Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T10:54:12.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Applying the Concept of Gender: Unsettled Questions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Jane S. Upin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In commenting on Susan Bordo's discussion of gender bias, 1 both support and build on her contention that women's exclusion from philosophical discourse has been epistemologically and politically significant. But I also explore difficulties associated with applying the concept of gender and I voice concern about how to characterize the perspectives we share as women. Finally, I consider some theoretical and political limitations of utilizing gender as an analytical category.

Type
Symposium on Susan Bordo's “Feminist Skepticism and the ‘Maleness’ of Philosophy”
Information
Hypatia , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , Summer 1992 , pp. 180 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

De Beauvoir, Simone. [1949]. 1953. The second sex. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1987. The flight to objectivity. Essays on Cartesianism and culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1988. Feminist skepticism and the “maleness” of philosophy. Abbreviated version. Journal of Philosophy 85(11): 619–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1990. Feminism, postmodernism, and gender‐scepticism. In Feminism/postmodernism, ed. Nicholson, Linda. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1992. Feminist scepticism and the “maleness” of philosophy. In Women and reason, eds. Harvey, Elizabeth and Okruhlik, Kathleen. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Genet, Jean. 1958. The Balcony, trans. Frechtman, Bernard. New York: Grove Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Jan. 1991. The uses of male hysteria: Medical and literary discourse in nineteenth‐century France. Representations 34(Spring): 134–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jean. 1986. Philosophy and feminist thinking. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Grosskurth, Phyllis. 1991. The psychology of women. New York Review of Books 38(17): 25–32.Google Scholar
Lutz, Tom. 1991. American nervousness, 1903: An anecdotal history. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1960. Thus spake Zarathustra, trans. Common, Thomas. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, Paula. 1990. The construction, deconstruction, and reconstruction of difference. Hypatia 5(1): 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sennett, Richard. 1978. The fall of public man: On the social psychology of capitalism. New York: Random House, Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Smith‐Rosenberg, Carroll. 1986. Writing history: Language, class, and gender. In Feminist studis/critical studies, ed. De Lauretis, Teresa. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar