Patrice DiQuinzio – författare

Much work in feminist ethics has been rather abstract. The editors of this work believe that the time has come to assess the potential contribution of feminist ethical theory to the evaluation of specific social policies. If feminist ethics has indeed mobilized important paradigm shifts in normative analysis, then this should enable creative ways of reflection on social policy. Feminist ethics criticizes the gender blindness and biases in much traditional ethical theory, and develops new theories and concepts that are more gender sensitive. Feminist ethics also works to conceptualize issues of right action, social justice, and the human good from out of the specifically gendered experience of diverse groups of women. Feminist ethics has no single set of questions or propositions, but includes a variety of approaches as demonstrated by these essays—some operate within a liberal framework of equality, freedom, justice, and rights, while others are more critical of mainstream liberal versions of these concepts.

An adequate analysis of experiences and situations specific to women, especially mothering, requires consideration of women's difference. A focus on women's difference, however, jeopardizes feminism's claims of women's equal individualist subjectivity, and risks recuperating the inequality and oppression of women, especially the view that all women should be mothers, want to be mothers, and are most happy being mothers. This book considers how thinkers including Simone de Beauvoir, Julia Kristeva, Nancy Choderow and Adrienne Rich struggle to negotiate this dilemma of difference in analyzing mothering, encompassing the paradoxes concerning embodiment, gender and representation they encounter. Patrice Di Quinzio shows that mothering has been and will continue to be an intractable problem for feminist theory itself, and suggests the political usefulness of an explicitly paradoxical politics of mothering.

An adequate analysis of experiences and situations specific to women, especially mothering, requires consideration of women's difference. A focus on women's difference, however, jeopardizes feminism's claims of women's equal individualist subjectivity, and risks recuperating the inequality and oppression of women, especially the view that all women should be mothers, want to be mothers, and are most happy being mothers. This book considers how thinkers including Simone de Beauvoir, Julia Kristeva, Nancy Choderow and Adrienne Rich struggle to negotiate this dilemma of difference in analyzing mothering, encompassing the paradoxes concerning embodiment, gender and representation they encounter. Patrice Di Quinzio shows that mothering has been and will continue to be an intractable problem for feminist theory itself, and suggests the political usefulness of an explicitly paradoxical politics of mothering.

An adequate analysis of experiences and situations specific to women, especially mothering, requires consideration of women''s difference. A focus on women''s difference, however, jeopardizes feminism''s claims of women''s equal individualist subjectivity, and risks recuperating the inequality and oppression of women, especially the view that all women

An adequate analysis of experiences and situations specific to women, especially mothering, requires consideration of women''s difference. A focus on women''s difference, however, jeopardizes feminism''s claims of women''s equal individualist subjectivity, and risks recuperating the inequality and oppression of women, especially the view that all women

A critique of public policy rhetoric from multiple feminist perspectives.This diverse collection explores the rhetoric of a wide range of public policies that propose "to put women and children first," including homeland security, school violence, gun control, medical intervention of intersex infants, and policies that aim to distinguish "good" from "bad" mothers. Using various feminist philosophical analyses, the contributors uncover a logic of paternalistic treatment of women and children that purports to protect them but almost always also disempowers them and sometimes harms them. This logic is widespread in contemporary popular policy discourse and affects the way that people understand and respond to social and political issues. Contributors rethink basic philosophical assumptions concerning subjectivity, difference, and dualistic logic in order to read the rhetoric of contemporary public policy discourse and develop new ways of talking and acting in the policy domain.