And it gets worse...pic.twitter.com/dCtpD8w5ZY
Show this thread
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
You really think a theorist could stick biological reproduction, motherhood, etc., at the front and center of how they conceptualize womanhood, and the epistemological "privileges" that flow from it, and everybody would be adult about it? Really?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
But the development here is absolutely crucial to Hartsock's view. It's a psychodynamic theory that relies on object relations theory to explain why it is that men seek to dominate (and kill) nature. You can't just throw it out! 1/
-
And it's that bit that's problematic, because the feminist standpoint - in effect a different way of knowing - is rooted in the different way the Oedipus complex resolves for boys and girls (which in turn is dependent on a certain view of motherhood and its centrality).
-
I realize you know all this. I do. And I hope you're right that actually there wouldn't be a fuss if the implications of this view for how "woman" is conceptualized were made explicit, but... Well, I'm dubious. That said, you've got more experience than me, so maybe I'm wrong.
-
Sorry if that were incoherent, I'm responding too quickly because I've got to go. Hope you have a good rest of your evening.
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.