Second Paper Topics

Assignment: Please choose ONE of the following paper topics. Papers should be 3-5 pages in length, due in class Thursday, Nov. 2. Rough drafts are strongly encouraged, but not mandatory. I will be accepting rough drafts no later than 11:59 pm on Monday, Oct. 30. Please keep in mind that drafts are first come, first serve. So get those drafts in asap. Final copies should be sent electronically to me at megw@email.unc.edu, saved in the following format "[first name]_[last name]_2". So, for example, Rod Flanders would send me his first paper saved as "Rod_Flanders_2". Please put only your PID on the actual paper, since they will be graded blind. Email me or talk to me if you have any questions.

1. Compare and contrast Simone de Beauvoir's suggestion for women's liberation (from oppression) to that of the radical feminists that we read--either Firestone's "The Dialectic of Sex" or Radicalesbians "The Woman Identified Woman" (you need not use both, but feel free if you'd like). In what ways do their views about women, the oppression of women, and sexism differ? How does their idea of woman affect their proposal for liberation from sexism? Do you agree with one view over another? Explain and discuss.

2. Incorporating the ideas proposed in either Hartmann's "The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Sexism" or Barrett's "Capitalism and Women's Liberation", discuss the incorporation of Marxist political ideas with feminism. How are the two supposed to be parallel? Why did some feminists think that appealing to marxism would help their cause? In what ways did the relevant feminists think that Marxism was deficient (as a theory about human nature in general, e.g.)? And why did they think that previous feminist theories had left something out? Do you agree that the combining of marxist ideals with feminist issues was productive to the feminist movement or not? Discuss.

3. Discuss the complaints voiced by bell hooks in ch. 1 of Feminist Theory about previous "white" feminist theories. What does she think that these theories have left out or ignored? How does she define 'oppression', and how do you think that this definition helps issues in feminism? Discuss her frustations about why she was never allowed to voice dissent within the feminist movement. Why should this matter, and what is her proposal to fix this problem in feminism? Discuss.

4. Using ch.1 of bell hooks' Feminist Theory and Collins' "Defining Black Feminist Thought", explain how the following three questions are answered: (i) why does there need to be a black feminism?, (ii) who can be a black feminist?, and (iii) what constitutes black feminism?  Do you think that the answers given in the relevant readings are adequate? Why or why not?  If you have time, discuss Collins' criticisms of several earlier attempts to answer (ii). Discuss whether you think her criticisms are fair, and whether you think her own propsoal stands up to these criticisms. Make sure that in answering this last question you elaborate on her explantion of the 'core themes of a black womans standpoint' , the variation of responses to these themes, and how this is supposed to help provide an answer to (ii). Critically discuss.

5. Incorporating the events, ideas, and topics raised in the frontline documentary "A Class Divided" (which we saw in class 10/24), discuss any relevant topics in feminism that have been raised in class or in the readings so far. What parallels can you draw between the reactions of the various groups that were placed 'on the bottom' and those 'on the top' and the issues of oppression or sexism that we have raised in feminism so far? Does the parallel bewteen lessons in race discrimination and lessons in sex/gender discrimination add any plausibility to the claim that we need 'black feminism' as well as 'feminism.' Does it lend plausibility to the claim that we need separate branches of feminism at all (based on race, class, culture, etc.)? Why or why not? Make extensive use of examples from the video, and the arguments discussed in class and in the readings to support your claims.


6. Keeping in mind the issues raised in Uma Narayan's "Contesting Cultures", discuss whether you think the charge of 'westernization' against Third World Feminists is legitimate or not. How can any culture--not just Third World cultures--withstand criticism of it's discriminatory or oppressive customs, if these customs are considered integral to the culture? Imagine that all oppression and discrimination were eradicated: would that then destroy what makes many cultures distinctive? Why or why not? Would this necessarily be a bad thing? Explain, and critically discuss.


7. Free-Wheeling: Incorporating the material that we have covered in the readings and in class the last few weeks, construct your own thesis. Make sure that you (i) you have a clear thesis, (ii) that you argue for and support your thesis adequately, and (iii) that you show mastery of the material covered both in class and out.

Note: you should come see me before picking this topic to ensure that your paper adequately satisfies (i)-(iii).

Page Last Updated: October 27, 2006
Back to Phil 275 Course Page
Back to Meg's Teaching Page
Back to Meg's Main Page