In this article I examine one of the thorniest aspects of the relationship between feminism and postmodernism, in order to see what a discursive analytic approach can contribute to this important debate. The problem I refer to concerns the threat that the postmodern turn-despite its benefits-is said to pose for a politically committed feminism. I begin with a brief recapping of the postmodernist challenge to the tenets of social science. I then advance a two-part argument promoting discourse analysis for feminist scholars who seek to benefit from postmodernism's respect for difference and inclusivity, yet refuse to give up a critical perspective. The first part of the argument deals with the charge that the postmodern turn disables critical inquiry; the second with the related debate over the need for `generalizing' or `totalizing' concepts (e.g. the concept `women') in the service of a feminist politics. I argue that postmodernist scholars' wide-spread tendency to discuss language outside its context of use has hobbled their ability to respond to this serious challenge, and I suggest that a closer look at routine talk can help feminists reframe these debates about politicality in helpful ways.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leslie J. Miller (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: