Finally someone hits the nail on the head on the so-called controversy about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's comments in a speech she made once to students/academic types. (The one in which she talks about how her experiences as a Latina have given her a unique and valuable way of understanding the world and has helped her be a better judge.) Eugene Robinson's column today asks why it's acceptable for white men to recognize their heritage/socio-economic position but anyone else who does so is accused of being racist/subjective/biased.
Being white and male is seen ... as a neutral condition, the natural order of things. Any "identity" -- black, brown, female, gay, whatever -- has to be judged against this supposedly "objective" standard."
Knowledge that comes from the dominant position (white/male/straight/able-bodied etc.) is assumed to be universal and objective (i.e. "factual"). Knowledge that comes from anywhere else is assumed to be particular and subjective (i.e. "opinion"). We've been duped into thinking that the dominant knowledge is the more correct, more "objective" and therefore more valuable knowledge. This is not only a fallacious inaccurate picture of reality, it simultaneously reinforces the dominant paradigm.
This is why feminist epistemology is so important. It turns this fallacy (that there exists universal Absolute truth) on its head. ALL knowledge is located within a particular time and place. Our view and understanding of the world depends on where we're looking at it from. As a Latina woman, Sotomayor has a different understanding the world than does say, Samuel Alito. Is it a better understanding? Yes, actually, it is when it comes to understanding certain aspects of this world, such as male-dominance or white supremacy. In those cases, a Latina standpoint (or any other non-dominant standpoint) is an advantage because someone with such a standpoint is better positioned to understand the system of dominance of which one has direct personal, lived experience.
This is what standpoint feminism is all about and it's yet another example of how Marx's philosophy still shapes the way we understand the world around us. It may not always be presented in such detail, but this idea generally is not at all uncommon in any grad-school level theory class. It's controversial only to very old-school academics who have stubbornly resisted post-18th century philosophies and want to remain in the comfortable, secure illusion that an objective view of the world is possible and that there is One Absolute Truth out there floating around somewhere in space removed from any messy human complicatedness such as social and class relationships and if we only ignore such things we can achieve such god-like knowledge.
There is no One Absolute Truth. Such knowledge is not possible. Samuel Alito is as influenced by his experiences as a white male as Sonia Sotomayor is influenced by her experiences as a Latina. Pretending that the former is more accurate and universally applicable than the latter is just plain dumb.










Recent Comments