The Feminine Mystique in 1963

These descriptions of issue fronts of feminism occupy to the question of whether it is possible to sort out libber texts in a way that gives an organized account of contemporary women's liberationist thought. Can feminist theories with different points of view be accommodate? If they cannot, can they nevertheless be classified in a useful, organized way? Can irreconcilable voices all drive the label of feminist? If they cannot, can the claims be evaluated? And if so, how?

SIGNIFICANCE OF PROBLEM. Questions roughly the building of feminist thought be important because productive--if struggling--clarity around what feminists think and want and why seems preferable to ambiguity. To an extent, anthologists of feminist texts do categorize feminist thought. In particular, Jaggar and Rothenberg present what they describe as "theories of women's subordination" (FF viii), classifying commentaries according to social-science categories such as Marxism, understructure feminism, collectivist feminism, multicultural feminism, and global feminism. But it is not clear whether these categories are to be considered completely separate or to overlap and converge. there is also significance in looking at the structure of feminist thought because of the antifeminist voices that have emerged in the culture in recent years. Such vo

look into PLAN. This research will take the form of a retrospective review of representative supposititious and analytical works of feminism. Ideally, the end will be to examine the content of these texts in coiffure to develop a unified framework--perhaps even a matrix--that identifies and characterizes points of theoretical confluence and divergence of these different voices.

Such a framework could be a tool for clarity about the nominate of feminist discourse and potentially forecast possible lines of development.

Jaggar, Alison M., and Rothenberg, Paula S. Introduction. feminist Frameworks: Alternative Theoretical Accounts of the Relations Between Women and Men. 3rd ed. revolutionary York: McGraw-Hill, 1993. xi-xviii.

Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique, Twentieth Anniversary Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1983.

Sommers, Christine H. Who Stole feminist movement? How Women Have Betrayed Women. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.

ices as those of Catherine MacKinnon (classified as radical) and (say) Camille Paglia (B4), who is hostile to radical feminism in general and MacKinnon in particular, are irreconcilable. The essentialist group of feminist theory made by Sommers (45ff et passim) appears hostile to feminist thought represented in Women's Work, Gender/Sexuality, and Feminist Frameworks and calls for a response that is not hostile to feminism. Specifically, Sommers deplores the "second-wave" feminism that t
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.