Western moral and political theorists have recently devoted considerable attention to the perceived victimisation of women by non-western cultures. In this paper, the author argues that conceiving injustice to poor women in poor countries primarily as a matter of their oppression by illiberal cultures presents an understanding of their situation that is crucially incomplete. This incomplete understanding distorts Western theorists’ comprehension of our moral relationship to women elsewhere in the world and so of our theoretical task. It also impoverishes our assumptions about the intercultural dialogue necessary to promote global justice for women., Alison M. Jaggar, and Anglické resumé
The paper discusses the history of the relation between feminist scholarship and cultural anthropology as two ways of thinking about culture and social relationships. It focuses in particular on the feminist critique of the anthropological theory and ethnographic research. In points out the different epistemological and political standpoints of feminism and anthropology as the sources of the tensioned relationship between these two traditions of thinking about culture.
Th e article reads the Czech literary canon during the period from 1948 to 1989 not from a consciously feminist standpoint, but from a gender perspective. Following works of Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, and Wendy Brown, the article’s primary focus is on fi ction written by dissent and alternative writers, with an emphasis on their role in what the author calls “dispositives of silence,” consisting of the discursive emergence of silencing and the aff ective dimension of “injurious attachments.” Th e article holds that while the dissident and alternative literary scene’s opposition to the then-offi cial regime made the need for political opposition clearly visible to it, other issues, such as the drive towards gender equality, became invisible to it, which represents a case of injurious attachments. In the article’s interpretative part, it reads literary works by writers Iva Pekárková, Tereza Boučková, and Pavel Kohout as examples that illustrate the issue of injurious attachments. In the article’s fi nal part, it supplements its thesis on dissident and alternative literature of the 1948–1989 period with a brief sketch of the literary evolution during the period, and it presents an overview of fi ve major – and partly contradictory – tendencies that can be identifi ed in the four decades in question.