The Feminist Standpoint Revisited, And Other Essays

by Nancy Hartsock

For over twenty years Nancy Hartsock has been a powerful voice in the effort to forge a feminism sophisticated and strong enough to make a difference in the real world of powerful political and economic forces. This volume collects her most important writings, offering her current thinking about this period in the development of feminist political economy and presenting an important new paper, “The Feminist Standpoint Revisited.”Central themes recur throughout the volume: in particular, the relationships between theory and activism, between feminism and Marxism, and between postmodernism and politics. Readers will appreciate Hartsock’s account of how so much of her theoretical work grew directly out of the demands of the activist life.The Feminist Standpoint Revisited is an important record and a timely reevaluation of the development of feminist thought, as well as a contribution to current work. It will be a valuable resource for feminist theorists in a wide variety of disciplines.

Genres: Feminism, Philosophy

272 pages, Paperback

First published February 25, 1999

Reviews

[Liam O'Leary · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read the main essay (The Feminist Standpoint), which seems to be the main part of the book, here's my understanding:

-Hartsock applies Marxian class theory to argue for the relevance of Feminist Standpoint Theory.

-Marx and Engel's view that an individual is based on what they produce, not on their consumption, creates a dialectic two-class system of working (proletariat) and ruling (bourgeoise) class, similar to Hegel's Master/Slave system.

-The working class, by virtue of being those who produce for the master, are in a better position for knowing what the world needs.

-A standpoint is a socially situated collective consciousness, Hartsock indicates that socially marginalized groups (women) offer new perspectives to the ruling class (men) at the level of epistemology. The lived experience of marginalization itself, and the condition associated for the marginalization, offers a new perspective to human experience of both the ruling and working class.

-Feminist Standpoint Theory (as an epistemology) indicates that women or other marginalized populations will be in a good position to offer unique insights to knowledge because they have been oppressed, and their experience has been underrepresented by the ruling class. Her examples include poetry (Adrienne Rich) and psychoanalysis (Nancy Chodorow), but I think she should have stressed more Karen Horney.

What confuses me about feminist standpoint theory is how women can both occupy the working class or proletariat view, and in other feminist arguments women can be underrepresented or discriminated in the workplace. It makes more sense to me that Marxian theory intended men to occupy both ruling and working class in an era when women were not working, and that if this is so then a three class system is involved here? A consumer, a producer and a marginalized class? Because we are then talking about the sub-working class as the marginalized group that needs to become the working class to sway how society produces materials and knowledge. Maybe this will become clear to me after I read Marxist texts, but somehow I doubt it.

[Tara Brabazon · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written, powerful and inspirational book. Professor Hartsock developed a remarkable phrase, theory and argument: the feminist standpoint. This book is a collection of her essays, including the famous original, and the contemporary revisioning of it.

Feminism in the last fifty years has been complex, controversial, stroppy and diverse. The debates have often been brutal and brutalizing. The differences have been - sometimes - toxic.

This book presents the cycles of arguments between Marxism and feminism. These debates are intriguing, deep and complex.

While scholars may disagree with some of these arguments and essays, it is so important to respect the scholarship and respect the research. Deep thinking deserves respect and we owe it to the scholars that came before us to recognize their efforts and arguments.

[V. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nancy Hartsock argues for what she calls a "feminist historical materialism" as a corrective to Marxism's purported inability to explain and combat women's oppression. The problem is that there's nothing historical or materialist about feminist theory, which sees women's oppression not as a result of current material reality, but rather ahistorically reads sexism and patriarchy practically into the DNA of human beings. Combining feminist theory with historical materialism predictably leaves one in a muddle, and you can guess which theory Hartsock errs on the side on. When she finally argues that capitalism has not led to women's oppression, but rather the notion of "abstract masculinity" may have itself led to the idea of exchange, and that the idea of abstract masculinity is what caused capitalism (and not, say, the material interests of a certain group of people at a certain time who were in a certain position to secure the satisfaction of their interests), her absolute rejection of historical materialism in favor of baldly idealist philosophical anthropology comes to the fore.