Journal of Gender Studies 16 (2):139-153 (2007)

Authors
Maya J. Goldenberg
University of Guelph
Abstract
The precondition of any feminist politics – a usable category of ‘woman’ – has proved to be difficult to construct, even proposed to be impossible, given the ‘problem of exclusion’. This is the inevitable exclusion of at least some women, as their lives or experiences do not fit into the necessary and sufficient condition(s) that denotes group membership. In this paper, I propose that the problem of exclusion arises not because of inappropriate category membership criteria, but because of the presumption that categories can only be organised by identity relations or shared properties among their members. This criterion of sameness as well as the characterisation of this exclusion as essentialism attests to a metaphysics that is not conducive to resistance and liberatory projects. Following a strain of hybrid thinking in feminist and post-colonial theory, I outline an alternative pluralist logic that confronts oppressive binaries that impede theory work in gender, sexuality, and race theory, and limit political action and resistance. The problem of exclusion is neither irresolvable nor is it essentialism. Instead it is a denial of subjectivity due to pseudodualistic self/Other dichotomies that can be resisted by adopting a new categorial logic. While this paper focuses on the specific problem of formulating a category of ‘woman’, it has implications for other areas of gender, critical race, and postcolonial theory. Rather than working toward an inclusive category founded on sameness, theorists need to develop independent and positive categories grounded in difference. Our current categorial logic does not permit such a project, and therefore a new metaphysics must be adopted.
Keywords Exclusion  Difference  Essentialism  Woman  Subjectivity  Other(ness)  Feminist politics
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

In Defense of the Metaphysics of Race.Adam Hochman - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (11):2709–2729.
Genere.Boris Rähme & Valentina Chizzola - 2017 - Aphex 15:1-38.
Framing the Refugee.Phil Cole - 2020 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 2:35-51.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Im-Possibility of a Feminist Subject.Claudia Leeb - 2009 - Social Philosophy Today 25:47-60.
A Defence of the Category ‘Women’.Lena Gunnarsson - 2011 - Feminist Theory 12 (1):23-37.
Gender Sceptics and Feminist Politics.Mari Mikkola - 2007 - Res Publica 13 (4):361-380.
The Politics of Identity and the Metaphysics of Diversity.Natalie Stoljar - 2000 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2000:21-30.
Exclusion Again.Karen Bennett - 2008 - In Jakob Hohwy & Jesper Kallestrup (eds.), Being Reduced: New Essays on Reduction, Explanation, and Causation. Oxford University Press. pp. 280--307.
Excluding Exclusion: The Natural(Istic) Dualist Approach. Istv - 2008 - Philosophical Explorations 11 (1):67 – 78.
Excluding Exclusion: The Natural(Istic) Dualist Approach.István Aranyosi - 2008 - Philosophical Explorations 11 (1):67-78.
Can Counterfactuals Solve the Exclusion Problem?Lei Zhong - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (1):129-147.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-10-05

Total views
1,726 ( #2,471 of 2,462,617 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
107 ( #6,050 of 2,462,617 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes