当前位置: X-MOL 学术Philosophia › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Ending Sex-Based Oppression: Transitional Pathways
Philosophia Pub Date : 2020-11-23 , DOI: 10.1007/s11406-020-00297-0
Holly Lawford-Smith

From a radical feminist perspective, gender is a cage. Or to be more precise, it’s two cages. If genders are cages, then surely we want to let people out. Being less constrained in our choices is something we all have reason to want: theorists in recent years have emphasized the importance of the capability to do and be many different things. At the very least, we should want an end to sex-based oppression. But what does this entail, when it comes to gender? In this paper, I’ll compare four ‘transitional pathways’, with a view to considering how each relates to the ultimate end of ending sex-based oppression. Should we open the doors to the cages, so that people can move freely between them, but leave the cages themselves in place? (Transgender pathway). Should we add more cages? (Nonbinary pathway). Should we make the cages bigger, so that people have a lot more room to move around inside them? Or should we dismantle the cages, so there are no more genders at all? (Gender abolitionist pathways). Some of these options are ‘gender revisionist’, others are gender abolitionist. I’ll argue in favour of a gender abolitionist pathway.

中文翻译:

结束基于性别的压迫:过渡途径

从激进的女权主义者的角度来看,性别是一个笼子。或者更准确地说,它是两个笼子。如果性别是笼子,那么我们当然想让人们出去。在我们的选择中减少限制是我们都有理由想要的:近年来理论家强调了做许多不同事情的能力的重要性。至少,我们应该希望结束基于性的压迫。但是,当涉及到性别时,这意味着什么呢?在本文中,我将比较四种“过渡途径”,以考虑每种途径与结束基于性别的压迫的最终结局有何关系。我们是否应该打开笼子的门,让人们可以在它们之间自由移动,而将笼子本身留在原地?(跨性别途径)。我们应该增加更多的笼子吗?(非二元途径)。我们应该把笼子做大些吗 这样人们就有更多的空间在里面走动?还是我们应该拆除笼子,这样就没有更多的性别了?(性别废除主义途径)。其中一些选项是“性别修正主义者”,其他选项是性别废除主义者。我将争论支持性别废除主义者的途径。
更新日期:2020-11-23
down
wechat
bug