The contents of the French post-structuralist feminism page were merged into Post-structural feminism on 21 April 2021. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Post-structural feminism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I know feminists love to tag all kinds of adjectives onto feminism to carve out a piece of the feminism namespace with the application of a theory that is in vogue, but just because some of them read some philosophy of post-structuralism, does not make this a whole new field, there is in fact very little to establish its WP:Notability Ethanpet113 ( talk) 07:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
"post[-]structural feminis[t/ts]"
, as well.) The results of those searches moreover yield literature which either describes poststructural feminism as distinct from other feminist perspectives or otherwise treats them as such. For example, just from the top results of "post-structural feminism"
in Google Books:Post-structural feminism is primarily concerned with identity politics and the construction of power relations that position those who are gendered female in a subordinate position to those who are gendered male. Post-structural feminists articulate that our understanding of everyday knowledge is constructed through power relations that are gendered.
— Donna Seto, No Place for a War Baby: The Global Politics of Children born of Wartime Sexual Violence (2016), "Gendering International Relations", p. 55
The relativism of post-structural feminism is seen by some critics as incapable of provoking any action to improve the lives of women. If "women" as a coherent category has been deconstructed and "power" is seen as a capillary and localized operation, then how and where can feminists work to improve social worlds? Critics suggest that social theory that does not foreground radical social action and that problematizes agency is suspect for feminist purposes. This position is evidence in some critiques of postmodern and post-structural feminism, critiques that see the focus on discourse as inconsistent with an orientation to social change.
— Susanne Gannon, Bronwyn Davies, "Part I – Feminist Perspectives on Knowledge Building"; Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber (ed.), Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis (2012), p. 80
I can continue, but you can see for yourself. I will note that poststructural feminism has a history dating back to at least 1979, with publications talking about it as a specific kind of feminism in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1994, and so on and so forth with greater frequency the closer to 2018. Is this sufficient to indicate this neologism is notable? If not, then when?Perhaps postructural feminism is ultimately just feminism with poststructuralist elements, but that is equivalent to saying that democratic socialism is just socialism with democratic elements or national liberalism is just liberalism with nationalist elements or clerical fascism is just fascism with clericalist elements. In the end, they are all distinct perspectives with both historic and contemporary meanings whose defining characteristics are precisely as the intersections of those perspectives. Within this context, I do not see how the problem here is that of a non-notable article subject; rather, I think it is one of insufficient article development and sourcing, hence my edit. — Nøkkenbuer ( talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)My approach starts from post-structural feminism and gives weight to structural components of gender relations, reproduced when individuals perform within institutions.
— Annica Kronsell, "Methods for studying silences: gender analysis in institutions of hegemonic masculinity"; Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, Jacqui True (eds.), Feminist Methodologies for International Relations (2004), p. 108
I propose to merge French post-structuralist feminism into Post-structural feminism. Most of the theorists mentioned in French post-structuralist feminism are also mentioned here, neither article is particularly long, and I see overlap. Additionally, I find it difficult to find a significant difference between the philosophies outlined in these articles. Although I believe Nøkkenbuer has established this article's validity and notability, it still could help to have more information on the page. I welcome any and all feedback (especially since this is my first merger/proposal). DynaGuy00 ( talk) 16:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
any user may close the discussion and move forward with the merger if enough time (normally one week or more) has elapsed and there has been no discussion or if there is unanimous consent to merge. As 6 months is more than one week, I don't think that the merge was unreasonable. I also can't follow your argument that we should wait for the article to be beefed up. Post-structural feminism has been in need of support for the last decade, and the material in French post-structuralist feminism heavily overlaps on several point (for example, the leading figures on the two pages heavily overlap), but also provides additional references material, and deeper discussion on the key figures and ideas of post-structuralist feminism. Editors have had a decade to beef up Post-structural feminism and my view is that the content on the French subtopic helpfully does so.
References
The contents of the French post-structuralist feminism page were merged into Post-structural feminism on 21 April 2021. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Post-structural feminism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I know feminists love to tag all kinds of adjectives onto feminism to carve out a piece of the feminism namespace with the application of a theory that is in vogue, but just because some of them read some philosophy of post-structuralism, does not make this a whole new field, there is in fact very little to establish its WP:Notability Ethanpet113 ( talk) 07:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
"post[-]structural feminis[t/ts]"
, as well.) The results of those searches moreover yield literature which either describes poststructural feminism as distinct from other feminist perspectives or otherwise treats them as such. For example, just from the top results of "post-structural feminism"
in Google Books:Post-structural feminism is primarily concerned with identity politics and the construction of power relations that position those who are gendered female in a subordinate position to those who are gendered male. Post-structural feminists articulate that our understanding of everyday knowledge is constructed through power relations that are gendered.
— Donna Seto, No Place for a War Baby: The Global Politics of Children born of Wartime Sexual Violence (2016), "Gendering International Relations", p. 55
The relativism of post-structural feminism is seen by some critics as incapable of provoking any action to improve the lives of women. If "women" as a coherent category has been deconstructed and "power" is seen as a capillary and localized operation, then how and where can feminists work to improve social worlds? Critics suggest that social theory that does not foreground radical social action and that problematizes agency is suspect for feminist purposes. This position is evidence in some critiques of postmodern and post-structural feminism, critiques that see the focus on discourse as inconsistent with an orientation to social change.
— Susanne Gannon, Bronwyn Davies, "Part I – Feminist Perspectives on Knowledge Building"; Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber (ed.), Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis (2012), p. 80
I can continue, but you can see for yourself. I will note that poststructural feminism has a history dating back to at least 1979, with publications talking about it as a specific kind of feminism in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1994, and so on and so forth with greater frequency the closer to 2018. Is this sufficient to indicate this neologism is notable? If not, then when?Perhaps postructural feminism is ultimately just feminism with poststructuralist elements, but that is equivalent to saying that democratic socialism is just socialism with democratic elements or national liberalism is just liberalism with nationalist elements or clerical fascism is just fascism with clericalist elements. In the end, they are all distinct perspectives with both historic and contemporary meanings whose defining characteristics are precisely as the intersections of those perspectives. Within this context, I do not see how the problem here is that of a non-notable article subject; rather, I think it is one of insufficient article development and sourcing, hence my edit. — Nøkkenbuer ( talk • contribs) 04:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)My approach starts from post-structural feminism and gives weight to structural components of gender relations, reproduced when individuals perform within institutions.
— Annica Kronsell, "Methods for studying silences: gender analysis in institutions of hegemonic masculinity"; Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, Jacqui True (eds.), Feminist Methodologies for International Relations (2004), p. 108
I propose to merge French post-structuralist feminism into Post-structural feminism. Most of the theorists mentioned in French post-structuralist feminism are also mentioned here, neither article is particularly long, and I see overlap. Additionally, I find it difficult to find a significant difference between the philosophies outlined in these articles. Although I believe Nøkkenbuer has established this article's validity and notability, it still could help to have more information on the page. I welcome any and all feedback (especially since this is my first merger/proposal). DynaGuy00 ( talk) 16:00, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
any user may close the discussion and move forward with the merger if enough time (normally one week or more) has elapsed and there has been no discussion or if there is unanimous consent to merge. As 6 months is more than one week, I don't think that the merge was unreasonable. I also can't follow your argument that we should wait for the article to be beefed up. Post-structural feminism has been in need of support for the last decade, and the material in French post-structuralist feminism heavily overlaps on several point (for example, the leading figures on the two pages heavily overlap), but also provides additional references material, and deeper discussion on the key figures and ideas of post-structuralist feminism. Editors have had a decade to beef up Post-structural feminism and my view is that the content on the French subtopic helpfully does so.
References