Skip to main content

Lost Father Patriarchy & other masculinities - Thelma

 In the beginning of their dialogue, Hall and hooks discuss the tension(s) of the feminist rupture in cultural studies and how it was misunderstood at the beginning of its formation. hooks explains many Black women intellectuals were too intimidated to engage in a feminist critique with their male counterparts because of their shared race. While on the other hand, some Black male intellectuals were reluctant to having their work transformed by feminist thinking. Although both Hall and hooks suggest that the hostility and initial resistance to the feminist rupture has already been forgotten, how do feminist or cultural studies continue to resist Black feminism today? 

I am also interested in the idea of the lost father patriarchy and hooks’s theory that Black masculinity is confined to heterosexist paradigms because of its “overwhelming fear of homosexuality” (26). Beyond feminist and queer studies, are there any other theoretical paradigms for examining the expression of Black masculinities? Does the idea of “toxic masculinity” further confine these expressions into heterosexist paradigms? 


We can also discuss the limitations of “toxic masculinity” in the context of a recent event: Will Smith’s response to Chris Rock’s misogynoir and ableism. A lot of viewers have labeled and dismissed Smith’s defense of Jada as toxic masculinity - a reaction primarily rooted in white feminism, carceral logics, and anti-Blackness. How do we, as intellectuals, respond to an event like this (if at all)? This is already too long (sorry), but I was surprised that Nikole Hannah-Jones referred to this moment as an "assault" and called Jada's chronic illness into question, asking "How is hair loss a disability specifically?" (she deleted this tweet already). I'm in no position to judge Hannah-Jones's response, but I think it does suggest that there are still some contingencies to bridging the gap between race and feminism in public discourse.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Journals and Prose

My two questions from this week have emerged from the Judith Butler piece, A 'Bad Writer' Bites Back , both centered around the journal, Philosophy and Literature —which Butler describes as the self-proclaimed “arbiter of good prose.”  I agree with Butler’s staunch defense of questioning common sense and provoking “new ways of looking at a familiar world”, and was reminded of David Harvey’s quote in the introduction to his Companion to Marx’s Capital : “Real learning always entails a struggle to understand the unknown.”   Butler describes Philosophy and Literature as a “culturally conservative academic journal” which naturally led me down a longer-than-anticipated visit to the journal's website . I was greeted with a video presented by the Philosophy and Literature’s editor Garry L. Hagberg, who rails against the “jargon infested” work that litters the journal’s field, locating Philosophy and Literature in clear opposition to such bothersome clutter.  However, Hagberg...
Post a Comment
Read more

Articulation_by_Abby Escatel

 In "Race, Articulation and Societies Structured in Dominance," Stuart Hall is concerned with complicating Marxist theory's tendency to overgeneralize and universalize its claims that are specifically located within a European history of labor. Questions concerning slavery, coloniality, unfree/forced labor come to the fore and force Marxist theorists to grapple with the need to be specific in their contextualization and historicization of particular moments, ruptures and conjunctures. My questions are as follows:  1. How do we move forward with Marxism while taking into account the component of "unfreedom" when conceptualizing class, labor, and labor power? How does the "proletariat" fail to account for the lived realities of racialized bodies?  2. It seems as though Hall is also saying that race is not all encompassing and also shouldn't be overgeneralized/universalized. In short, labor and race are both always already at work. As a scholar who ce...
Post a Comment
Read more

Week 5

  What are the differences between Gramsci’s concept of the “organic intellectual” and Hall’s “public pedagogy?”   On the topic of the diasporic intellectual, Kuan-Hsing Chen mentions that “Some of the diasporic intellectuals I know of have exercised their power, for better or worse, back home, but you have not. And some of them are trying to move back, in whatever way. So, in that sense, you are very peculiar” (503). Although Hall felt some reconnection with the Carribean through the Black diasporic population in Britain, he insists that cultural identity is not fixed but “comes out of very specific historical formations, out of very specific histories and cultural repertoires of enunciation, that it can constitute a ‘positionality’, which we call, provisionally, identity” (503). Individuals can negotiate, rearticulate, recontextualize their different identities, but how does this rearticulation work at an institutional-level?   Thelma
Post a Comment
Read more