Among the 40 guests sat coaches, scientists, and former athletes who had been directly or indirectly involved in winning more endurance sport Olympic gold medals and world championships than we could count. One guest, Dag Kaas, had coached 12 individual world champions in four different sports.
Anne Cameron, a very gifted white Canadian author, writes several first person accounts of the lives of Native Canadian women.
At the International Feminist Book Fair in Montreal, a group of Native Canadian writers ask Cameron to, in their words, "move over" on the grounds that her writings are disempowering for Native authors. After the elections in Panama are overturned by Manuel Noriega, U.
President George Bush declares in a public address that Noriega's actions constitute an "outrageous fraud" and that "the voice of the Panamanian people have spoken.
At a recent symposium at my university, a prestigious theorist was invited to give a lecture on the political problems of post-modernism. Those of us in the audience, including many white women and people of oppressed nationalities and races, wait in eager anticipation for what he has to contribute to this important discussion.
To our disappointment, he introduces his lecture by explaining that he can not cover the assigned topic, because as a white male he does not feel that he can speak for the feminist and post-colonial perspectives which have launched the critical interrogation of postmodernism's politics.
He lectures instead on architecture. These examples demonstrate the range of current practices of speaking for others in our society. While the prerogative of speaking for others remains unquestioned in the citadels of colonial administration, among activists and in the academy it elicits a growing unease and, in some communities of discourse, it is being rejected.
There is a strong, albeit contested, current within feminism which holds that speaking for otherseven for other womenis arrogant, vain, unethical, and politically illegitimate.
Feminist scholarship has a liberatory agenda which almost requires that women scholars speak on behalf of other women, and yet the dangers of speaking across differences of race, culture, sexuality, and power are becoming increasingly clear to all.
In feminist magazines such as Sojourner, it is common to find articles and letters in which the author states that she can only speak for herself. In her important paper, "Dyke Methods," Joyce Trebilcot offers a philosophical articulation of this view.
She renounces for herself the practice of speaking for others within a lesbian feminist community, arguing that she "will not try to get other wimmin to accept my beliefs in place of their own" on the grounds that to do so would be to practice a kind of discursive coercion and even a violence.
In anthropology there is similar discussion about whether it is possible to speak for others either adequately or justifiably. The recognition that there is a problem in speaking for others has followed from the widespread acceptance of two claims. First, there has been a growing awareness that where one speaks from affects both the meaning and truth of what one says, and thus that one cannot assume an ability to transcend her location.
In other words, a speaker's location which I take here to refer to her social location or social identity has an epistemically significant impact on that speaker's claims, and can serve either to authorize or dis-authorize one's speech.
The creation of Women's Studies and African American Studies departments were founded on this very belief: The unspoken premise here is simply that a speaker's location is epistemically salient. I shall explore this issue further in the next section. The second claim holds that not only is location epistemically salient, but certain privileged locations are discursively dangerous.
This was part of the argument made against Anne Cameron's speaking for Native women:Two kinds of academic freedom There are two distinctly different kinds of academic freedom, which should have distinct names: Individual academic freedom protects an individual professor.; Institutional academic freedom protects universities from interference by government, a right that applies to the community of scholars, not to individual faculty.
There have been many studies conducted that focus on the individual differences in the stress response. According to Friedman & Rosenman, every individual belongs to either of the two types of personalty: Type A or Type B.
Social and Political Recognition. Acts of recognition infuse many aspects of our lives such as receiving a round of applause from a rapt audience, being spotted in a crowded street by a long-forgotten friend, having an application for a job rejected because of your criminal record, enjoying some words of praise by a respected philosophy professor, getting pulled over by the police because you.
The information you find in this article will help to write a good definition essay, choose a relevant topic, find proper words, and prove that your concept has a right to exist.
Our experts explain the meaning of this paper type and provide the most relevant tips. Improve your writing today. [Related to: Attitude vs.
Altitude] I. I write a lot about the importance of IQ research, and I try to debunk pseudoscientific claims that IQ “isn’t real” or “doesn’t matter” or “just shows how well you do on a test”. Published: Mon, 5 Dec A person differing from others is understandable, but how and why a person differs is less clear and is therefore a subject of the study of individual differences (Revelle, ).