Globalizing Feminist Ethics

Jaggar, Alison M.

doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.1998.tb01223.x

Cited by 56 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since “ignoring and annihilating differences” is not an acceptable feminist option, women must continuously work together “across our differences” (Narayan , 34). In working across differences, however, women sharing the feminist commitment must recognize not only “vast power inequalities” among discourse participants (Jaggar , 20), but also a “hermeneutical injustice” in the discourse itself, resulting from the exclusion of historically oppressed/marginalized groups’ experiences (Fricker , 208). Miscommunications are bound to arise because members of advantaged groups may be not only oblivious to the experiences and perspectives of women and feminists from historically oppressed/marginalized groups, but also unaware of the fact that they themselves are perpetuating “assumptions and attitudes born out of centuries of power and privilege” (Narayan , 35).…”

Section: Is Nationalism Necessarily Detrimental To Transnational Femimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can Transnational Feminist Solidarity Accommodate Nationalism? Reflections from the Case Study of Korean “Comfort Women”

Herr¹

2016

Hypatia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to refute the “incompatibility thesis” that nationalism is incompatible with transnational feminist solidarity, as it fosters exclusionary practices, xenophobia, and racism among feminists with conflicting nationalist aspirations. I examine the plausibility of the incompatibility thesis by focusing on the controversy regarding just reparation for Second World War “comfort women,” which is still unresolved. The Korean Council at the center of this controversy, which advocates for the rights of Korean former comfort women, has been criticized for its strident nationalism and held responsible for the stalemate. Consequently, the case of comfort women has been thought to exemplify the incompatibility thesis. I argue against this common feminist perception in three ways: first, those who subscribe to the incompatibility thesis have misinterpreted facts surrounding the issue; second, the Korean Council's nationalism is a version of “polycentric nationalism,” which avoids the problems of essentialist nationalism at the center of feminist concerns; and, third, transnational feminist solidarity is predicated on the idea of oppressed/marginalized women's epistemic privilege and enjoins that feminists respect oppressed/marginalized women's epistemic privilege. To the extent that oppressed/marginalized women's voices are expressed in nationalist terms, I argue that feminists committed to transnational feminist solidarity must accommodate their nationalism.

show abstract

Section: Is Nationalism Necessarily Detrimental To Transnational Femimentioning

confidence: 99%

“… This has been noted especially in regard to the superior power Western/white feminists have vis‐à‐vis women and feminists of color (Narayan ; Lugones ; Jaggar ). However, this is relevant in any feminist discourse, even among women and feminists of color themselves. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Transnational Feminist Solidarity Accommodate Nationalism? Reflections from the Case Study of Korean “Comfort Women”

Herr¹

2016

Hypatia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Feminist bioethicists in North America, the UK and Australia in particular have called for a greater sensitivity to differences among cultures. According to Alison Jaggar,13 as globalisation increasingly draws non-western cultures into its net, there is a danger that these cultures will be exploited by powerful western interests. Françoise Baylis, Susan Sherwin, Heather Widdows, Donna Dickinson, and others have argued that the imposition of western-style abstract, individualistic, universalist ethical norms on people to whom these concepts are foreign is a form of oppression that bioethicists should resist 14 15…”

Section: Four Meanings Of Globalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concern to avoid cultural imperialism is particularly important, given the sorry tradition of colonialism, whose effects continue to cause suffering not only in the global south but among indigenous and formerly enslaved people in the north as well 13. In bioethics, the non-idealised feminist theory, critical race theory and colonial studies that have provided the basis for this approach to globalisation have largely been promoted by feminists.…”

Section: Four Meanings Of Globalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical resources for a globalised bioethics: Table 1

Verkerk

Lindemann

2010

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an age of global capitalism, pandemics, far-flung biobanks, multinational drug trials and telemedicine it is impossible for bioethicists to ignore the global dimensions of their field. However, if they are to do good work on the issues that globalisation requires of them, they need theoretical resources that are up to the task. This paper identifies four distinct understandings of ‘globalised’ in the bioethics literature: (1) a focus on global issues; (2) an attempt to develop a universal ethical theory that can transcend cultural differences; (3) an awareness of how bioethics itself has expanded, with new centres and journals emerging in nearly every corner of the globe; (4) a concern to avoid cultural imperialism in encounters with other societies. Each of these approaches to globalisation has some merit, as will be shown. The difficulty with them is that the standard theoretical tools on which they rely are not designed for cross-cultural ethical reflection. As a result, they leave important considerations hidden. A set of theoretical resources is proposed to deal with the moral puzzles of globalisation. Abandoning idealised moral theory, a normative framework is developed that is sensitive enough to account for differences without losing the broader context in which ethical issues arise. An empirically nourished, self-reflexive, socially inquisitive, politically critical and inclusive ethics allows bioethicists the flexibility they need to pick up on the morally relevant particulars of this situation here without losing sight of the broader cultural contexts in which it all takes place.

show abstract

“…Rather, the suggestion is that we need to develop methodological strategies for investigating the ways in which the subjectivities of theorists both enables and limits what we see. There is a significant feminist literature addressing the challenges of moral reasoning in contexts characterized by diversity and structural inequality, including work by Maria Lugones (1987), Alison Jaggar (1998, 2006), Iris Young (1997), Ofelia Schutte (1998), and Uma Narayan (1997, 2001), to name just a few. My suggestion is that we build on and draw out the implications of this work for philosophical methodology.…”

Section: Conclusion: Building On Schwartzman's Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalizing Feminist Methodology: Building on Schwartzman'sChallenging Liberalism

Tobin¹

2009

Hypatia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lisa Schwartzman opens her book, Challenging Liberalism: Feminism as Political Critique, by noting that liberalism has been both good and bad for women. Liberal ideals and values such as equality, autonomy, and rights have certainly been valuable to women in their struggles for liberation. Yet liberal ideals have also been used to undermine women's interests: right-to-privacy arguments have been used to block state interference in cases of domestic violence, and free-speech arguments have been used to protect pornography and sexually harassing speech (Schwartzman 2006, 1). Schwartzman locates the pernicious effects of liberal theory in two features of a common methodology that many liberal moral and political theorists employ: (1) individualism and (2) a particular strategy of abstraction.Drawing from the work of several feminist moral and political theorists, Schwartzman argues persuasively that, taken together, these features of liberal methodology produce theories that render oppression invisible and often function to reinforce unjust social relations of power. Drawing from this same body of work, she identifies and articulates an alternative feminist methodology that she argues is much better equipped to uncover and critique systems of Symposium on Challenging Liberalism 145

show abstract

Globalizing Feminist Ethics

Cited by 56 publications

References 13 publications

Can Transnational Feminist Solidarity Accommodate Nationalism? Reflections from the Case Study of Korean “Comfort Women”

Can Transnational Feminist Solidarity Accommodate Nationalism? Reflections from the Case Study of Korean “Comfort Women”

Theoretical resources for a globalised bioethics: Table 1

Globalizing Feminist Methodology: Building on Schwartzman'sChallenging Liberalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About