|
Author
|
Topic: feminist theories of the state
|
|
|
weakling willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3260
|
posted 03 March 2004 10:51 AM
A good place to start is Lisa Brush's _Gender and Governance_ book (Altamira Press, 2003). This is a good book because it reflects the trend to more cultural/post-structuralist understandings, but refuses to completely junk work in the modernist tradition, and indeed finds quite a bit of it necessary and useful for the feminist critical project.There's also a book with a title like _Critical Theories of the State_ that will have a chapter on feminist state theory. Now, whether these rival Marxist theories of the state -- well that's another whole can of worms. The feminist political economy tradition in Canada has tried to forge a middle way, with some success. [ 03 March 2004: Message edited by: weakling willy ]
From: Home of the Canadian Football Hall of Fame and Museum | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170
|
posted 03 March 2004 11:22 PM
Yeah, I don't know exactly what you mean by "to rival Marxism," but RW Connell has some interesting work on the nature of the state (being coded masculine rather than essentially patriachial). Nancy Harstock's "Sex and Power: Towards a feminist historical matierialism" might be in your area. And of course there is Catherine MacKinnon's "Toward a Feminist Theory of the State" (written before she went too crazy, IMHO, but she's not an easy read). Is this just a casual interest?? Edited to add: A few other things that came to mind:
-Pauline Rankin and Jill Vickers' "Women's movements and State feminisms, published by Status of women Canada.
- Vicky Randall and Georgina Waylan, "Gender, Politics and the State"
- Judith Allen, 'Does feminism need a theory of the state?" in Playing the State (Sophie Watson editor)
- Gerda Lerner, "The Creation of Patriarchy"
- Spike Peterson, 'Gendered States" (very interesting) Essentially, there are multiple feminist theories of the state, the two majors being those who see it as inherently patriarchial, and those who see it as coded masculine but malleable. Enjoy! [ 03 March 2004: Message edited by: swirrlygrrl ]
From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
beverly
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5064
|
posted 04 March 2004 06:27 PM
I have thought about your question, and would recommend all of the above. As mentioned, the "radical" (how I hate that term) feminist perspective is that Marxism doesn't go far enough and doesn't explain the inequlaities between women and men. Add to the list above "The Politics of Reproduction" Mary O'Brien "Reproducing the World" Mary O'Brien
From: In my Apartment!!!! | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621
|
posted 11 March 2004 02:56 AM
quote:
provides some leverage on the questions posed.
Can you be more specific? Thanks to all who posted. Swirrlygirl, the questions are not merely casual, I am thinking about curriculum for political education. Crudely, it seems to me you can divide radical theories of the state into pessimistic and optimistic. Of the two views swirrlygrrl refers to (would it be accurate to call them the "radical feminist" and "socialist feminist"?), one seems to be the analogue of anarchism, the other of socialism or social democracy.
From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
