Critical Analysis #1

What is a ‘woman’? How do you define what a ‘woman’ is? How about ‘women’?  What is ‘Westernization? Why is being considered ‘Westernized’ a frequent charge held against scholars who consider themselves Third World Feminists? These seemed to be some of the biggest questions that were asked and answered in the articles assigned. Mohanty, Naryan, Grewal, amd Kaplan analyze these topics from different angles to answer these particular questions.

In Mohanty’s ‘Under Western Eyes’, Mohanty directs her critiques at the homogenous perspectives and assumptions written in the Zed Press ‘Women in the Third World’ series. Mohanty points out that many western feminist writers have constructed a secular, ahistorical image of the poor, victimized ‘Third World Woman’. She also states that western feminists overlook the diversity in the ‘Third World’ by not considering the class, ethnic, and racial backgrounds in which they belong to thereby making their generalized writings considered ‘Westernized’. While reading this, I could not help but to be curious as to why these differences are not acknowledged in western feminism. Are the reasons good or bad? Would it cause misunderstanding of the role of a ‘woman’?  I personally believe it would be really hard to define this question if these generalizations are not made. There would be so much to try to understand and I don’t believe it would give us a clear definition of what exactly is a ‘woman’ or her role in society.

 In the article, ‘Contesting Cultures’ Uma Narayan presents a more engaging theory which she relates with usage of her own personal experiences. She begins the article on a personal note explaining how difficult it is to define herself as a Third World Feminist due to the context of what many others believe makes a Third World Feminist. Also at the beginning, and what I found really interesting in this article, is how she explains how it was her childhood experiences of listening in to her mother and the other Indian women that influenced her into becoming a feminist. Her opposition formed due to her understanding of right and wrong. Narayan’s mother however blamed this rebellion on ‘Westernized’ influences. Though it is not ‘Westernized’ influences that need to be blamed. It needs to be understood that women are evolving, and this is what her mother needed to understand.

In Grewal and Kaplan’s “Scattered Hegemonies”, they call for an acknowledgement of ‘transnational culture flows’ because without this the feminist movements around the world will fail to understand the conditions that structure women’s lives in different locations, whether that be the first or the third world. They consider how to go about creating these links without creating any type of cultural or even economic hegemony. Is this possible? I do not know. It appears to be but there are always other factors to consider. 

All three of these articles have showed me from different views of how Third World Feminism is perceived or should be perceived to the rest of the world. So now I wonder, from which angle do you approach something like this?