Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-cmjwd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-22T06:04:57.826Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Missionary Positions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Ann E. Cudd
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Postcolonial feminist scholars have described some Western feminist activism as imperialistic, drawing a comparison to the work of Christian missionaries from the West, who aided in the project of colonization and assimilation of non-Western cultures to Western ideas and practices. This comparison challenges feminists who advocate global human rights ideals or objective appraisals of social practices, in effect charging them with neocolonialism. This essay defends work on behalf of universal human rights, while granting that activists should recognize their limitations in local cultural knowledge.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 20 , Issue 4: Special Issue: Analytic Feminism , Fall 2005 , pp. 164 - 182
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alexander, M. Jacqui, and Talpade Mohanty, Chandra, eds. 1997. Feminist genealogies, colonial legacies, democratic futures. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cudd, Ann E. 2002. Analyzing backlash to progressive social movements. In Theorizing backlash: Philosophical reflections on the resistance to feminism, ed. Superson, Anita and Cudd, Ann E.Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Cudd, Ann E. 2004. The paradox of liberal feminism: Choice, rationality and oppression. In Varieties of feminist liberalism, ed. Baehr, Amy. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. 2001. The responsibility to protect. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre. http://www.dfait‐maeci.gc.ca/iciss‐ciise/pdf/Commission‐Report.pdf.Google Scholar
Miles, Angela. 1998. North American feminisms/global feminisms‐Contradictory or complementary? In Sisterhood, feminism, and power, ed. Nnaemeka, Obioma. Trenton, N.J.: Africa World Press.Google Scholar
Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. 1997. Women workers and capitalist scripts: Ideologies of domination, common interests, and the politics of solidarity. In Feminist genealogies, colonial legacies, democratic futures, ed. Jacqui Alexander, M. and Talpade Mohanty, Chandra. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Narayan, Uma. 1997. Dislocating cultures. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2000. Women and human development: The capabilities approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511841286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogge, Thomas W. 2002. World poverty and human rights: Cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1999. A critique of postcolonial reason. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctvjsf541CrossRefGoogle Scholar