-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Björn Freter & Marc GwodogAbstract:
An African philosophy that excludes women despite its African cultural origin and DNA of complementarity, inclusion, interrelatedness, and interconnectedness, as highlighted by concepts like ‘Ubuntu’, is indeed an aberration. The excuse that the process of forging the African identity in an era of exclusion from rationality called for a blanket or block procedure that could not accommodate demographic disaggregation is untenable. Also, the assumption of gender neutrality is a farce. This African philosophical enterprise is essentially an exhibition of a colonized mentality. The hermeneutic analysis of the pre-colonial Yoruba African world-view, its concept of existence, being/self, governance, and eldership, has offered proof that ideas of interconnectedness, interrelatedness, being-with-others, inclusion, and complementarity are entrenched and inseparable from the African world-view. In conclusion, it is therefore a valid argument and conclusion that if African philosophy is based on African world-views of complementarity, inclusion, and being-with-others, then external (colonial) influence on thought and the socialization process is responsible for the contemporary marginalization of women. When a correct diagnosis has been made, a prescription can be made accurately, and the cure is at hand.Comment (from this Blueprint): Examines the intersections of African philosophy, gender, and colonialism and thus provides a good introduction to these issues. This is a rather easily accessible text to learn about a contemporary position on issues of African women philosophers.
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Olivia Maegaard NielsenAbstract:
Identity politics is everywhere, polarising discourse from the campaign trail to the classroom and amplifying antagonisms in the media. But the compulsively referenced phrase bears little resemblance to the concept as first introduced by the radical Black feminist Combahee River Collective. While the Collective articulated a political viewpoint grounded in their own position as Black lesbians with the explicit aim of building solidarity across lines of difference, identity politics is now frequently weaponised as a means of closing ranks around ever-narrower conceptions of group interests.
But the trouble, Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò deftly argues, is not with identity politics itself. Through a substantive engagement with the global Black radical tradition and a critical understanding of racial capitalism, Táíwò identifies the process by which a radical concept can be stripped of its political substance and liberatory potential by becoming the victim of elite capture -deployed by political, social and economic elites in the service of their own interests.
Táíwò’s crucial intervention both elucidates this complex process and helps us move beyond the binary of ‘class’ vs. ‘race’. By rejecting elitist identity politics in favour of a constructive politics of radical solidarity, he advances the possibility of organising across our differences in the urgent struggle for a better world.
Comment: This book is critical yet accessible and would be suitable to read in its whole in a reading group for example. Or single chapters could be used as part of seminars on identity politics, social movements, injustice, speaking for others, standpoint epistemology, etc. Táíwò also wrote an essay where some of the same points come across as in the book. If there is only limited time to discuss his work, the essay could also replace the book: https://www.thephilosopher1923.org/post/being-in-the-room-privilege-elite-capture-and-epistemic-deference
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Rebecca BuxtonPublisher’s Note:
Philosophy has not just excluded women. It has also been shaped by the exclusion of women. As the field grapples with the reality that sexism is a central problem not just for the demographics of the field but also for how philosophy is practiced, many philosophers have begun to rethink the canon. Yet attempts to broaden European and Anglophone philosophy to include more women in the discipline’s history or to acknowledge alternative traditions will not suffice as long as exclusionary norms remain in place. In Where Are the Women?, Sarah Tyson makes a powerful case for how redressing women’s exclusion can make philosophy better. She argues that engagements with historical thinkers typically afforded little authority can transform the field, outlining strategies based on the work of three influential theorists: Genevieve Lloyd, Luce Irigaray, and Michèle Le Doeuff. Following from the possibilities they open up, at once literary, linguistic, psychological, and political, Tyson reclaims two passionate nineteenth-century texts―the Declaration of Sentiments from the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention and Sojourner Truth’s speech at the 1851 Akron, Ohio, Women’s Convention―showing how the demands for equality, rights, and recognition sought in the early women’s movement still pose quandaries for contemporary philosophy, feminism, and politics. Where Are the Women? challenges us to confront the reality that women’s exclusion from philosophy has been an ongoing project and to become more critical both of how we see existing injustices and of how we address them.Comment (from this Blueprint): In her book, Tyson discusses why it is valuable recognise the contributions of women philosophers, arguing that their lost contributions have the potential to transform the current field. This opens up interesting questions about the value of representation and how we ought to approach campaigning for the inclusion of women.