Le genre, structure sérielle : penser les femmes comme un groupe social

À la suite des critiques formulées par des femmes de couleur et par des lesbiennes quant à la conception ethnocentrique blanche et hétérosexiste d’une bonne partie de la réflexion féministe, l’auteure essaie de penser la catégorie « femmes » en dehors des définitions essentialisantes et totalisantes. Elle propose, à cette fin, de recourir à la notion sartrienne de structure sérielle pour penser les femmes comme un groupe social dont les membres n’ont pas nécessairement à partager les mêmes attributs. Cela lui permet d’envisager la possibilité d’un féminisme qui ne repose pas sur la catégorie « femmes » dans son ensemble, mais qui émerge plutôt des pratiques, nécessairement parcellaires, de femmes qui transforment en enjeux politiques certains aspects de la « condition féminine ». Ainsi, il devient possible de penser le féminisme comme théorie et pratique politiques sans le faire procéder de « femmes » dont la condition serait identique en tous points, mais plutôt de coalitions qui remettent en cause un aspect particulier des rapports de pouvoir entre hommes et femmes.Taking into consideration critiques from women of color or lesbians on the white ethnocentric and heterosexist character of a large part of feminist theorizing, I try to conceptualize the category “women” while avoiding both essentialism and totalisation. For this purpose, I propose to use the Sartrian concept of seriality in order to think about women as a social group, without implying that all women share a set of social attributes. This allows me to adopt a conception of feminism that does not proceed from the category “women” as a whole, but stems out of the partial practices that politicize various aspects of “women’s condition”. Thus, one can define feminism as a theory and a political practice that is not exclusive to the domain of “women”, but rather draw on various coalitions that challenge the power relation between men and women in some respect

RESPONSABILIDAD Y JUSTICIA GLOBAL: UN MODELO DE CONEXIÓN SOCIAL

In this essay I clarify the status of claims about global justice and injustice which are increasingly voiced and accepted in our world. Such claims present a problem for political philosophy because until recently most philosophical approaches to justice assumed that obligations of justice hold only between those living under a common constitution within a single political community. I will argue that the context that generates obligations of justice is social structural processes rather than political institutions. Claims that obligations of justice extend globally for some issues, then, are grounded in the fact that some social structural processes have global reach.El objetivo del presente ensayo es aclarar el sentido de las reivindicaciones en torno a la justicia y a la injusticia mundial que cada vez se oyen y se aceptan más en nuestro mundo. Tales reivindicaciones representan un problema para la filosofía política, ya que hasta hace muy poco tiempo los enfoques filosóficos sobre la justicia admitían que las obligaciones respecto de la misma se establecían únicamente entre aquellos que vivían bajo una constitución común o en una misma comunidad política. Trataré de argumentar que el contexto que genera obligaciones jurídicas es más un proceso socio-estructural que el marco de las instituciones políticas. Las afirmaciones de que las obligaciones jurídicas se extienden de forma mundial en algunos temas se fundamentan, por tanto, en el hecho de que algunos procesos socio-estructurales tienen un alcance mundial

Political Responsibility and Structural Injustice

This is the text of The Lindley Lecture for 2003, given by Iris Marion Young (1949-2006), an American philosopher

Self-determination as non-domination

This article conceptualizes self-determination as non-domination, and distinguishes this from the more standard concept of self-determination as noninterference. Principles of non-domination imply relationships between self-determining units and the joint regulation of such relationships. To understand the application of this model, I suggest that we should assume the situation and claims of indigenous people as the norm rather than the exception. This model of self-determination implies federalism as a mode of being together with other self-determining units. Many discussions of federalism, however, assume that autonomous units are large, homogeneously occupied, contiguous territories. Suspending this assumption opens ways of conceiving federal relations as more local, plural, and horizontal. I suggest that this model of self-determination as non-domination and the patchwork federalism it sometimes implies may enable a vision of Israeli Jews and Palestinians dwelling peacefully together in bi-national federation

El género como serialidad: pensar sobre las mujeres como colectivo social

Traducción de “Gender as Seriality: Thinking about Women as a Social Collective”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1994, vol. 19, no. 3. Por Verónica Meske y Andrea Torricella

Cinco faces da opressão

Cinco faces da opressã

Categorias desajustadas: uma crítica à teoria dual de sistemas de Nancy Fraser

Resumo O texto é uma crítica à dualidade entre reconhecimento e redistribuição e, mais pontualmente, entre ação afirmativa e ação transformadora, em textos da filósofa norte-americana Nancy Fraser. Segundo a crítica aqui presente, a abordagem de Fraser não é capaz de ultrapassar seu caráter dicotômico, mesmo quando sustenta que estabelece umcontinuum entre injustiças sócio-econômicas e identitárias. Isso ocorre porque as injustiças, na proposta de Fraser, são reduzidas a duas categorias, mutuamente excludentes, ou à intersecção entre elas. A posição sustentada no texto é a de que a economia política permeia o cultural sem deixar de ser material e que a “cultura” é econômica em sua produção, distribuição e efeitos, incluindo seus impactos para a reprodução das relações de classe. Palavras-chave: Nancy Fraser; dualidade; reconhecimento; distribuição; identidades; classes.   Abstract The article is a critique on the duality between recognition and redistribution and, more specifically, between affirmative action and transformative action, in texts of the American philosopher Nancy Fraser. According to such critique, Fraser’s approach is not capable of surpassing its dichotomous character, even when sustaining that it establishes a continuum between socioeconomic and identity injustices. This occurs because injustices, in Fraser’s proposal, are reduced to two mutually exclusory categories, or to the intersection between them. The position supported by the article is that the political economy permeates the cultural domain without losing its materiality, and that “culture” is economic in its production, distribution and effects, including its impacts over the reproduction of class relations. Keywords: Nancy Fraser; duality; recognition; distribution; identity; classes

The idea of community and the politics of difference

Tekst dotyczy idei wspólnoty w filozofii dekonstrukcji i filozofii Szkoły Frankfurckiej.bra

Desafios ativistas à democracia deliberativa

Resumo Neste artigo, Iris Young discute o papel dos protestos e da ação direta na democracia. Sua estratégia para avaliar os argumentos a favor e contra a ação direta é o diálogo hipotético entre duas personagens, uma ativista e uma democrata deliberativa. Considerando como ambas lidam com os conflitos e desigualdades nas democracias e como definem a boa cidadania, ela discute os limites e potenciais dessas abordagens teóricas e práticas. Revelando conflitos que não podem ser ultrapassados e possíveis continuidades entre elas, a autora destaca que os protestos são tão necessários às democracias quanto o diálogo e a persuasão. Faz, assim, a crítica ao potencial paralisante da democracia deliberativa, em sua busca por consensos amplos. Palavras-chave: ativismo, deliberacionismo, democracia, protestos, ação política direta.   Abstract In this article, Iris Young discusses the role of protests and direct action in democracy. Her strategy to evaluate arguments for and against direct action is a hypothetical dialogue between two characters, an activist and a deliberative democrat. Considering how both deal with conflicts and inequities in democracies and how they define good citizenship, she discusses limits and potentials of those theoretical approaches and practices. Revealing conflicts that cannot be bypassed and possible continuities between them, the author underlines that protests are needed in democracies as much as dialogue and persuasion. She criticises the paralyzing potencial of deliberative democracy, as it attempts to accomplish broad consensus. Keywords: activism, deliberative democracy, consensus, protests, direct action