How Should Feminist Autonomy Theorists Respond to the Problem of Internalized Oppression
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8050421 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sonya Charles (Institute of Religious Studies, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 409-428 |
| Publication date | 2010-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Theory and Practice (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0037-802X • E-ISSN: 2154-123X |
| Publisher | Philosophy Documentation Center (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.5840/soctheorpract201036322 |
| OpenAlex | W2113511245 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
In her analysis, Stoljar considers five different ways that procedural theorists interpret the critical reflection necessary for autonomy.She argues that none of these versions can adequately account for the feminist intuition that decisions influenced by oppressive 9 I take this general category distinction from the literature review in Mackenzie and
Applied philosophy · Autonomy · Epistemology · Feminist philosophy · Oppression · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Gender Studies · Law · Philosophy
Authenticity and Normative Authority
Ghostwritten Lives
Self-Control without a Self
Education for Civil Disobedience in the Context of Democratic Decline
Challenging gender norms
Autonomy, Liberalism, and Anti-Perfectionism
Internalized Oppression and Its Varied Moral Harms
Personal Autonomy, Social Identity, and Oppressive Social Contexts
Dupes of Patriarchy
Against willing servitude
Adaptive preferences in political philosophy
| Citations per year | 0.79 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2012 - 2026 (15) |
| Highly cited | No |