Skip to main content
  • 86 Accesses

Abstract

Freedom of ideas is a central tenet of liberal ideology not only in the sense that government ought not regulate the beliefs or thoughts within a democratic polity, but also in the metaphysical sense that ideas are unfettered. Both the anticensorship strand and the autonomy of ideas strand of intellectual freedom have shaped understandings of feminist scholarship. Whether traced to religious precepts, German idealism, nineteenth-century Romanticism, Freudian stream of consciousness, or scientific claims about the logic of discovery, claims concerning the autonomy of ideas permeate liberal and feminist discourse. Arthur O. Lovejoy’s (1940) conceptualization of the history of ideas fits squarely within this tradition; he insists that ideas never move in a predetermined fashion or direction. Rejecting Hegelian claims about an inherent dialectical movement of ideas, Lovejoy argued that ideas move in a more oscillating manner.2

What is insurrectionary consciousness in one instance becomes tragic vision in another.

—Edward Said 1983

There is a sense of lack of alternative to the liberal ideology.

—Shirin M. Rai 2002

I appreciate the openness of your response to my suggestion for co-operation between SIGNS and A.I.D. Let me recapitulate it.

—Catharine Stimpson, August 29, 19781

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. To give a sense of just how successful the journal was in its early publication, just after its first year of publication in autumn 1976 Signs already had a circulation of 8,220, a circulation rate proving to be fairly consistent throughout its first decade of publication. By the time the editorship shifted to Gelpi at Stanford, the journal’s circulation remained steady at slightly over 6,500. This statistic comes from Joan N. Burstyn’s conference paper “‘Journal of One’s Own’—Signs in the Evolution of Women’s Studies, 1975–1980,” which was prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Organization of American Historians, April 1–4, 1981. A copy of the transcript of Burstyn’s conference paper can be found in the Signs archives, Special Collections and University Archives, Rutgers University, Alexander Library. Box 1, Folder: The Transition: Notes.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Works published in the 1970s and early 1980s on how the administration of the socialist model of development impacted women’s status and condition in Western Europe include Marilyn J. Boxer and Jean H. Quataert’s (1978) Socialist Women: European Socialist Feminism in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries;

    Google Scholar 

  3. Annette Kuhn and AnnMarie Wolpe’s (1978) Feminism and Materialism: Women and Modes of Production;

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jane Slaughter and Robert Kern’s (1981) European Women on the Left: Socialism, Feminism, and the Problems Faced by Political Women, 1880 to the Present;

    Google Scholar 

  5. Charles Sowerine’s (1982) Sisters or Citizens?: Women and Socialism in France since 1876.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Works published in the 1970s and early 1980s on how the administration of the socialist model of development impacted women’s status and condition in the People’s Republic of China include Marilyn Blatt Young’s (1973) Women in China: Studies in Social Change and Feminism;

    Google Scholar 

  7. Delia Davin’s (1976) Woman-Work: Women and the Party in Revolutionary China;

    Google Scholar 

  8. Paul Chao’s (1977) Women under Communism;

    Google Scholar 

  9. Elisabeth Joan Croll’s (1978) Feminism and Socialism in China;

    Google Scholar 

  10. Barbara Wolfe Jancar’s (1978) Women under Communism;

    Google Scholar 

  11. Judith Stacy’s (1983) Patriarchy and Socialist Revolution in China.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Alice Hageman’s (1979) “Emerging from Underdevelopment: Women and Work in Cuba”

    Google Scholar 

  13. Margaret Randall’s (1981) Women in Cuba: Twenty Years Later.

    Google Scholar 

  14. For more on single-systems theory see Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James 1975. For more on dual-systems theory see Lydia Sargent 1981; and Heidi Hartmann 1997. For more on unified-systems theory see Iris Marion Young 1981 and Michèle Barrett 1985. For an excellent summary of the history of socialist feminist systems theory in feminist scholarship, see Kathi Weeks 1998, 73–86. For more on object relations theory see Nancy Chodorow 1978. For more on socialist feminist predications of standpoint theory see Nancy Hartsock 1983. More general works on socialism as a theory regarding women’s oppression include Linda Jenness’s (1972) Feminism and Socialism;

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sheila Rowbotham’s (1973) Women’s Liberation and Revolution: A Bibliography;

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rowbotham’s (1974) Women, Resistance and Revolution: A History of Women and Revolution in the Modern World; Charnie Guettel’s (1974) Marxism and Feminism; the New American Movement’s (1972) Working Papers on Socialist Feminism; Roberta Hamilton’s (1978) The Liberation of Women: A Study of Patriarchy and Capitalism; Batya Weinbaum’s (1978) The Curious Courtship of Women’s Liberation and Socialism; the Fourth International’s (1979) Women’s Liberation and Socialist Revolution; Zillah Eisenstein’s (1979) Capitalist Patriarchy and the Case for Socialist Feminism; Sally M. Miller’s (1981) Flawed Liberation: Socialism and Feminism; Joelle Rutherford Juillard’s (1981) Implications of the Relationship between Sexual Oppression and Class Exploitation for Feminist Politics; and Lydia Sargent’s (1981) Women and Revolution: A Discussion of the Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism. For more general discussions of intersections between feminist activism and class politics, see Mary-Alice Water’s (1972) Feminism and the Marxist Movement and Michèle Barrett, Beatrix Campbell, Anne Phillips, Angela Weir, and Elizabeth Wilson (1986) “Feminism and Class Politics: A Round-Table Discussion.”

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2011 Kelly Coogan-Gehr

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Coogan-Gehr, K. (2011). Signs Encounters the Global South . In: The Geopolitics of the Cold War and Narratives of Inclusion. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230370555_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics