Simone De Beauvoir: Transgressing Immanence, Motherhood And Social Constructs

• Autorzy: ELISABETA ZELINKA
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The thesis of the present paper is to investigate the reasons why it may become difficult for the 20th century Western woman to avoid feeling trapped within her status of motherhood and to transcend her immanence as a woman. Simone de Beauvoir argues in The Second Sex, Part V, chapter XVII (“The Mother”) that the modern Western woman proves unable to transgress her own immanence. What are the three factors that stand in the way of the woman's existential telos? What is the natural consequence of her Snow White-type of imprisonment? Will she impose the same pattern of panoptic surveillance upon her own offspring?

Słowa kluczowe

EN

existential ethics; immanence; motherhood; spiritual flatness; transgression

• Wydawca: Sciendo
• Czasopismo: Gender Studies
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 13
• Numer: 1
• Strony: 118-130

Daty

wydano

2014-12-01

online

2015-03-25

Twórcy

autor

ELISABETA ZELINKA

• West University of Timişoara, Romania, 4, Vasile Pârvan Blvd, 300223 Timişoara,

Bibliografia

• de Beauvoir, S. 1976. The Ethics of Ambiguity. New York: Citadel Press.
• de Beauvoir, S. 1993. The Second Sex. London: David Campbell Publishers Ltd.
• Burkitt, J. 1999. Bodies of Thought: Embodiment, Identity and Modernity. London: Sage.
• Cunnigham, M. 1998. The Hours. London: Clays Ltd.
• Gilbert, S., S. Gubar 1985. “What Do Feminist Critics Want? A Postcard from the Volcano” in The New Feminist Criticism. E. Showalter (Ed.). New York: Pantheon Book, pp. 29-45.
• Grosz, E. 1993. “Bodies and Knowledges: Feminism and the Crisis of Reason” in Feminist Epistemologies. L. Alcoff and E. Potter (Eds.). New York, London: Routledge, pp. 187-215.
• Haraway, D. 2004. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective” in The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. S. Harding (Ed.). New York: Routledge, pp. 81-101.
• hooks, b. 2004. “Choosing the Margin as a Space of Radical Openness” in The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. S. Harding (Ed.). New York: Routledge, pp. 153-159.
• Kristeva, J. 1986/1996. “A Question of Subjectivity. An Interview”. Women's Review 12, 1986, reprinted in Modern Literary Theory: A Reader. P. Rice, P. Waugh (Eds.). London: Arnold, 1996, pp. 131-136.
• Kristeva, J. 1989. “Women's Time” in The Feminist Reader: Essays in Gender and the Politics of Literary Criticism. C. Belsey, J. Moore (Eds.). London: Macmillan, pp. 201-216.
• Longino, H. 1993. “Subjects, Power and Knowledge: Description and Prescription in Feminist Philosophies of Science” in Feminist Epistemologies. L. Alcoff, E. Potter (Eds.). New York, London: Routledge, pp. 101-120.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1515/genst-2015-0009