I could be mistaken, but I thought that someone's sex was a matter of biology, not language. I suspect that something is missing from the article that would explain this seemingly odd statement. -Casito⇝Talk18:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)Reply
Sex is a matter of biology. However, gender is not. Sarge Baldy 21:57, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
Not according to postmodernist feminists, it isn't; that's one of their main distinguishing features. I've edited the article to try and explain their argument. VoluntarySlave02:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
My apologies. I am familiar with the postmodernist usage of gender, but I just wasn't thinking about it at the time. Of course, gender is often (and imprecisely) used as a euphemism for sex, and I incorrectly assumed you were using it that way. Nevertheless, the article could probably use a bit more background information. I was exposed to the topic of gender vs. sex in a high-level anthropology class taught by a postmodernist professor. She had to take considerable time to explain, since a significant portion of the class was not familiar with it. Anyhow, I'll do my best to reduce ambiguity in the article, but, unfortunately, I know absolutely nothing about postmodern feminism, so I won't be much help in expanding the article. -Casito⇝Talk01:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)Reply
Actually, one of the most fundamental aspects of poststructuralist feminist (an off-shoot of postmodernism) is the concept that sex does not exist. That is to say, sexual identity is not based on fixed biological 'essence', but is in fact fluid and constructed entirely by culture (as controlled by language). There is, therefore, only gender. Judith Butler's brilliant 'Gender Trouble' is the place to start with this - Carla
I think you're getting confused with semantics. Sex does exist. Sex is a biological issue - if an organism has certain reproductive organs, e.g. a penis and gonads, its sex is male.
If postmodern feminists are indeed trying to use the word "sex" to refer to the social roles that males and females are supposed to play, instead of the word "gender", then they are doing themselves a disservice by muddying the semantic waters. Language is a matter of convention; in all feminist literature I have read, it is explicitly agreed that "sex" and "gender" denote to the respective interpretations put forward on this page.
So the article should read "... gender is constructed through language".
As an interesting sidenote on the role of language and gender, many African languages do not have gender-specific pronouns (i.e. he/she) and therefore do not suffer from the he/she denotations in western texts (texts = writing, speech etc.). There have been suggestions that gender oppression is a "western" phenomenon because of this (but by implication of any culture that has gender-specific language). [See O. Oyewumi, "Visualising the body", The invention of women: Making an African sense of gender studies pp 1-30, 1997] However, empirical evidence does not seem to bear this out (e.g. there is widespread oppression and abuse of women throughout Africa).
From my understanding, although gender is largely constructed through socialization, there are biological processes in utero related to gender development, mentionably the increase in androgen receptors, and the BST region of the hypothalamus. It is not simply a case that if you were to bring up a biological male child as female through their toys, treatment, exposure to female-typical activites etc that they would grow up feeling female.
Amanda
I have labeled this page for expert attention since no one seems sure whether or not is gender or sex that recevies a new treatment in postmodern feminism. While I think the statements "the argument gender is itself constructed through language" and "gender is not something natural, nor is it something completely determinate and definable. [...] Gender, like other systems of meaning, is less like a cage, and more like a tool: it constrains but never completely determines what one can do with it." do not really make sense from a prespective of history of ideas since gender was considered simply a social construct since Simone de Beauvoir, a pre-postmodern feminist. --chemica02:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply
People are attempting to write an encyclopedic entry, but don't have a grasp of the fundamentals of the subject matter? Of course postmodern feminism deconstructs both sex and gender via post-structuralists linguistic approaches. A fundamental aspect of postmodernism was to deconstruct linguistic structures of modernity. This doesn't just apply to social constructs within modernity but of course applies to all linguistic endeavors, especially ontologically objective subjects such as sex. This is how equations become bias and privileged, and works of Newton could be labeled a rape manual by Harding: these are entailments of a purely deductive form. The correspondence theory of language is false, within the postmodern framework (it is in fact a cornerstone of the school of thought), so therefore there is no corresponding ontologically objective truth between language and object. Sex, therefore, is also a construct, not just gender. Butler's highly problematic, Gender Trouble, hammers away at these points, while abandoning sex all together and defining gender as a preforming act. This is why she argues that people should engage in bisexual activity and cross dress, it's just another deductive entailment of the philosophy. The concept of sex does not correspond to reality just as equations do not correspond to reality: they're both hierarchal forms that are inherently oppressive and bias since they were constructed by men (note linguistic trap of contradiction). These ideas are precisely WHY Harding and Butler are well known.
POV
Latest comment: 16 March 20061 comment1 person in discussion
This article is extraordinarily POV. The final paragraph needs extensive editing. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the subject to fix it. GenericGabriel21:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
--
I've added a few quick edits, as this was so scrappy, but don't have time to do anything larger. Will try to come back later and revamp it more fully. Silver Avocado 22:50 BST, 9th June 2006.
Frug & an expert opinion
Latest comment: 4 February 20071 comment1 person in discussion
The question of postmodern feminism is a vexed one. I say this because of the definitions of post-feminism the first being "after feminism" the second being "postmodern, poststructural, postfeminsim".[1] Whether this article should exist seperately from postfeminism is a moot point - IMHO they should be merged. From a Gender studies expert point of view, Frug's work is over emphasized. Frug's conclusions about "sex" are to similar to Judith Butler's to give her work this amount of emphasis.--Cailil01:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 January 20181 comment1 person in discussion
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Postmodern feminism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
Latest comment: 22 January 20191 comment1 person in discussion
Can someone explain or expand the 'Bornstein' section; specifically how it relates to 'Origins and theory'. Where are they cited as creating the term or expanding on its theory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.168.59.54 (talk) 05:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
Group Edit for WikiEdu
Latest comment: 28 April 20193 comments3 people in discussion
We are a group of students looking to edit this page for our WikiEdu classroom project. We are not entirely finished but from looking at this article want to change:
The lead paragraph to be more specific and sourced
Under origins and theories, get rid of unsourced claims in Frug's section
Delete Bornstein section due to lack of information, lack of sources, and relevance
In French Feminism, get rid of long quotes, unsourced content, format into paragraph form, and add more detail/content
add a section about the intersection of postmodern feminism and technology
also edit critiques section into paragraph form, adding more critiques with sources, and getting rid of large non-cited/unrelated quotes
Postmodern feminism is a mix of post structuralism, postmodernism, and French feminism. [2] The goal of postmodern feminism is to destabilize the patriarchal norms entrenched in society that have led to gender inequality. [3] Postmodern feminists seek to accomplish this goal through rejecting essentialism, philosophy, and universal truths in favor of embracing the differences that exist amongst women to demonstrate that not all women are the same. [4] These ideologies are rejected by postmodern feminists because they believe if an universal truth is applied to all woman of society, it minimizes individual experience, hence they warn women to be aware of ideas displayed as the norm in society since it may stem from masculine notions of how a women should be portrayed. [5][6]
Postmodern feminists seek to analyze any notions that have led to gender inequality in society. Postmodern feminists analyze these notions and attempt to promote equality of gender through critiquing logocentrism, supporting multiple discourses, deconstructing texts, and seeking to promote subjectivity. Postmodern feminists are accredited with drawing attention to dichotomies in society and demonstrating how language influences the difference in treatment of genders.[7][8]
The inclusion of postmodern theory into feminist theory is not readily accepted by all feminists, some believe postmodern thought undermines the attacks that feminist theory attempts to create, while other feminists are in favor of the union. [9][10] For this reason, postmodernism and feminism have always had an uneasy relationship.[11]
(edited section to remove unsourced content/ statements)
Mary Joe Frug suggested that one "principle" of postmodernism is that human experience is located "inescapably within language". Power is exercised not only through direct coercion, but also through the way in which language shapes and restricts our reality. She also stated that because language is always open to re-interpretation, it can also be used to resist this shaping and restriction, and so is a potentially fruitful site of political struggle.
Frug's second postmodern principle is that sex is not something natural, nor is it something completely determinate and definable. Rather, sex is part of a system of meaning, produced by language. Frug argues that "cultural mechanisms ... encode the female body with meanings", and that these cultural mechanisms then go on explain these meanings "by an appeal to the 'natural' differences between the sexes, differences that the rules themselves help to produce".[12]
French Feminism
French feminism as it is known today, is an Anglo-American invention coined by Alice Jardine to be a section in a larger movement of postmodernism in France during the 1980s. This included the theorizing of the failure of the modernist project, along with its departure. More specifically for feminism, it meant returning to the debate of sameness and difference. The term was further defined by Toril Moi, an academic with a focus on feminist theory, in her book Sexual/Textual Politics. In this book she further defined French feminism to only include a few authors such as Hélène Cixous, Luce Irigaray, and Julia Kristeva, while also creating a distinction between French feminism and Anglo-American Feminism. She states that the difference between the two is that Anglo-American feminists want to find a "woman-centered perspective" and a woman identity since they were not given the chance to have one in the past. French Feminists believe there is no identity for a woman but that "the feminine can be identified where difference and otherness are found."[13] Elaine Marks, an academic in the field of Women's Studies, noted another difference between French and American feminists. French feminists, specifically radical feminists, criticized and attacked the systems that benefit men, along with widespread misogyny as a whole, more intensely than their American counterparts.[14] Through American academics contriving their own concept of French feminism, it separated and ignored the already marginalized self-identifying feminists, while focusing on the women theorists associated with Psych et po (Psychanalyse et politique) and other academics who did not always identify as feminists. This division ultimately ended up placing more importance on the theories of the French feminists than the political agenda and goals that groups such as radical feminists and the Mouvement de liberation des femmes (women's liberation movement) had at the time.[15]
There have been many critiques of postmodern feminism since it originated in the 1990s. Most of the criticism has been from modernists and feminists supporting modernist thought. They have put a focus on the themes of relativism and nihilism as defined by postmodernism. Though modernist critics believe more importantly, that through abandoning the values of Enlightenment thought, postmodern feminism "precludes the possibility of liberating political action."[16] This concern can be seen in critics like Meaghan Morris, who have argued that postmodern feminism runs the risk of undercutting the basis of a politics of action based upon gender difference, through its very anti-essentialism.[17] Roberta G. Sands and Kathleen Nuccio also raise concerns about postmodern feminists redefining “women” and the threat it may impose on the “political agenda for feminists”. The belief that the term “woman” does not identify with all women, contradicts the belief of feminists politics, who rely on unity. Feminists cannot “pursue collective political action on women’s issues” if it is argued that women do not share the same interests and concerns.Cite error: Script error: No such module "Namespace detect".Script error: No such module "Namespace detect".Gloria Steinem has also criticized feminist theory, and especially postmodernist feminist theory, as being overly academic, where discourse that is full of jargon and unaccessible is helpful to no one.[18]Template:Reflist-talk
Text above is the result of multiple edits to the same content, by two student editors. See the history tab for details. Mathglot (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Template:Cob
Collapsed several edits by student editors containing proposed article text. Mathglot (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
Talk page edits by student editors
Latest comment: 28 April 20192 comments1 person in discussion
This Talk page iswas in a confused state, due to a large amount of article text pasted into the page, missing signatures or signatures removed and then readded, as well as interleaved edits in the middle of previous edits by the same or other editors. Please read the talk page guidelines at WP:TALK and pay attention to how to respond to previous edits using colons for indentation, and proper threading. Do not interrupt or change the text or comments that anybody else added to the page; leave it as it is, right or wrong. You can add your own comments after their comments, following proper threading technique. It's okay to add some proposed text for the article here for discussion, but consider using a sandbox page or a draft page so the Talk page doesn't get too cluttered or taken over with long stretches of article text, or consider using collapse templates Template:Tl and Template:Tl to hide long sections of article text by default. Pinging involved editors Template:Ping and Shalor. Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 28 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 30 April 20192 comments2 people in discussion
I've removed the section "The link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology (see rev. 894311538 for pevious appearance of page). (Content was added by Script error: No such module "user". in threeedits on April 17.) The subsections were removed because there is no demonstrated connection between them, and the topic, which is "Postmodern feminism" or the section, which is about feminism and biology. In detail:
lead paragraph – made arbitrary, unsourced claims and assertions like, "a woman's body is more important than ever to her rights as a human".
Liberal Feminism – removed this subsection including the three included references. It started off with an okay definition, than veered into some niche assertions about science. But the main objection is, what does this subsection have to do with "the link between Post-modern Feminism and Biology"? Nothing, or at least, nothing is said about it here. Might be appropriate in some other article, or some other section of this article, but not in this "Link between..." section.
Radical Feminism – removed. "radical feminism rejects the possibility of science from an objective perspective..." and veers off into too much emphasis on scientific institutions. There might be some truth to this, but it's way out of proportion to what radical feminist theorists write about. But beyond that, what's the link here to the section title? As for the case of the "Liberal feminism" section above it, it hasn't been demonstrated. Doesn't belong in this article, or at least, not here.
Racial/African-American Feminism – removed. The description given in this subsection is all well and good, but what is the conntection to biology, or to the topic of the article, Postmodern feminism? There doesn't seem to be any.
Latest comment: 27 July 20201 comment1 person in discussion
I am questioning the inclusion of a photo of Gloria Steinem in this article. Steinem is a critic of postmodern feminism. To include a photo of a critic but no photo of any of the postmodern feminists themselves seems unbalanced. Carol Goudie (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
Latest comment: 18 January 20221 comment1 person in discussion
File:Sciences humaines.svg This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ksj47.
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
Latest comment: 18 January 20221 comment1 person in discussion
File:Sciences humaines.svg This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2021 and 14 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zeyang Han.
Roberta G. Sands and Kathleen Nuccio also raise concerns about postmodern feminists redefining “women” and the threat it may impose on the “political agenda for feminists”. The belief that the term “woman” does not identify with all women, contradicts the belief of feminists politics, who rely on unity. Feminists cannot “pursue collective political action on women’s issues” if it is argued that women do not share the same interests and concerns.[19]Template:Reflist-talk
Within Frug paragraph
Latest comment: 10 August 20231 comment1 person in discussion
