Women and Violence: A Theory of Judgment

  • María Pía Lara
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter deals with one particular problem about women and violence: rape. My thesis is that our moral notions of violence have changed dramatically in history and that this is apparent if we look back at the ways in which many stories from literature have presented the question of rape. I also argue that feminism has contributed to the moral transformation of the actions of rape, and I point out the ways in which different feminist techniques have allowed the question of violence in rape to be disclosed and understood as a moral harm. In the third part of the article I argue that although feminism has contributed a great deal in the change of our perceptions, the cultural revolution brought by certain feminist groups ended up addressing certain practices that are oppressive to women as acceptable because of so called cultural differences. In order to move out of the dilemma, I propose to use my theory of reflective judgment to provide the grounds for understanding rape as a crime through different and particular practices analyzed through the examples of stories (mainly provided with movies).

Keywords

Rape Historical understanding Feminism Representation Cultural turn Reflective judgments Moral disclosure Moral harm 

References

  1. Altares, G. 2008a. ‘Viaje al tiempo del miedo.’ El País, 19th January: 2–5.Google Scholar
  2. Altares, G. 2008b. ‘Una historia Verdadera.’ El País, 19th January: 6–7.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous. 2005. A Woman in Berlin. Eight Weeks in the Conquered City (New York: Metropolitan Books).Google Scholar
  4. Arendt, H. 1970. On Violence (San Diego, New York and London: Harcourt Brace & Company).Google Scholar
  5. Arendt, H. 1982. Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, Ed. R. Beiner (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  6. Benhabib, S. et al. 1994. Feminist Contentions (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  7. Butler, J. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  8. Butler, J. 1993. Bodies that Matter (New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  9. Butler, J. 1997a. The Psychic Life of Power. Theories in Subjection (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Butler, J. 1997b. Excitable Speech. A Politics of the Performative (New York and London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  11. Butler, J. 2005. Giving an Account of Oneself (New York: Fordham University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Card, C. 2002. The Atrocity Paradigm: A Theory of Evil (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cavarero, A. 1997. Relating Narratives. Storytelling and Selfhood (London and New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  14. Cooke, M. 2006. Re-Presenting the Good Society (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press).Google Scholar
  15. Ferrara, A. 2008. The Force of the Example: Explorations in the Paradigm of Judgment (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
  16. Fraser, N. 2005. ‘Mapping the Feminist Imagination: From Redistribution to Recognition to Representation.’ Constellations 12 (3): 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grotius, H. 2005. The Rights of War and Peace (New York: Liberty Fund).Google Scholar
  18. Honig, B. 1999. ‘My Culture Made Me Do It.’ Is Multiculturalism Bad For Women? Ed. S. Moller Okin (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  19. Kant, I. 1987. Critique of Judgment (Indianapolis and Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company).Google Scholar
  20. Landes, J. 2001. Visualizing the Nation: Gender, Representation, and Revolution in Eighteenth-Century France (Ithaca, NY: Carnell University Press).Google Scholar
  21. Lara, M.P. 1998. Moral Textures. Feminist Narratives in the Public Sphere (Berkeley, and Los Angeles: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  22. Lara, M.P. 2007. Narrating Evil: A Postmetaphysical Theory of Reflective Judgment (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
  23. Lauretis, T.de. 1984. Alice Doesn’t. Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press).Google Scholar
  24. Lauretis, T.de. 2007. Figures of Resistance. Essays in Feminist Theory (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press).Google Scholar
  25. MacKinnon, C. 1993. Only Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  26. Meron, T. 1993. Henry’s Wars and Shakespeare’s Laws. Perspectives on the Law of War in the Later Middle Ages (Oxford and New York: Clarendon Press Oxford).Google Scholar
  27. Meron, T. 1998. Bloody Constraint. War and Chivarly in Shakespeare (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  28. Moller Okin, S. 1999. Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  29. Mukarovsky, J. 1975. Writings on the Semiotics of Art and Aesthetics (Barcelona: Gustavo Gili Editores).Google Scholar
  30. Neier, A. 1998. War Crimes. Brutality, Genocide, Terror, and the Struggle for Justice (New York: Random House).Google Scholar
  31. Nicholson, L. (Ed.) 1989. Feminism and Postmodernism(London and New York: Routledge).Google Scholar
  32. Nussbaum, M.1986. The Fragility of Goodness. Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy (Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, and Sidney: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  33. Ortner, S.B. 1996. Making Gender. The Politics and Erotics of Culture (Boston: Beacon Press).Google Scholar
  34. Seel, M. 2001. Aesthetic of Appearing (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  35. Silverman, K. 1998. The Acoustic Mirror. The Female Voice in Psychoanalysis and Cinema (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press).Google Scholar
  36. Yeatman, A. 1994. Postmodern Revisionings of the Political (New York and London: Routledge).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • María Pía Lara
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Autonoma MetropolitanaMexico CityMexico

Personalised recommendations