Stanford Humanities Center Newsletter

by Jillian Hess

Third wave? Fifth wave? No wave? What wave of feminism are we in? If feminism itself defies easy definition in the 21st century, the type of work done in its name is perhaps easier to understand: it is interdisciplinary, praxical, theoretical, and above all, multiple. At a time when a monolithic feminism has been abandoned for feminisms, the Feminist Theory workshop has productively assembled different types of feminism at work within the academy. Whether the questions we ask are broadly global or specifically local, one basic question seems to arise: What do we want from Feminist Theory?

This was the question posed in our very first meeting by Helen Longino, faculty coordinator of the workshop along with Paula Moya. Inherent in this question is, in my opinion, feminist theory’s most exciting quality: its organic nature – it lives through the generations, taking on new shapes to fit the needs of those who claim it, rather than rigidly clinging to former categorizations. In 2008, the word “feminist” is just over a century old, giving us a rich history to reflect on, a complicated present to dissect, and an inchoate future to consider.

This year we brought in several speakers working in diverse fields. For example, historian Afsaneh Najmabadi visited in the fall to discuss her work on the present-day relationship between dominant cultural discourse and sexual identity, specifically as it relates to transexuality in Iran. Sociologist Benita Roth came in the winter quarter to share her important study of second-wave feminism, which complicates the typical narrative told about this period. Roth revivifies mid-20th-century Black, Chicana, and White feminist movements by showing the ways they were separate yet related, and demonstrating that it is impossible to understand any of these movements in complete isolation as previous scholarship has done.

We also explored pedagogy’s impact in shaping feminist theory through a lively discussion about syllabi for feminist courses. Faculty participants not only brought in their own syllabi, but also solicited syllabi from colleagues at other universities. Every syllabus tells a story, and together we teased out implicit feminist narratives told through a professor’s choice of assigned texts, time periods represented, and questions posed.

This workshop has fortunately enjoyed a great deal of participation from our own members. Helen Longino (co-coordinator and professor of philosophy) set the tone for our workshop with reflections on the term “theory” as it applies to feminism. Paula Moya (co-coordinator and professor of English) gave an inspiring lecture on the direction in which feminism should head. And Penny Eckert (professor of linguistics) shared her work on gendered difference in phonetic variation. We are also looking forward to historian of science Londa Schiebinger’s talk in a few weeks.

I am particularly grateful to this workshop for providing an interdisciplinary perspective on a topic that I have always cared deeply about. Because feminist work transcends disciplinary lines, it often occurs in separate sectors of the academy, thus it has been an invaluable opportunity for many of us to come together in the same room – and through our meetings we have enriched the question we started with by engaging feminist theory with a deeper sense of what it was, what it is, and of course, what it should be.

LINKS:

Feminist Theory Workshop: http://shc.stanford.edu/workshops/feministtheory_0708.htm