#RaceB4Race A thread on division & specialization of academic intellectual labor (filters are intact): Let's stop reinforcing whyte hegemonic notions of academic disciplines when it comes to premodern race. (I write this as Margo Hendricks/EM Eng lit)
1/
-
-
as I said in the LitCompass intro., at least for medieval there are 2 genealogies of race work. The historian one stuck in eugenicist pre-1960 land and then the one by usually lit. Scholars who read CRT+indigenous studies. Religious studies is good as well. But consider that..1/
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
And then how few BIPOC scholars in history there are... and then do they do critical race.... so if one wants to use an analogy, it is as if one field area decided to base all their gender work on definitions of 1950s gender (sex)—so cisgendered, binary, etc. why would 2/
-
A critical gender research group doing recent work have ppl speak that basically are speaking about gender in a 1950s bubble? This would never get onto a panel at the National Women’s Studies Association. So consider that rubric & do we have medieval historians being accepted 3/
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Heh. I struggle with this, but that's because I read CRT. And I think the relationship between the lit texts I read and the social history evidence is complex -- and it's something I've been interested in for 30 years.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.