MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W364567892

Where the Body Is a Battleground: Materializing Gender in the Humanities

2002· article· en· W364567892 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jo‐Ann Wallace

Notice bibliographique

RevueResources for feminist research · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueContemporary Literature and Criticism
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSubject (documents)Materiality (auditing)SubjectivityCriticismSociologyArgument (complex analysis)AestheticsHumanitiesPhilosophyEpistemologyArtLiterature
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In this article, the author investigates the insights that attention to research in neuropsychiatry might offer feminist theorizing about the and subjectivity in the humanities. Her argument incorporates both the writings of Judith Butler and Peter Kramer's book, Listening to Prozac, a bestseller which has remained largely undiscussed in humanities academic circles, to open up an innovative way of thinking about the and its construction within social spaces. * * * It coming to be more and more a deadly fight for our -- Josephine Butler (1872) (quoted in Kent, 1987, p. 120) I began writing this book by trying to consider the materiality of the only to find that the thought of materiality invariably moved me into other domains. I tried to discipline myself to stay on the subject, but found that I could not fix bodies as simple objects of thought. Not only did bodies tend to indicate a world beyond themselves, but this movement beyond their own boundaries, a movement of boundary itself, appeared to be quite central to what bodies are. I kept losing track of the subject. -- Judith Butler (1993, p. ix) In a 1993 review in the London Review of Books, Terry Eagleton -- a wellknown critic and literary theorist -- surveyed the degree to which contemporary literary theory of all stripes engages in body talk, concluding that there will soon be more bodies in contemporary criticism than on the fields of Waterloo (Eagleton, 1993, p. 7). Eagleton's comment can be read in two ways: on the one hand, we can take it as an observation of the ways in which literary theory of the last 20 years has engaged the in ways that sometimes seem to render it lifeless, unrecognizable; on the other hand, we can also take it as a turn on the by now predictable metaphor of the as a battlefield. The title of this article, Where the Body a Battleground, borrowed from an Amnesty International pamphlet on the specific ways in which women's human rights are violated globally (through rape, domestic abuse, genocidal rape, etc.). Amnesty International almost certainly borrowed the title of its pamphlet from the now famous Barbara Kruger poster, Your Body a Battleground, designed to advertise the 1989 March on Washington in support of legal abortion, birth control, and women's rights. However, as the first epigraph to this article suggests, the metaphor has an even longer history. As early as 1872, Josephine Butler, the charismatic Evangelical leader of the movement to repeal the Contagious Diseases Acts in Britain (and later in the British colonies and imperial outposts),(1) proclaimed that the struggle against the Acts is coming to be more and more a deadly fight for our bodies. Her emphasis, like that of many first-wave feminists, was on bodily integrity and self-determination; this concept was understood as coterminous with a liberal commitment to individual rights, and it underwrote the anti-slavery and feminist work of many (though not all) nineteenth-century women activists. A commitment to bodily integrity also underwrote many of the assumptions of early second-wave feminism, as evident in the title of one of the period's most successful publications, the Boston Women's Health Collective's Our Bodies, Ourselves (originally published in 1969). For many first- and early second-wave feminists -- as for Amnesty International's women's caucus today -- a commitment to bodily integrity and self-determination was the primary ground of a feminist politics and practice. In the past 20 years, however, feminist theory in the humanities, and especially in the disciplines of literary studies and philosophy, has moved toward what Susan Bordo, among others, has called gender skepticism, by which she means an increasing skepticism about the status of the in general and women's bodies in particular (Bordo, 1993). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,016
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,046

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0040,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0100,076
Communication savante0,0160,026
Science ouverte0,0010,014
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,203
Tête enseignante GPT0,340
Écart entre enseignants0,137 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResources for feminist researchMême sujetContemporary Literature and CriticismTravaux en français237 207