Talk:Third-world feminism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Third-world feminism article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class.

Contents 1 segregating feminism? 2 'third world' 3 'third world' 4 "Third-world"

[edit] segregating feminism?

I have issues about segregating feminism - and am concerned at the neo-colonial, patriarchical overtones to using the expression 'third world feminism'. Can someone else chip in? I also sense 'third world' authorship of this page is lacking. Annawright 21:04, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, all of these concerns that you voice should be discussed in the article. They are not reasons for its removal. Savidan 20:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 'third world'

Yes, you're right, 'third world' is a tricky descriptive phrase full of political implications. There are alternatives such as the 'developing world' (which has its own problems) and the 'underderveloped world' (where 'underdeveloped' is used as a verb rather than an adjective, implying that active under development carried and inflicted on poorer nations by wealthier ones) as well as 'the global south'. Despite these alternatives, 'third-world feminism' remains the self-identifying category used by many feminists as well as a category used in scholarship and activism. This relevence is reflected in the naming of the Wikipedia article, at least I think. You make a really valuable point and perhaps a link or section pointing this out could be helpful. _______________ As per reviewed by Michael Pozo for "Methodology of the Oppressed" in <http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~ganterg/sjureview/vol1-2/methodology.html> the term "Third World Feminism" recovers and implements methods of resistance developed by subjugated people under Colonial rule, slavery and oppression and combines these methods with the contemporary perspective of U.S. feminists of color, a perspective quite different from the mainly Euro/Anglo-American feminism derived from the seventies. Sandoval believes this perspective to be the starting point in which to call for a necessary mixture or mestizaje in the collaboration and appropriation of ideas, knowledge and theories. This idea of a mixed consciousness reflects the necessary reality of surviving as a "minority" or other in a dominant society by utilizing every and any aspect of the dominant power. The hope for Sandoval is that such a method and such a consciousness will be recognized by others in dissimilar fields as the approach towards the same goal, which is the democratization of power through active social engagement.

I believe the term has a different connotation in Wikipedia. Am I wrong? Maggieven

[edit] 'third world'

Yes, you're right, 'third world' is a tricky descriptive phrase full of political implications. There are alternatives such as the 'developing world' (which has its own problems) and the 'underderveloped world' (where 'underdeveloped' is used as a verb rather than an adjective, implying that active under development carried and inflicted on poorer nations by wealthier ones) as well as 'the global south'. Despite these alternatives, 'third-world feminism' remains the self-identifying category used by many feminists as well as a category used in scholarship and activism. This relevence is reflected in the naming of the Wikipedia article, at least I think. You make a really valuable point and perhaps a link or section pointing this out could be helpful. -Ovaltine

Ovaltine

Thanks so much for inserting the line on the main page.  ^freedomAnnawright 17:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Third-world"

Yes, some people take offense at the term third world. That can be noted on the article about "third world". This does not change the fact that there is an actual school of feminism called third world feminism both by themselves and by others and the article should not be deleted because you find the term problematic. For example, there is an article on "humanity" although many consider the term gendered. If you must, make a note of the problematic nature of the term in the article by linking to whatever article you think best voices these concerns. Savidan 20:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)