Sammy Karon
22 March 2015
In Chapter
1 of Dispossesion, Butler and
Athanasiou discuss the role of property in dispossession. Butler poses the
question, “Was there a property that was first owned and then was stolen? ...
What do we make of the idea that we have property in our own persons?” (7).
This is a complicated question, which only becomes further complicated after
Butler proposes that “the social form of property and the social form of
individuality” depend on context (8). In other words, the meaning of internal
human value depends on the external conditions it exists in. In this way,
Butler advocates for the possibility that human rights are on a spectrum of
experiences, not a single human experience. From my own experiences, I
understand this to be true. Not all humans rejoice or suffer in the same way,
even under the same circumstances. Humanity is complex, diverse and surprising
in that way. Yet, in a philosophical sense, I do believe in universal human
values. This points to the struggle Athanasiou points out in Butler’s argument,
whether or not there is a causal link between “being” and “becoming” dispossessed
(5). Reflecting back on Nancy Tuana’s “Epistemologies of Ignorance,” it seems
that at least in the case of women, ignorance can be proven to cause
dispossession.
Like Butler, Tuana argues that
ignorance is situated. Tuana explains ignorance as the lack of knowledge in
certain groups that prevents them from possessing power. While sometimes this
lack of knowledge just exists passively, like when We Do Not Even Know That We
Do Not Know, other times it is actively created, like when They Do Not Want Us
To Know (6, 9). This seems to represent the dynamic that Athanasiou brings up
in Dispossessed. In some
circumstances, women do not have knowledge about their bodies, but because they
do not there is knowledge out there that they are lacking, they would not
necessarily identify as dispossessed. Thus, they are “being” dispossessed, but
they do not necessarily see that as part of their identity. However, in other
circumstances, when men are actively preventing women from getting answers to
their questions, women “become” dispossessed. Once someone knows they do not
have the power to find out the truth, they lose part of their autonomous
identity. In this way, Butler and Athanasiou’s discussion on dispossession
connects to Tuana’s discussion of ignorance.
I really enjoy your example of female's ignorance of their own bodies (which is exceedingly dependent on the societal norms -- typically of patriarchal nature where the female body is a secondary to that of the male body). I remember that you notated in class that in anatomy textbooks (or any course that analyses the human body) tends to portray the male physique. In that sense, female bodies are being dispossessed from knowledge (consequently, becoming forms of ignorance). I completely agree with your parallel to "being" dispossessed (education or society allows for females to "be" dispossessed from their bodies). As males serve as the "norm" or the real human, females are dispossessed constantly. They are always compared to the male.
ReplyDeleteI really agree with your analysis of Dispossession and how it relates to Tuana's piece. I had a difficult time interpreting what the difference was exactly between "being" dispossessed and "becoming" dispossessed, but your post cleared that up for me. Your post does a good job of capturing the two distinct ways women are dispossessed when it comes to knowledge about their own bodies, as I think that oppression does take on multiple manifestations.
ReplyDelete