Feminist and Transgender Tensions: An Inquiry into History, Methodological Paradigms, and Embodiment

  • Lanei M. Rodemeyer
Part of the Breaking Feminist Waves book series (BFW)


When we carry out analyses of gender and embodiment, the paradigms we employ can determine our outcomes—often in exclusive ways. While many feminists have demonstrated that philosophical paradigms can contain masculine or normative bias, Vivane Namaste has criticized gender theorists in a similar way: By abstracting the question of “gender” from economic and social factors, theorists have neglected essential aspects of transgender experience. Building upon Namaste’s insight, I wish to examine four paradigms that have been employed to analyze gender and embodiment: sex/gender, queer, phenomenology, and transfeminism. While doing so, I will indicate how the limitations of certain methods affect their analyses, especially in light of transgender experience, and how engaging two or more approaches together could offset the shortcomings of each taken alone.


  1. Ahmed, Sara. 2016. An Affinity of Hammers. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 22–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bettcher, Talia Mae. 2016. Intersexuality, Transgender, and Transsexuality. In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, 407–427. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bindel, Julie. 2004. Gender Benders, Beware. The Guardian, January 30. Accessed 6 Mar 2017.
  4. Cárdenas, Micha. 2016. Pregnancy: Reproductive Futures in Trans of Color Feminism. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 48–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Currah, Paisley. 2016. General Editor’s Introduction. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Garber, Marjorie. 1992. Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing & Cultural Anxiety. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Hausman, Bernice L. 1995. Changing Sex: Transsexualism, Technology, and the Idea of Gender. Durham/London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Jeffreys, Sheila. 2014. Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Johnston, Tim R. 2014. Review of Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism, by Sheila Jeffreys. Hypatia Reviews Online. Accessed 6 Mar 2017.
  10. Namaste, Viviane. 2000. Invisible Lives: The Erasure of Transsexual and Transgendered People. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 2009. Undoing Theory: The ‘Transgender Question’ and the Epistemic Violence of Anglo-American Feminist Theory. Hypatia 24 (3): 11–32. “Transgender Studies and Feminism: Theory, Politics, and Gendered Realities.”Google Scholar
  12. Prosser, Jay. 1998. Second Skins: The Body Narratives of Transsexuality. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2004. Light in the Dark Room: Photography and Loss. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.Google Scholar
  14. Raymond, Janice G. 1979. The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Rodemeyer, Lanei. 2014. Feminism, Phenomenology, and Hormones. In Feminist Phenomenology and Medicine, ed. Kristin Zeiler and Lisa Käll. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2017. Husserl and Queer Theory. Continental Philosophy Review 50 (3): 311–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ———. 2018. Lou Sullivan Diaries (1970–1980) and Theories of Sexual Embodiment: Making Sense of Sensing. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rubin, Henry S. 1998. Phenomenology as Method in Trans Studies. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 4 (2): 263–281.Google Scholar
  19. Salamon, Gayle. 2010. Assuming A Body: Transgender and Rhetorics of Materiality. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. ———. 2014. Phenomenology. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 1 (1–2): 153–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Simpkins, Reese. 2016. Trans*feminist Intersections. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 228–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stone, Sandy. 2006. The Empire Strikes Back: A Posttranssexual Manifesto. In The Transgender Studies Reader, ed. Susan Stryker and Stephen Whittle, 221–235. New York/London: Routledge. Originally Published in Body Guards: The Cultural Politics of Gender Ambiguity, ed. Julia Epstien and Kristina Straub. New York: Routledge, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. Stryker, Susan. 2006. My Words to Victor Frankenstein Above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage. In The Transgender Studies Reader, ed. Susan Stryker and Stephen Whittle, 244–56. New York and London: Routledge. Originally Published in GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1(3). Gordon & Breach Science Publishers: 1994.Google Scholar
  24. Stryker, Susan, and Talia M. Bettcher. 2016. Introduction: Trans/Feminisms. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tuvel, Rebecca. 2017. In Defense of Transracialism. Hypatia 32 (2): 263–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Williams, Cristan. 2016. Radical Inclusion: Recounting the Trans Inclusive History of Radical Feminism. TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 3 (1–2): 254–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lanei M. Rodemeyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Duquesne UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations