Listening and its Asymmetries

Signs, 1997

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

2014

Communication Theory, 2000

Please note that I am not denying that earlier feminisms have been exclusionary. Bell hooks (1981) called White feminists to task for using "woman" to mean "White woman." Gubar (1998, p. 889; see also Scott, 1998) traces development of this antiessentialist rhetorical move through Audre Lorde, Hazel V. Carby, Chandra Talpade Mohanty, and others to display how "generalizations about 'women's experiences' perpetuated the negation of Black womanhood [and, by my extension, other raciauethnic groups] ." Carrillo Rowe's disenchantment with mainstream feminist work and unreflexiveness echoes the condemnation and challenges articulated by these feminists and current (women of color and White) feminist communication researchers. In their review of communication scholarship, Aldoory and Toth (in press) acknowledge that traditional feminist communication research not only has publicized inadequately the concerns of women of color, but also has further disenfranchised women of color and Third World women by neglecting economic class structures (see also C a l k & Smircich, 1996, for influences of colonialism on feminist research). Hegde (1998), too, justly criticizes the communication field for inattention to perspectives of women globally, to the "problems of universalizing the White condition" (p. 275), and to intersections of gender and race by noting that "the dialogue on global issues and minority perspectives has been very feebly registered in the field of communication" (p. 274). Current third wave feminists actively question complex intersections of sameness-difference and the category "woman" (e.g., Siegel, 1997).

Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. III, 1 &2, Univ of Paramaribo, 1996

This is among my first published papers critiquing feminist theory from a non-white perspective. At the time, I had not developed the concept of black feminism. Over the last two decades, feminist theory has undergone tremendous changes. This paper traces the most significant debates on feminist theorizing and discusses their relevance for non-white feminist scholars, especially in anthropology, using the perspectives of Black American feminist scholars to formulate a critique.

Human Resource Development Quarterly, 2003

Journal of Social Issues, 1997

Feminist science often is caricatured in oppositional terms+s a venture antagonistic to the scientific mission. Such portrayals not only misrepresent feminist science but also displace the fact that there are multiple feminist approaches toward science, each advancing particular notions of appropriate methods, objectivity, subjectivity, and thejurisdiction ofscientifc inquiry. Acquaintance with the variety of feminist approaches toward science will enable feminist scholars to better conjgure their research and strategies. Comprehending science itselfas culture is crucial to these ends. A contextual perspective on science as culture will enhance our abilities to efect cultural change through our research projects. Such comprehension also will prepare us for improving the environment in which we work as well as the nature of that work. What are feminist methods? What would a list offeminist methods look like? We could begin to answer these questions with a basic definition of feminism: a beliefthat gender is a primary category of experience (and therefore, of analysis) and an attendant commitment to remedying the disadvantages of women. Applying this elemental definition to psychology, we then could locate a large number ofmethods that accommodate gender as a central analytic category; for any particular method to be feminist, it would be necessary that the method notjust be applicable to observing or measuring gender but also that the method itself be "gender fair" or absent of unacknowledged gender meanings. The list now would be substantial and would conjoin some otherwise highly distinguishable research practices. This inductive approach to defining feminist research methods, however, collapses together some significant efforts on the part of feminist researchers. It also underplays the problems of gender in science itself in order to extend accountability to the practice of science itself.

This paper addresses a dilemma in feminist philosophy: how do we engage effectively with historical texts that marginalize the subaltern other? Feminist standpoint theory and critical race theory have popularized an interlocking systems of oppression approach which raises serious questions about the durability of feminist and anti-­‐racist epistemic practices loyal to an "additive " approach (King, 1995 [1988]; Spelman, 1988). I argue that the interlocking approach does make our epistemic practices more robustly truth-­‐seeking; however, it seems to undermine the " ampersand " or additive approach that feminist philosophers have used to ferret out discriminatory evaluations in canonical andropocentric texts and in the contemporary life-­‐world. My question is whether we can continue to teach and investigate race and gender as if they were isolated facts of life or whether we can appropriate a combination of additive and intersectional analysis, which engender a meaningful practice of solidarity.

Full Stack Feminism

Hypatia Reviews Online