Subject of Desire/Subject of Feminism. Some Notes on the Split Subject(S) of #MeToo
Choose format
RIS BIB ENDNOTEPublication date: 11.12.2024
Romanica Cracoviensia, Volume 24 (2024), Volume 24, issue 2, pp. 247-258
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843917RC.24.023.20416Authors
Sujet du désir/ sujet du féminisme. Notes sur la division du sujet de #MeToo
#MeToo hails the comeback of the decried “subject of feminism”: if not women as unified subjects, at least women subjects united across class, race, and even sexual orientation dividing lines, through the common experience of sexual violence at the hands of men. It warns us, then, it seems, against taking too quick a break from feminism. The outcry, and its repeated occasions, sound like a vindication of Catharine Mackinnon’s understanding of sexuality as a universal apparatus of male domination. Yet, a closer look at some of the scenes leading up to the drama that now goes by this name, complicates the matter at stake. Domination and seduction may overlap where sexuality is concerned, causing the subject of desire and the “subject of feminism” to split, but they needn’t coincide. A new theory – and practice – of seduction may be called for in order to bridge the gap between the two “subjects”.
Une première version de ce texte a paru en anglais sous le titre “Subject of Desire/ Subject of Feminism: Some Notes on the Split Subject(s) of #MeToo”, 2021, (in:) The Routledge Handbook of the Politics of the # MeToo Movement, Giti Chandra, Irma Erlingsdóttir (éds), Londres – New York: Routledge, 55–64.
Freud Sigmund, « Le fétichisme » [1927], 1997, (in :) La Vie sexuelle, trad. Denise Berger, Jean Laplanche et al., Paris : PUF.
Freud Sigmund, 1936, « La féminité », (in :) Nouvelles conférences de psychanalyse, trad. Anne Berman, Paris : Idées Gallimard.
Iacub Marcela, 2013, Belle et Bête, Paris : Stock. Kouchner Camille, 2021, La Familia Grande, Paris : Seuil.
MacKinnon Catharine, 1989, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, Cambridge : Harvard University Press.
Mathieu Nicole-Claude, 1991, « Quand céder n’est pas consentir. Des déterminants matériels et psychiques de la conscience dominée des femmes », (in :) L’Anatomie politique. Catégorisations et idéologies du sexe, chapitre V, Paris : Côté-Femmes.
Merlin-Kajman Hélène, 2020, La littérature à l’heure de #MeToo, Paris : Ithaque.
Mulvey Laura, 1990, « Visual pleasures and narrative cinema », (in :) Issues in Feminist Film Criticism, Patricia Erens (éd.), Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 57–68.
Springora Vanessa, 2020, Le Consentement, Paris : Grasset.
Théry Irène, 2002, « Les trois révolutions du consentement: pour une approche socio-anthropologique de la sexualité », (in :) Les Soins obligés ou l’utopie de la triple entente: Actes du XXXIIIe congrès de criminologie, Pierre-Victor Tournier (éd.), Paris : Dalloz, 29–55.
Wittig Monique, 1992, The Straight Mind and Other Essays, Boston : Beacon Press.
Worms Frédéric, 2017, « Harcèlement sexuel : après la sidération, le temps du trouble, source de clarté », Libération, 23 novembre.
Information: Romanica Cracoviensia, Volume 24 (2024), Volume 24, issue 2, pp. 247-258
Article type: Original scientific article
Titles:
Laboratoire d'études de genre et de sexualité (LEGS),
Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris
France
Published at: 11.12.2024
Article status: Open
Licence: CC BY 4.0
Percentage share of authors:
Information about author:
Article corrections:
-Publication languages:
French, EnglishView count: 659
Number of downloads: 595