The Feminist Critique and the Postmodern Challenge to Anthropology - Essay Example

Lecturer: The Feminist Critique and the Postmodern Challenge to Anthropology Feminist Critique is a term that traces its roots to the Ideal that is commonly referred to as Feminism. This critique, also known as Feminist criticism, according to Esther Lombardi is defined as a type of literal criticism, that studies and advocates for the rights of women. Feminist criticism is, according to Judith Fetterley, a political act that aims at not simply interpreting the world through a feminist point of view, but also in changing the world, through impacting on the consciousness of people who read and/ or study, and the resultant relationships that are created from what they read (Louise Lamphere). Feminism, as an ideal, is the collection of movements, associations, groupings and or establishments that aim at defending, defining and establishing equality in the spheres of social rights, politics and the economy; this pertaining to women. In addition, the ideal promotes the creation and provision of equal opportunities for women in both education and also in employment. Thus, a feminist is a person who’s behavioral and belief systems are based on the ideal of feminism (Fruzzetti 39). From the afore-mentioned feminist movements, associations and groupings emerged the Feminist theory, which aimed at understanding the causes and reasons for the presence of gender inequality. This understanding was based on the examination of women lived experiences and social roles throughout history and into the contemporary 21st Century. From it emerged different theories that touched on a variety of disciplines; this so as to respond and subsequently address issues such as the social construct of gender and sex. Some earlier forms of the theory received criticism for their taking into consideration only educated, white middle-class perspectives. As a result, of this criticism, was the creation of multi-culturalist and/ or ethnically-specific forms of the theory (Cott 73). Feminists campaign on the platform of ‘Women’s Rights’ – bodily integrity, reproductive rights (including access to abortion and contraceptives), women’s suffrage, equal pay, right to property and entry into contracts (contract law), and also voting. They seek to protect girls and women from domestic violence, sexual assaults and harassments among other violations. Due to its radical nature, this ideal has attracted its share of both criticism and blessings; this in the form of pro-feminism and anti-feminism ideologies. Feminism and Anthropology As a result of the feminist critique to anthropology, the approach – Feminist anthropology – emerged. It sought to study cultural anthropology and correct the perceived andro-centric bias within the field. Its origin can be traced to early anthropologists such as E.E. Evans-Pritchard and James Frazer, who both displayed much interest in the notions of marriage and kinship. Women would thus, always appear in their ethnographies. Henrietta Moore, who is a prominent theorist in (the school of thought of) feminist anthropology, though of the opinion that women had been included in anthropological research and theory, was of the view that the problem was not the presence of women in anthropology, but in its representation, interpretation and understanding (Bratton10). According to her, it is how women are included in anthropology that matters. Thus, the challenge, then, was to avail new critical analysis on the existing anthropological literature, including creation of new research that placed the ‘Woman’ in the centre of it. This led to the emergence of self-conscious feminist anthropology in the 1970s; this as a series of challenges to the male-dominated and biased anthropology. Rayna Rapp, in her work - Toward an Anthropology of Women (1975), was one of the earliest contributors to this emerging school. She argued that women and men experience gender differently; this in reference to the myriad of social markers. The experiences of women were in themselves a legitimate subject for enquiry in the field of anthropology (Dirks, Eley and Ortner 85). She pointed out the presence of male bias, in both assumptions and theories in contemporary anthropology, thereby introducing new avenues of self-criticism in anthropology. The publication of - Feminism and Anthropology, by Henrietta Moore (1998), was a further critique of the field of anthropology that aimed at emphasizing a more feminist approach and conscience in the way gender differences related to different social markers. These social markers include race, class/ social stratification and ethnicity. She was of the view that anthropology tended to order the world in a male perspective; this due to the fact that the researchers, either women or men, were trained in the discipline that is male-oriented ( Morgen 40). She was of the view that the practical methods and theoretical architecture; this pertaining to Anthropology, were influenced significantly by sexist ideology, that without a conscious effort and self-examination, so as to counter this bias, female experience could not be represented meaningfully in anthropology. Throughout the 20th Century, anthropology was commonly known as the ‘study of Man’; this referring to the sexist ideology. Moore was of the opinion that the concept of ‘Woman’ was specific only to certain cultures, and was thus not a universal standard of analytical categorization in an anthropological enquiry. The field Feminist Anthropology can trace its roots to three approximate categories: - the first (1850-1920), the second (1920-1980) and the third from 1980 onwards. The three categories are also referred to as waves/ chapters in the development and evolution of the feminist ideal. From 1850-1920, the first wave that is commonly referred to as suffrage feminism, entailed the undertaking of research and the drawing of ethnographies by men and for men. This was informed by the then prevailing presumption that an individual’s social roles were determined by his/her biological make-up/ gender. The first wave feminists sought to include the Woman’s voice in ethnography thereby giving a feminist perspective on both events and experience. This charted the way for a completely new perspective that enabled ethnographers to get accounts and observations from the feminine side; what pertained to the womenfolk then (Dirks, Eley and Ortner 18). Fundamentally vital to this movement was Elsie Clews Parson, a social activist who later on converted to anthropology. Her ethnographic skills coupled with her insightful notions on the socio-cultural determination of norms, in addition to her feminist ideals, are largely credited with the progression of this movement. Alice Fletcher was among the earliest professionals in the field of anthropology. She was instrumental in the breaking up of reservations (pertaining to American Indians); this through the development of the Dawes Act. She was also helpful in the founding of the Association for the Advancement of women. Within British anthropology, and specifically on the pioneering research in anthropology that was based on women; this in specific political and social contexts, was Phyllis Kayberry. Through her work, she was able to examine both women and men and their resultant relationships, with specific focus on religion. Phyllis’ book - Women of the Grassfields, a classic text, focused on rural development and women’s work. It made significant impacts following the decolonization of Africa. Through it, there has been to a great extent recent anthropological work that has focused on development. The resultant findings have indicated that existing economic models have ignored, almost totally, the contributions of women’s labor; this pertaining to development (Collier 98). The second wave of feminist anthropology (1920-1980) saw the genesis of separation of gender and sex, as descriptive categories, which had previously been used interchangeably. ‘Gender’ is viewed as a culturally defined term while ‘Sex’ is definitively determined by biology and thus, in-turn has effects on biology. The term ‘Woman’ was viewed as uniting all females; this due to its consideration as having the most significant role and thus the strongest identification with regard to categorization. Margaret Mead, a key contributor to the above distinction, helped break down prejudices, through her work in different cultures, that based their existence on concepts of what is ‘natural’; this pertaining to the cultural importance in a people’s development (Bratton 7). She contributed immensely to the examination of cultural influences, on human social development, through her distinction between cultural and biological factors that played significant roles in both personality development and human behavior. Simone de Beauvoir a French existentialist philosopher, produced the work - Second Sex (1952), arguing that the definition of women was from the men-folk and that any attempt at disengaging this risked the alienation of the women-folk. Betty Friedan, through her book - The Feminine Mystique (1963), viewed gender roles within families and questioned as to whether the modern Woman’s fulfillment was to be found within traditional roles. The Anthropology of Women is a term that is used to refer to the latter half of this second wave. Of great influence, are Eleanor Leacock’s ethno-historical studies of the Innu. Her focus was on gender and social roles; this while reevaluating both Friedrich Engel’s and Karl Marx’s work. In the early 1970s, Lucy Slocum argued that studies in anthropology had both Euro-centric and andro-centric assumptions and biases. She was to influence both primatologists and archaeologists who has on previous occasions questioned the man-the-hunter hypothesis, and whose works had challenged the existing simplistic jobs and roles assignments; this on the basis of biological differences present in excavated skeletal material (Dirks, Eley and Ortner 109). Editing of the ground breaking work - Woman, Culture and Society – by Michelle Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere (1974), has seen the emergence of arguments that women, having frequently participated in behaviors that were often limiting, necessitates the performance of an analysis on the larger social system so as to understand gender inequality. The introduction of the - Sex/gender system’, by Gayle Rubin, distinguishes biology from behavior. She has insisted on gender having a place in the anthropological table. The work – Male is to Females as Nature is to Culture, by Sherry Ortner examines the subordination of women to men; this both cross-culturally and through time. She argues that women’s association with nature has existed for a long time and since nature is subordinate to men, therefore, women are also subordinate to men (Conkey 30). Postmodernist Challenge to Anthropology The third wave feminism extended from 1980 A.D onward into the contemporary era; this with many questions on anthropologists minds, on issues such as biological determinism that tended to suggest that ‘Sex’ was a straightforward phenomenon based in physiological differences. Such questions, however, cannot be taken lightly; this to a cause-and-effect relationship and resultant trends, which have proposed a reversal to the earlier separation of culture and biology through the indication that ‘Sex’ is also a social category just like gender. This is due to the fact that people, in the social structure, do have social expectations that are based on their physical makeup i.e. to which gender a person belongs to (Cott 98). Coupled with the above is the increase in more detailed work, in the fields of physiology and endocrinology that has remarkably increased the difficulty of distinguishing between cultural and biological factors. Said’s work – Orientalism, and by means of postmodern discourse, encouraged evaluation of the existing politics of representation. Thus, the categorization of a person as a – woman, no longer supersedes other roles and distinctions; this pertaining to society. Race, socio-economic status, religion, class and ethnicity, are examples of other categories that are recognized as important characteristics that add to the diversity in women categorizations. The above is informed by the fact that all women do not possess the same universal experiences and needs. The post-modern challenge to anthropology; this in conjunction with the notion of feminism, has centered mainly on work and production (in relation to industries), sexuality and reproduction (in relation to physiology), and on the notion of gender and the state (Modleski 79). Four theories that have influenced to a greater level the field of anthropology; this from both the ideals of Feminism and Post-modernism are as follows: - Practice theory: feminist practice is about real actions, just as culture is present by deliberate choice. It is about the behavioral aspects and not about qualities that are possessed (Conkey & Gero, 29). There has emerged a realization; this in the field of anthropology, that a reaction to Durkheim’s notion of – the sacred and the profane, which assumed the lack of a symbolic position for the woman. It questions the production of systems; this despite their instability, contradictions and inequality. It disputes the breaking of all things down into dichotomies – especially gender. A dynamic system of resistance and struggle replaces Durkheim’s static system. Ortner (78), argues that determination of gender is based on the reflection of men being cultural creators while women are the creators of nature – children. Positionality theory; that developed in the late 1980s was a response to cultural feminism. It is an essentialist view that suggests that female essence exist and that feminine values should be acknowledged. The thinking is that instead of women entering the men’s world and putting on business suits, they should be promoting their femininity and its positive characters - such as reproduction and nurturing (Ember 74). Performance theory; it is an extension of anti-structuralism (of the 1970s), defines ‘Sex’ as the resultant effect of gender, while gender as the outcome of discourse. It is characterized by the existence of a concern that is primarily focused on the reproductive force rather that with the denotation of discourse (Morris 1995 p 567). Influential figures of this theory include the likes of Bourdieu and Sahlins; the latter whose theory of cultural history is of the suggestion that - change occurs as a result of the competing interests and the existence of different advantages at any given time in history. The fourth is the Queer theory that defines itself in opposition to the notion of ‘normalcy’. It challenges the normative character of the term heterosexuality and highlights the effects of socialization on the basis of sexual identity. It attempts to cut across the different traditions present in contemporary gender studies; with strong influences from the constructionalist theory and also by Foucault and other contemporary writers such as Diana Fuss, Judith Mayne and Judith Butler (Ember 91). Work cited Bratton, Angela. "Feminist Anthropology." Anthropology Today (1998): 4-28. Collier, Jane F. and Sylvia Yanagisako. Femininities, Masculinities, Sexualities : Freud And Beyond. Lexington: Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1994. Print. Conkey, Margaret and Joan Gero. "Theory in Anthropology Since Feminist Practice." Critique of Anthropology 9(2) (1989): 27-37. Cott, Nancy F. The Grounding of Modern Feminism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. Print. Ember, Carol R. Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era. Berkeley and LA: Berkeley and LA: University of California, 1991. Print. Fruzzetti, Lina M. The Feminine Mystique. New York: Norto Publishers Inc, 1963. Print. Louise Lamphere, Helena Ragone, and Patricia Zavella, eds. Situated Lives: Gender and Culture in Everyday Life. New York: Routledge, 1997. Print. Martin, Emily. Situated Lives: Gender and Culture in Everyday Life. New York: Routledge, 1997. Print. Modleski, Tania. Feminism without women: culture and criticism in a "postfeminist" age. New York: Routledge Publishers, 1991. Print. Nicholas Dirks, Geoff Eley, and Sherry Ortner, eds. Culture, Power and History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Print. Sandra Morgen, ed. Gender and Anthropology: Critical Reviews for Research and Teaching. Washington, D.C, 1989. Print. Warner, Michael, ed. Between Voice And Silence : Women And Girls, Race And Relationship. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995. Print. Read More