Academic literature on the topic 'Feminist social theory'

El feminismo es para todo el mundo, é uma das obras mais importantes da escritora, teórica ativista, acadêmica e crítica cultural afronorteamericana bell hooks. Inspirada em sua própria história de superação e influenciada pela teoria crítica como prática libertadora de Paulo Freire, a autora nos provoca a refletir sobre o sujeito social do feminismo e propõe um feminismo visionário e radical, que deve ser analisado a partir das experiências pessoais e situada desde nossos lugares de sexo, raça e classe para compreender as diferentes formas de violência dentro do patriarcado capitalista supremacista branco. Como feminista negra interseccional, a escritora reivindica constantemente a teoria dentro do ativismo, por uma prática feminista antirracista, antissexista, anticlassista e anti-homofóbica, que lute contra todas as formas de violência e dominação, convidando a todas as pessoas a intervir na realidade social. Para a autora, o feminismo é para mulheres e homens, apontando a urgência de transitar alternativas outras, de novos modelos de masculinidades não hegemônicas, de família e de criança feminista, de beleza e sexualidades feministas, de educação feminista para a transformação da vida e das nossas relações sociais, políticas, afetivas e espirituais. Feminismo. Revolução. bell hooks. Feminismo is for everybody bell hooksFeminism is revolution in the world: other performances to transit non-hegemonic bodiesAbstractEl feminismo es para todo el mundo, is one of the writer's most important works, activist theorist, academic and cultural critic African American, bell hooks. Inspired by her own overcoming history and influenced by critical theory as a liberating practice of Paulo Freire, the author provokes us to reflect on the social subject of feminism and proposes a visionary and radical feminism that must be analyzed from personal experiences and situated from our places of sex, race, and class to understand the different forms of violence within the white supremacist capitalist patriarchy. As an intersectional black feminist, the writer constantly advocates the theory within activism, for a feminist practice anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-classist and anti-homophobic practice that fights against all forms of violence and domination, inviting all people to intervene in social reality. For the author, feminism is for women and men, pointing to the urgency of moving other alternatives, new models of non-hegemonic masculinities, family and child feminist beauty and feminist sexualities, feminist education for life transformation and of our social, political, affective and spiritual relationships. Feminism. Revolution. bell hooks

The work of feminists in science may seem less voluminous and less theoretical than the feminist scholarship in some humanities and social science disciplines. However, the recent burst of scholarship on women and science allows categorization of feminist work into six distinct but related categories: 1) teaching and curriculum transformation in science, 2) history of women in science, 3) current status of women in science, 4) feminist critique of science, 5) feminine science, 6) feminist theory of science. More feminists in science are needed to further explore science and its relationships to women and feminism in order to change traditional science to a feminist science.

Whereas others have considered the interrelationship between feminism and sociology in terms of the impact of the former on the latter, this paper focuses on the influence of sociological thought on feminist theory. Sociological perspectives were much in evidence within feminist thought in the 1970s, but the shifting disciplinary hierarchies associated with the ‘cultural turn’ of the 1980s have since undermined sociology's influence within feminism - and especially in feminist theory. One consequence of this, I suggest, has been the erasure of some important sociological insights and perspectives from the map of feminist theory. In particular the origins of social constructionism have been forgotten, along with much that was distinctly social in this approach. In charting the course and assessing the effects of the ‘cultural turn’, I make it clear than not all feminists have followed that route. I argue for the recovery of the social from its eclipsing by the cultural and for the continued importance of a sociologically informed feminism into the 21st century. In making the case for a distinctly sociological approach to central feminist concerns, I will take sexuality as a case study. Here I seek to demonstrate that sociology has more to offer feminism than the cultural focus of queer theory.

Any universal definitions of feminism - as well as what constitutes feminist theory, political strategy, and related practices - are problematic. The patriarchal relations that feminists oppose have different configurations depending on the social, economic, cultural and political contexts. Consequently, there are various feminisms: multiple syntheses of local and universal knowledge. This article analyzes the conceptual and political rifts within the global feminism associated with the hegemony of western ideas and its criticism by transnational and postcolonial feminists and examines the postsocialist transformations and localizations of feminism and, in particular, the evolution of feminist ideas in post-soviet Russia.

The aim of the article is to answer two questions: – what is feminist social work, and – what is the influence of feminism on the theory and practice of social work? The first part of the article is focused on the history of social work (in terms of women's contribution to the development of this discipline) and feminism (including various trends of feminism). Then, the features of feminist social work are discussed. The article is only an introduction to the issue of feminist social work and does not cover all the related topics.

AbstractThe paper functions as a contribution to feminist analyses that are methodologically based on Rosa Luxemburg’s critique of political economy and her understanding of capital accumulation, but also as a contribution to contemporary social-reproduction theory which aims to integrate Luxemburg’s legacy alongside that of Marx. The essay offers a sketch for a ‘Luxemburgian feminism’ consisting of (1) an overview of Luxemburg’s critique of bourgeois feminism and (2) a preliminary application of Luxemburg’s ‘dialectics of spatiality’ to contemporary social-reproduction theory. With Luxemburg’sThe Accumulation of Capitalin mind and her several essays on the so-called ‘women’s question’, we shall attempt to relate Luxemburg’s explanation of the dynamic link between capitalist and non-capitalist spatialities with the commodification of women’s reproductive labour.

Feminist philosophers and social theorists have engaged in an extensive critique of the project of modernity during the past three decades. However, many feminists seem to assume that the critique of religion essential to this project remains valid. Radical criticism of religion in the European tradition presupposes a theory of religion that is highly ethnocentric, and Marx's theory of religion serves as a case in point.

The paper discusses political implications of the feminist revision of psychoanalysis in the works of major representatives of 1970s French poststructuralism, and their current significance. The influence and modifications of Lacan's interpretation of imaginary structure of the Ego and linguistic structure of the unconscious on explanations of the relations between gender and identity developed by Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray and H?l?ne Cixous are examined. French poststructuralist feminism, developing in the 1970s, was the second major current in French feminism of the times, different from and in a way opposed to Simone de Beauvoir's approach. While de Beauvoir explores 'women's condition' determined by social and historical circumstances, French feminists of poststructuralist persuasion engage with problems of unconscious psychological structuring of feminine identity, women's psychosexuality, theoretical implications of gendered visions of reality, especially in philosophy, semiology and psychology, as well as opening up new discursive possibilities of women's and feminine self-expression through 'women's writing'. Political implications of their approach have remained controversial to this day. These authors have been criticized for dislocating women's activism into the sphere of language and theory, as well as for reasserting the concept of women's nature. Debates over whether we need the concept of women's nature - and if yes, what kind - and over the relation between theory and political activism, have resulted in the split between the so-called 'essentialist' and 'anti-essentialist' approaches in feminist theory, and the subsequent division into American (non-essentialist) and French (partly labeled as essentialist) strands. The division is an oversimplification and overlooks concrete historical circumstances that produced the divergence between 'materialist' and 'linguistic' currents in France.

I comment on Eagly and Wood's biosocial constructionist evolutionary theory (2011; DOI: 10.1007/s11199-011-9949-9). Although this gender feminist theory allows for evolved physical differences between men and women and evolved psychological similarities for men and women, it fails to consider evolutionary accounts of psychological sex differences. I hypothesize that gender feminists' reluctance to acknowledge that evolution has left different fingerprints on men's and women's bodies and brains stems from two common misunderstandings of evolutionary psychology: the myth of immutability and the naturalistic fallacy. I conclude that although evolutionary psychology is eminently compatible with equity feminism, evolutionary psychology and feminist psychology will conflict as long as the latter adheres to gender feminism and its unwillingness to acknowledge the evidence for evolved psychological sex differences. Gender feminism's dualistic view of evolution hinders the search for and understanding of the proximate and ultimate causes of inequality. Feminist psychology needs to evolve by embracing equity feminism, which has no a priori stance on the origin or existence of differences between the sexes.