Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-l69ms Total loading time: 0.248 Render date: 2022-08-08T14:51:17.246Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

Islamist Women's Agency and Relational Autonomy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Abstract

Mainstream conceptions of autonomy have been surreptitiously gender‐specific and masculinist. Feminist philosophers have reclaimed autonomy as a feminist value, while retaining its core ideal as self‐government, by reconceptualizing it as “relational autonomy.” This article examines whether feminist theories of relational autonomy can adequately illuminate the agency of Islamist women who defend their nonliberal religious values and practices and assiduously attempt to enact them in their daily lives. I focus on two notable feminist theories of relational autonomy advanced by Marina Oshana and Andrea Westlund and apply them to the case of Women's Mosque Movement participants in Egypt. I argue that feminist conceptions of relational autonomy, centered around the ideal of self‐government, cannot elucidate the agency of Women's Mosque Movement participants whose normative ideal involves perfecting their moral capacity.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , Spring 2018 , pp. 195 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 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

Abu‐Lughod, Lila. 2002. Do Muslim women really need saving? American Anthropologist 104 (3): 783–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmed, Leila. 2011. A quiet revolution. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Avishai, Orit. 2008. “Doing religion” in a secular world: Women in conservative religions and the question of agency. Gender and Society 22 (4): 409–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badran, Margot. 2009. Introduction. Feminism and Islam. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.Google Scholar
Benson, Paul. 1990. Feminist second thoughts about free agency. Hypatia 5 (3): 4764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, Paul. 2005a. Taking ownership. In Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism, ed. Christman, John and Anderson, Joel. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Benson, Paul. 2005b. Feminist intuitions and the normative substance of autonomy. In New essays on personal autonomy and its role in contemporary moral philosophy, ed. Taylor, James Stacey. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bilge, Sirma. 2010. Beyond subordination vs. resistance. Journal of Intercultural Studies 31 (1): 928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracke, Sarah. 2008. Conjugating the modern/religious, conceptualizing female religious agency. Theory, Culture and Society 25 (6): 5167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucar, Elizabeth. 2010. Dianomy: Understanding religious women's moral agency as creative conformity. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 78 (3): 662–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, Kelsy. 2012. Women's agency in gender‐traditional religions. Sociology Compass 6 (2): 122–33.Google Scholar
Christman, John, and Anderson, Joel, eds. 2005. Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1991. What can she know? Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cudd, Ann. 2015. Adaptations to oppression. In Personal autonomy and social oppression, ed. Oshana, M.New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
de Waal, Frans. 2006. Primates and philosophers. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dotson, Kristie, Fatima, Saba, Herr, Ranjoo Seodu, Khader, Serene J., and Nyanzi, Stella. 2017. Contested terrains of women of color and third world women. Hypatia 32 (3): 731–41.Google Scholar
Fernando, Mayanthi. 2010. Reconfiguring freedom: Muslim piety and the limits of secular law and public discourse in France. American Ethnologist 37 (1): 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. 1971. Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. Journal of Philosophy 68 (1): 520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Marilyn. 1997. Autonomy and social relationships. In Feminists rethink the self, ed. Meyers, D. T.Boulder, Colo.: Westview.Google Scholar
Greene, Joshua. 2013. Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Herr, Ranjoo Seodu. 2014. Reclaiming third world feminism: Or why transnational feminism needs third world feminism. Meridians 12 (1): 130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschmann, Nancy. 2003. The subject of liberty. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ibrahimhakkioglu, Fulden. 2012. Embodied affective experience in Saba Mahmood's Politics of piety. APA Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy 12 (1): 1419.Google Scholar
Jaggar, Alison. 1983. Feminist politics and human nature. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Joyce, Richard. 2006. The evolution of morality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT press.Google Scholar
Khader, Serene. 2016. Do Muslim women need freedom? Politics and Gender 12 (4): 727–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackenzie, Catriona. 2014. Three dimensions of autonomy. In Autonomy, oppression, and gender, ed. Veltman, A. and Piper, M.New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Catriona, and Stoljar, Natalie, eds. 2000. Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mahmood, Saba. 2005/2012 (with a new preface). Politics of piety: The Islamic revival and the feminist subject. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Meyers, Diana. 2000. Feminism and women's autonomy: The challenge of female genital cutting. Metaphilosophy 31 (5): 469–91.Google Scholar
Meyers, Diana. 2014. The feminist debate over values in autonomy theory. In Autonomy, oppression, and gender, ed. Veltman, A. and Piper, M.New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mozaffari, Mehdi. 2007. What is Islamism? History and definition of a concept. Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 8 (1): 1733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narayan, Uma. 2002. Minds of their own. In A mind of one's own, 2nd ed., ed. Antony, L. and Witt, C.Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Nedelsky, Jennifer. 2011. Law's relations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 2000. Women and human development. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okin, Susan. 1994. Gender inequality and cultural differences. Political Theory 22 (1): 524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oshana, Marina. 2003. How much should we value autonomy? In Autonomy, ed. Paul, E., Miller, F. Jr., and Paul, J.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oshana, Marina. 2006. Personal autonomy in society. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Oshana, Marina. 2014. A commitment to autonomy is a commitment to feminism. In Autonomy, oppression, and gender, ed. Veltman, A. and Piper, M.New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pettit, Philip. 2001. A theory of freedom. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rostami‐Povey, Elaheh. 2007. Afghan women: Identity and invasion. New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Roy, Olivier, and Sfeir, Antoine. 2007. The Columbia world dictionary of Islamism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Salime, Zakia. 2011. Between feminism and Islam. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, Jakeet. 2015. Religious agency and the limits of intersectionality. Hypatia 30 (4): 657–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoljar, Natalie. 2000. Autonomy and the feminist intuition. In Relational autonomy: Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self, ed. Mackenzie, Catriona and Stoljar, Natalie. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Superson, Anita. 2005. Deformed desires and informed desire tests. Hypatia 20 (4): 109–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tancredi, Laurence. 2005. Hardwired behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1985. Atomism. In Philosophical papers 2: Philosophy and the human sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1989. Sources of the self. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1991. The dialogical self. In The interpretive turn, ed. Hiley, D., Bohman, J., and Shusterman, R.Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, James Stacey. 2005. New essays on personal autonomy and its role in contemporary moral philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, Gary. 1975. Free agency. Journal of Philosophy 72 (8): 205–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, Allison. 2013. Feminism and the Islamic revival. Hypatia 28 (2): 323–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westlund, Andrea. 2003. Selflessness and responsibility for self: Is deference compatible with autonomy? Philosophical Review 112 (4): 483523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westlund, Andrea. 2009. Rethinking relational autonomy. Hypatia 24 (4): 2649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, Susan. 1990. Freedom within reason. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
5
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Islamist Women's Agency and Relational Autonomy
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Islamist Women's Agency and Relational Autonomy
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Islamist Women's Agency and Relational Autonomy
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *