Centering Poststructural Feminist Thought P. 1
I have, like any good child of an era of identity politics, searched tirelessly for the perfect label to ascribe to my own “self” (small “s”!), in order to attempt to make clear/real my own intellectual or political position, or more broadly, my own experiences. At times, this has made me identify more with Emily Dickinson’s dash than with those understood to be my peers. What’s in a dash? What’s in a name for that matter? Or a categorical label?
It’s hard to say and I’ve certainly been known to do my fair share of critiquing of the promise of “coming out” as whatever we are as described in the terms bestowed unto us—or, if we’re creative, with what language allows us to create. In my own attempts to “make sense” of those so-called self, I’ve tried a few different categorical dresses on for size: postmodern atheist, feminist-womanist, ethical critic, etc. and finally: poststructural feminist.
Some questions that immediately arise are: What makes me poststructural? What makes me a feminist? What happens when those two terms, in coming together, modify one another? How? What constitutes a poststructural feminist project or work? Who can I look for for guidance in the development of my own poststructural analytic?
About this entry
You’re currently reading “Centering Poststructural Feminist Thought P. 1,” an entry on ambivigilante
- November 17, 2010 / 8:26 am