Feminist Perspective

• The contemporary ‘movement of movements’ must

surmount some key organizational and ideological
hurdles to challenge the hegemony of neo-liberal
globalization. The failures of neo-liberalism to address
serious global problems bring the realization that
there is need for a “counter-hegemonic
globalization,” defined as a globally organized project
of transformation aimed at replacing the dominant
(hegemonic) global regime with one that maximizes
democratic political control and makes the equitable
development of human capabilities and
environmental stewardship its priorities.
 Different Feminist Approaches
• ‘Feminist theoretical approaches to
globalization’ is an umbrella term that refers to
a number of specific theoretical approaches
that feminists have used to articulate the
challenges that globalization poses for women,
people of color, and the global poor. These
various approaches include those developed by
postcolonial feminists, transnational feminists,
and feminists who endorse an ethics of care.
 Key Features
• Feminist approaches to globalization seek to provide
frameworks for understanding the gender injustices
associated with globalization. Rather than developing all-
encompassing ideal theories of global justice feminist
philosophers tend to adopt the non-ideal theoretical
perspectives, which focus on specific, concrete issues.
Early feminist analyses focused on issues that were widely
believed to be of particular importance to women around
the world, such as domestic violence, workplace
discrimination, and human rights violations against women.
Many feminist philosophers view this approach as too
narrow, both in terms of the specific issues it addresses
and its methodological approach to these issues.
 Limitations of Early Feminists
• Moreover, by addressing specific global “women’s issues” as
independent phenomena, early feminist analyses failed to take
into account the systematic and structural gendered injustices
associated with neoliberalism.
• Although gender oppression takes different forms in different
social, cultural, and geographical locations, women in every
society face systematic disadvantages, such as those resulting
from their socially assigned responsibility for domestic work.
• Because of these structural injustices, women of all nationalities
tend to suffer more from the poverty, overwork, deprivation,
and political marginalization associated with neoliberal policies.
• Thus, more recent feminist analyses of globalization tend to
understand the outcomes of globalization not as disparate or
contingent phenomena, but rather as a result of systematic,
 Key Features (Contd.)
• Another key feature of feminist approaches to
globalization is a shared commitment to core feminist
values, including an opposition to the subordination of
women.
• Many feminists also use the language of human rights to
address the challenges of globalization. While they
acknowledge that traditional understandings of human
rights are implicitly male-biased, they contend that
feminist rearticulations of these norms can help to
identify the gendered harms involved in sexual slavery,
forced domestic labor, and the systematic withholding of
education, food, and healthcare from women and girls
that follow from severe economic deprivation.
 Relational Model
• However, not all feminist political philosophers agree with
this approach. Some believe that new feminist ideals, such
as relational understandings of power, collective
responsibility, and mutual dependence, are needed to
diagnose the gender injustices associated with globalization.
• For example, Iris Marion Young argues that the traditional
ideal theories of justice are unable to account for the
unjust background conditions that contribute to the
development of sweatshops in the global South.
• She argues that a new relational model of responsibility,
which she calls the social connection model, is needed to
articulate the obligations that people in affluent northern
countries have to workers in the global South.
 Social Connection Model of Iris Marion
Young
• The social connection model holds that
individuals bear responsibility for structural
injustices, such as those suffered by workers on
the global assembly line, because our actions
contribute to the institutional processes that
produce such injustices.
• In particular, northern consumers have a
responsibility to organize collectively to reform
the injustices associated with sweatshop labor.
 Feminist Methodologies
• The third key feature of feminist approaches to globalization is an
emphasis on feminist methodologies. In particular, these
approaches tend to embody three key methodological
commitments.
• The first is intersectionality, which maintains that systems of
oppression interact to produce injustices, and thus, that gender
injustices cannot be understood solely in terms of sex or gender.
• Feminists who theorize about justice on the domestic level argue
that women’s experiences of gender oppression are shaped by
other forms of oppression, such as those based on race, class,
disability, and sexual orientation. Feminist theorists of
globalization contend that gender oppression interacts with these
systems of oppression, along with other forms of systematic
disadvantage that arise within the global context.
 Methodological Commitments (contd.)
• Given this broad conception of intersectionality, feminist
theorists of globalization insist that gender injustices arise
within specific transnational contexts, such as historical
relationships among nations and current global economic
policies.
• The second methodological commitment shared by feminist
approaches to globalization is a sensitivity to context and
concrete specificity. Feminist philosophers strive to accurately
reflect the diverse interests, experience, and concerns of
women throughout the world, and to take seriously differences
in culture, history, and socio-economic and political
circumstances.
 A View Different from that of the
“International Feminists”
• This has led some feminist theorists of globalization to
distinguish their views from well-known feminists, such as
Martha Nussbaum and Susan Okin, whom Ackerly and
Attanasi refer to as “international feminists” by virtue of
their methodological commitments. In their view, Nussbaum
and Okin do not pay sufficient attention to the ways that
justice and injustice are mediated by local conditions in
their attempts to identify universal moral ideals. As a result,
their theories tend to privilege Western perspectives and
undermine their own commitment to reflecting women’s
lived experience (Ackerly and Attanasi 2009).
 Self-reflexive Critiques
• Finally, feminist theorists of globalization are committed to
developing self-reflexive critiques. At the heart of this
methodology is a willingness to critically examine feminist
claims, with particular attention to the ways in which feminist
discourses privilege certain points of view.
• For instance, Schutte insists that ostensibly universal feminist
values and ideas are likely to embody the values of dominant
cultures. This helps to explain why the voices of women from
developing countries are often taken seriously only if they
reflect the norms and values of the West and conform to
Western expectations. Thus, Schutte insists that feminists must
engage in methodological practices that de-center their
habitual standpoints and foreground perspectives that
challenge accepted ways of thinking (Schutte 2002).
Rejection of ‘Enlightenment Liberal’ Values
• Transnational feminists are urged to reject the problematic variants
of “Enlightenment liberal” values taken to be central to Western
feminism, including individualism, autonomy, and gender-role
eliminativism (Khader 2019, 3).
• Such values not only constitute cultural imperialism when imposed
on cultural “others,” as Schutte argues, but also can serve to justify
militarism, political domination, economic exploitation, and white
supremacy in the name of advancing gender interests (Khader
2019).
• Ackerly argues that feminist theory can be used not only to critique
feminist ideals and values, but also to develop richer ways to
evaluate the work done by women’s human rights organizations.
Feminist theory is able to engage with, shape and be shaped by the
work being done “on the ground” by NGOs and other groups
(Ackerly 2009).
 Feminist Theories in the 1980s
• The struggle to develop feminist theories that embody these
methodological commitments has been ongoing for feminists.
In the 1980s, Chandra Talpade Mohanty observed that
Western feminist scholarship tends to adopt an ethnocentric
perspective, depicting so-called Third-World women as one-
dimensional, non-agentic, and homogenous.
• Such scholarship tends to suggest that the average Third World
woman leads an essentially truncated life based on her
feminine gender (read: sexually constrained) and her being
“Third World” (read: ignorant, poor, uneducated, tradition-
bound, domestic, family-oriented, victimized, etc.). This, she
suggests, is in contrast to the (implicit) self-representation of
Western women as educated, as modern, as having control
over their own bodies and sexualities and the freedom to
Feminist Theories in the 1980s (Contd.)
• Mohanty claims that this perspective leads to a
simplistic understanding of what feminists in Western
countries can do to “help” women in developing
nations. Many of the recent developments in the
feminist literature on globalization can be understood as
a response to this theoretical failure. In addition to
recognizing the ways in which power influences the
production of feminist theories, feminist critics of
globalization strive to understand the ways in which
Western women share responsibility for gender
injustices in developing countries and at home, and to
articulate their obligations to eliminate these injustices.
 Distinctive Feminist Approaches

• Despite these common aims and methodological

commitments, feminists have analyzed globalization
from a number of different theoretical perspectives.
• It is in the fitness of things to examine here three
prominent approaches to globalization, developed
by postcolonial and decolonial, transnational, and
ethics of care feminists.
• Although it is not possible to draw sharp boundaries
around these theoretical perspectives, some
distinctive features of each may be identified for the
present analysis.
 Postcolonial and Decolonial Feminisms
• Postcolonial and decolonial feminisms offer primarily critical
theoretical frameworks, which analyze globalization within
the context of the history of Western colonialism and
imperialism.
• They begin with the claim that Western colonialism and
imperialism have played important roles in shaping the
contemporary world, and highlight their enduring effects
on global relations and local cultural practices.
• Although postcolonial and decolonial feminists write from all
over the world, they foreground non-Eurocentric epistemic
standpoints and criticize North-South power asymmetries
from the diverse perspectives of members of Indigenous
communities and people in the global South (Herr 2013,
Khader 2019, McLaren 2017, Schutte 2002, 2005).
 Postcolonial and Decolonial---(Contd.)
• First, they insist that it is impossible to understand local practices in
developing countries without acknowledging the ways in which these
practices have been shaped by their economic and historical contexts,
particularly their connection to Western colonialism and imperialism.
• Thus, postcolonial and decolonial feminists insist that any feminist
analysis of the harms of globalization must take seriously the history
and ongoing cultural, economic, and political effects of colonialism and
imperialism and analysis of suffering of women in developing countries
in simplistic terms often tends to reproduce a “colonial stance” toward
the global South. For example, as explained earlier, Chandra Mohanty
sees elements of imperialism in Western feminist scholarship on
women in the global South. Similarly, Uma Narayan criticizes feminists
for unwittingly adopting a Eurocentric perspective.
• Highlighting the role that colonialism has played in shaping local
practices enables feminists to avoid adopting a Eurocentric perspective.
Postcolonial and Decolonial Feminists’ Attack
on Neo-colonialism
• Postcolonial and decolonial feminists further argue that
although traditional forms of colonialism have formally ended,
many aspects of globalization are best understood as neo-
colonial practices.
• Multinational corporations and global businesses, largely
centered in Western nations, bring their own colonizing
influence through business models, hegemonic culture,
exploitation of workers, and displacement of traditional trades.
• Old style colonialism often killed or displaced indigenous
peoples; the new style of colonialism impoverishes a culture by
swamping society with Western values, products or ideals
(Sally Scholz, 2010:139).
 Attack on Neoliberalism
• More broadly, postcolonial and decolonial feminists observe that
many of the conditions created by colonialism—economic
inequality and exploitation, racism, cultural marginalization, and
the domination of the global South by the global North—have
been sustained and intensified by neoliberalism.
• Moreover, they argue, neoliberal policies and institutions
systematically favor countries in the global North to the detriment
of southern nations. International trade policies serve Western
interests even while claiming to be politically neutral and fair.
• Global economic institutions also privilege Western culture and
political norms, presenting them as models for the rest of the
world, while ignoring and marginalizing the claims of women’s and
indigenous movements in the global South as well as settler
nations (Weendon 2002).
 Attack on Neoliberalism (Contd.)
• Since appeals to so-called universal concepts,
epistemologies, and values, such as freedom,
rights, and autonomy, can be used to further
imperialist projects, postcolonial and decolonial
feminists seek to develop normative positions that
criticize neoliberal and neocolonial practices while
rejecting problematic ethnocentric ideals that
often masquerade as universal (Alcoff 2017,
Khader, 2019, McLaren 2017, Pohlhaus Jr. 2017,
Weir 2017).
 Ethic of Care Feminists
• This school of feminist theoretical responses to
globalization puts care, both caring labor—the work
of caring for the young, old, sick, and disabled, and
the everyday maintenance of households—and the
moral ideal of care, at the center of its analyses.
• Proponents of this approach begin by observing that
most mainstream analyses of globalization either
ignore or devalue care which is problematic for at
least three reasons:
 Ignoring or Devaluing Care Problematic for
Three Reasons
i. Care work, which is done almost exclusively by
women, has been profoundly influenced by
globalization;
ii. The values and work associated with care are both
undervalued and insufficiently supported, and this
contributes to gender, racial, and economic
inequality, both within countries and between the
global North and the global South; and
iii. Any viable alternative to neoliberal globalization
must prioritize the moral ideal of care. Thus, ethics
of care approaches to globalization have both
theoretical and practical dimensions.
Assumptions of Neoliberalism Chellenged
• In their view, neoliberalism presupposes a problematic
notion of the self, which posits individuals as atomistic,
independent, and self-interested, and an inaccurate social
ontology, which suggests that human relationships are
formed by choice rather than necessity or dependency.
• These assumptions lead neoliberalism to prioritize
economic growth, efficiency, and profit making over
other values, such as equality, human rights, and care.
Ethics of care feminists reject these assumptions.
• In their view, human beings are fundamentally relational
and interdependent; individuals are defined,
indeed constituted, by their caring relationships.
 Relational Values: The Basis of Just Forms of
Globalization
• All persons experience long periods during which their lives
literally depend on the care of others, and everyone needs
some degree of care in order flourish.
• Thus, vulnerability, dependency, and need should be
understood not as deficits or limitations, but rather as essential
human qualities requiring an adequate political response.
• Ethics of care feminists contend that relational values, including
care, should form the basis of more just forms of globalization.
• Because a global care ethics begins with a relational ontology, it
requires global political leaders to develop social and economic
policies that aim to meet human needs and reduce suffering
rather than to expand markets and increase economic
competition (Hankivsky 2006).
 Global Duty to Care
• Held endorses a similar view. According to her, an ethic of care
requires leaders to foster a global economy that is capable of
meeting universal human needs (Held 2004, 2007).
• Similarly, Miller advocates a “global duty to care,” which
requires individuals to take responsibility for their role in
contributing to global oppression, and obligates leaders to
advocate for institutions that embody the moral value of care
(Miller 2006).
• Concretely, feminist theorists who favor an ethics of care
approach highlight the role of care work in the global economy
and put forth recommendations for reevaluating it.
 The Global Distribution of Care Work
• Robinson develops a relational moral ontology that sheds
lights on the features of globalization that are usually
invisible: the global distribution of care work and the
corresponding patterns of gender and racial inequality.
• He highlights on the under-provision of public resources
for care work in both developed and developing
countries; and the ways in which unpaid or low-paid care
work sustains cycles of exploitation and inequality on a
global scale (Robinson 2006a, 2006b).
• Similarly, Held advocates for increased state support of
various forms of care work and for policies designed to
meet people’s needs in caring ways (Held 2004, 2007).
 Transnational Feminism
• In its broadest sense, transnational feminism maintains
that globalization has created the conditions for feminist
solidarity across national borders.
• On the one hand, globalization has enabled transnational
processes that generate injustices for women in multiple
geographical locations, such as the global assembly line.
Yet on the other, the technologies associated with
globalization have created new political spaces that
enable feminist political resistance.
• Thus, transnational feminists incorporate the critical
insights of postcolonial, Third World and ethics of care
feminists into a positive vision of transnational feminist
solidarity.
Transnational Feminism Vs Global Feminism

• However, transnational feminism differs from global

feminism in at least three significant respects:
• First, transnational feminism is sensitive to differences
among women. Global feminists argue that patriarchy is
universal; women across the globe have a common
experience of gender oppression. They promote the
recognition of a “global sisterhood” based on these
shared experiences, which transcends differences in race,
class, sexuality, and national boundaries. This solidarity is
thought to provide a unified front against global
patriarchy.
 Transnational Feminism Vs Global Feminism
(Contd.)

• Transnational feminists also advocate for solidarity across national

boundaries. However, their approach emphasizes the methodological
commitments discussed above, specifically intersectionality, sensitivity
to concrete specificity, and self-reflexivity. Transnational feminists are
careful to point out that although globalizing processes affect everyone,
they affect different women very differently, based on their geographical
and social locations. They are also quick to acknowledge that many
aspects of globalization may benefit some women while unduly
burdening many others.
• Second, transnational feminist solidarity is political in nature. Whereas
global feminists advocate a form of social solidarity defined on the basis
of characteristics shared by all women, such as a common gender identity
or experience of patriarchal oppression, transnational feminist solidarity
is grounded in the political commitments of individuals, such as the
commitment to challenge injustice or oppression.
 Transnational Feminist Solidarity Based on
Shared Political Commitments
• Because transnational feminist solidarity is based on shared political
commitments rather than a common identity or uniform set of
experiences, advantaged individuals, including those who have
benefited from injustice, can join in solidarity with those who have
experienced injustice or oppression directly (Ferguson 2009, Scholz
2008).
• The emphasis on shared political commitments also enables
feminists to resist oppressive conditions that manifest differently in
different geographical locations but are nonetheless prevalent in
many countries, such as racialized violence against women (Khader
2019, 44–48).
• Third, transnational feminists focus on specific globalizing processes,
such as the growth of offshore manufacturing, rather than a
theorized global patriarchy, and often take existing transnational
feminist collectives as a model for their theoretical accounts of
 Concluding Observations
• On the whole, globalization presents a number of challenges
to feminist political philosophers who seek to develop
conceptions of justice and responsibility capable of
responding to the lived realities of both men and women.
• As globalization will most certainly continue, these
challenges are likely to increase in the coming decades. As
outlined above, feminist political philosophers have
already made great strides towards understanding this
complex phenomenon. Yet the challenge of how to make
globalization fairer remains for feminist philosophers, as
well as all others who strive for equality and justice.