equal to men.
The second understands power not as a resource that can be possessed, distributed, or redistributed but, rather, as a relation -specifically, a relation of (male) domination and (female) subordination. This view equates power with domination and domination with a set of pervasive, dyadic, master / subject relations through which gender is created and reinforced. From this perspective, the goal of feminism is not enable women to have power in amounts rougly equal to men but to dismantle the system of domination entirely.
The (p.7)
-Amy Allen, The Power of Feminist Theory. Domination, Resistance, Solidarity, Routledge, 1999, 150 pages.
