Re: code name: "feminist!"
Phillip Allen White (pwhite who-is-at carbon.cudenver.edu)
Thu, 23 Apr 1998 17:31:40 -0600 (MDT)
On Thu, 23 Apr 1998, Katherine Brown wrote:
> What I get
> out of the general theme of diversity common to both literatures is this:
> the feminist literature Imost appreciate tries to hold gender, race and
> class issues in while doing analysis. This requires historical grounding
> and an apprecaition for dialectical thinking. It also generates huge numbers
> of contradictions in thinking and practice when you see how interest-group
> politics plays out in the construction of normsrked and unmarked catagories.
> (examples that come to mind right now are OJ simpson; Anita Hill; Tailhook;
> wage and tenure gaps in non and academic workplaces, etc. etc.). I think
> CHAT gives a fruitful structure of units and levels of analysis for the
> study of phenomena of interest to feminists.
> What do others think?
Katherine, I've been lately reading the works of feminist writers
- Susan Krieger, Rosanna Hertz, Mary Gergen - and yes, Bryson & DeCastel
- and I keep on wondering how this fits in sociocultural theory - and
now I'm beginning to wonder if many of the voices of sociocultural theory
aren't grounded in the traditional researcher voice - rather than a
voice of reflexivity and places the _researcher_ in the context of the
research....
any examples of work that's been published that integrates CHAT &
feminism?
anyway - i think this conversation in itself is very fruitful -
phillip