The general focus of this panel is the theorization, criticism, and/or pedagogical implications of men in feminism. Several existing studies have looked at the “problem” of male feminism within academic discourse and classroom instruction, notably Feminism Without Women (Modleski), Engendering Men: The Question of Male Feminist Criticism (eds. Joseph Boone and Michael Cadden), Men Who Believe in Feminism (Goldrick-Jones), Feminism With Men (Schacht and Ewing), and Female Impersonation (Tyler). Is it true that men who identify as feminists are “colonists” of a sort, attempting to “penetrate” the boundaries of and gain leverage within a field of study whose aim, ironically, has been to resist male domination and enlarge female autonomy? Are male feminists “theoretical impersonators” whose interest in feminism is simply a desire to wield a form of disciplinary and discursive power often denied to them? What should be the ethical responsibilities of a male feminist, and how do they differ from those for women? How might these questions be brought to bear on feminist literary criticism, feminist literature, feminist sociology, feminist anthropology, feminist film criticism, feminist psychoanalytic criticism, or feminist political activism?
Finally, in keeping with the overarching theme of this year’s (dis)junctions conference, we ask how or whether male feminism constitutes a crisis for feminism, in its multiform articulations and concerns? Is it possible to conceive of male feminism as a productive crisis? We welcome submissions addressing any part of this broad theoretical topic.
Send comments and questions to H-Net
Webstaff. H-Net reproduces announcements that have been submitted to us as a
free service to the academic community. If you are interested in an announcement
listed here, please contact the organizers or patrons directly. Though we strive
to provide accurate information, H-Net cannot accept responsibility for the text of
announcements appearing in this service. (Administration)