Homing in on the segregated culture of early modern English domestic criticism as its primary example, this article explores how white voices and “white logic” have dominated reading practices in early modern English studies, and academia in general, for some time—often without critique. In different ways, those voices and viewpoints have left little to no room at the metaphorical scholarly table for influencers of a different hue, thus rendering visible in the field and profession the existence of the “color line,” as W. E. B. Du Bois called it. With an antiracist agenda that embraces the goals of Black feminism, Brown thinks through the continued disconnect between domestic criticism and premodern critical race studies, a disconnect that denotes a representative pattern. Specifically, Brown highlights how whiteness goes unexamined critically, a fact that is surprising since the domestic sphere is, and was, a formative space where processes of racialization occur, processes informing the centuries-old racism that persists in the post-Obama era, or the post-postracial era: a time where anti-blackness and related violence (physical, verbal/rhetorical, psychological, emotional) is hypervisible. Encouraging readers to be(come) “accomplice feminists,” Brown calls for the decentering of whiteness and the desegregation of scholarly discourse and citational practices.

中文翻译：

---

“胡德女权主义”：后后种族时代的白人与隔离（前现代）学术话语

本文以早期现代英语国内批评的隔离文化为主要例子，探讨了白人的声音和“白人逻辑”如何在一段时间内主导了早期现代英语研究和一般学术界的阅读实践——通常没有批评. 以不同的方式，这些声音和观点在比喻性的学术桌子上几乎没有为不同色调的影响者留下空间，从而在该领域和行业中可见“颜色线”的存在，正如WEB Du Bois所称的那样。布朗提出了一个包含黑人女权主义目标的反种族主义议程，他思考了国内批评与前现代批判种族研究之间的持续脱节，这种脱节表明了一种代表性的模式。具体来说，布朗强调了白度是如何未经批判地审查的，一个令人惊讶的事实，因为家庭领域过去是一个形成性的空间，在那里发生种族化的过程，为在后奥巴马时代或后后种族时代持续存在的数百年的种族主义提供信息的过程：反种族歧视的时代- 黑暗和相关的暴力（身体、语言/修辞、心理、情感）是超可见的。鼓励读者成为（成为）“同谋女权主义者”，布朗呼吁去中心化白人，取消学术话语和引用实践的种族隔离。情感）是超可见的。鼓励读者成为（成为）“同谋女权主义者”，布朗呼吁去中心化白人，取消学术话语和引用实践的种族隔离。情感）是超可见的。鼓励读者成为（成为）“同谋女权主义者”，布朗呼吁去中心化白人，取消学术话语和引用实践的种族隔离。