Resources listed below have been chosen to provide only a springboardinto the huge amount of feminist material available on the web. Theemphasis here is on general resources useful for doing research infeminist philosophy or interdisciplinary feminist theory, e.g., thelinks connect to bibliographies and meta-sites, and resourcesconcerning inclusion, exclusion, and feminist diversity. The list isincomplete and will be regularly revised and expanded. Furtherresources on topics in feminism such as popular culture, reproductiverights, sex work, are available within each sub-entry on thattopic.
Some critics contend that theories of multiculturalism are premised onan essentialist view of culture. Cultures are not distinct,self-contained wholes; they have long interacted and influenced oneanother through war, imperialism, trade, and migration. People in manyparts of the world live within cultures that are already cosmopolitan,characterized by cultural hybridity. As Jeremy Waldron argues,“We live in a world formed by technology and trade; by economic,religious, and political imperialism and their offspring; by massmigration and the dispersion of cultural influences. In this context,to immerse oneself in the traditional practices of, say, an aboriginalculture might be a fascinating anthropological experiment, but itinvolves an artificial dislocation from what actually is going on inthe world” (1995, 100). To aim at preserving or protecting aculture runs the risk of privileging one allegedly pure version ofthat culture, thereby crippling its ability to adapt to changes incircumstances (Waldron 1995, 110; see also Appiah 2005, Benhabib 2002,Scheffler 2007). Waldron also rejects the premise that the optionsavailable to an individual must come from a particular culture;meaningful options may come from a variety of cultural sources. Whatpeople need are cultural materials, not access to a particularcultural structure. For example, the Bible, Roman mythology, and theGrimms' fairy tales have all influenced American culture, but thesecultural sources cannot be seen as part of a single cultural structurethat multiculturalists like Kymlicka aim to protect.
Cultural imperialism | Wiki | Everipedia
We have so far been using the term ‘oppression’ loosely tocover whatever form of wrong or injustice is at issue. Continuing withthis intentional openness in the exact nature of the wrong, thequestion still remains what it means to say that women are subjectedto injustice because they are women. To address this question, it mayhelp to consider a familiar ambiguity in the notion“because”: are we concerned here with causal explanationsor justifications? On one hand, the claim that someone is oppressedbecause she is a woman suggests that the best (causal) explanation ofthe subordination in question will make reference to her sex: e.g.,Paula is subject to sexist oppression on the job because the bestexplanation of why she makes $1.00 less an hour for doing comparablework as Paul makes reference to her sex (possibly in addition to herrace or other social classifications). On the other hand, the claimthat someone is oppressed because she is a woman suggests that therationale or basis for the oppressive structures requires that one besensitive to someone's sex in determining how they should be viewedand treated, i.e., that the justification for someone's being subjectto the structures in question depends on a representation of them assexed male or female. E.g., Paula is subject to sexist oppression onthe job because the pay scale for her job classification is justifiedwithin a framework that distinguishes and devalues women's workcompared with men's.
Linguistic imperialism, or language ..
Another argument for multiculturalism begins from the value of freedomfrom domination. One might value freedom from domination because oneis attracted to the doctrine of civic republicanism as developed byPhillip Pettit (1997) and Quentin Skinner (1998), or one might valueit because one holds that domination presents a serious obstacle tohuman flourishing (Lovett 2009). In contrast to the conception offreedom as non-interference dominant in liberal theory, freedom asnon-domination, drawn from the civic republic tradition, focuses on aperson's “capacity to interfere, on an arbitrary basis, incertain choices that the other is in a position to make” (Pettit1997, 52). On this view of freedom, we can be unfree even when we arenot experiencing any interference as in the case of a slave of abenevolent master. We are subject to domination to the extent that weare dependent on another person or group holding some measure ofarbitrary power over us (Pettit 1997, ch. 2).
reconstitution of structural and cultural inequalities ..
he intent was to illustrate contemporary notions of cultural evolution “representatives of all the world’s peoples, ranging from smallest pygmies to the most gigantic peoples, from the darkest blacks to the dominant whites” to show what was commonly thought then to be a sort of Ota (along with his fairground neighbour Apache leader Geronimo) proved to be a popular attraction at the World’s Fair.