What do you think?
Rate this book
Separate and Dominate: Feminism and Racism after the War on Terror
An examination of how mainstream feminism has been mobilized in support of racist measures
Feminist Christine Delphy co-founded the journal Nouvelles questions féministes with Simone de Beauvoir in the 1970s and became one of the most influential figures in French feminism. Today, Delphy remains a prominent and controversial feminist thinker, a rare public voice denouncing the racist motivations of the government’s 2011 ban of the Muslim veil. Castigating humanitarian liberals for demanding the cultural assimilation of the women they are purporting to “save,” Delphy shows how criminalizing Islam in the name of feminism is fundamentally paradoxical.
Separate and Dominate is Delphy’s manifesto, lambasting liberal hypocrisy and calling for a fluid understanding of political identity that does not place different political struggles in a false opposition. She dismantles the absurd claim that Afghanistan was invaded to save women, and that homosexuals and immigrants alike should reserve their self-expression for private settings. She calls for a true universalism that sacrifices no one at the expense of others. In the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, her arguments appear more prescient and pressing than ever.
Feminist Christine Delphy co-founded the journal Nouvelles questions féministes with Simone de Beauvoir in the 1970s and became one of the most influential figures in French feminism. Today, Delphy remains a prominent and controversial feminist thinker, a rare public voice denouncing the racist motivations of the government’s 2011 ban of the Muslim veil. Castigating humanitarian liberals for demanding the cultural assimilation of the women they are purporting to “save,” Delphy shows how criminalizing Islam in the name of feminism is fundamentally paradoxical.
Separate and Dominate is Delphy’s manifesto, lambasting liberal hypocrisy and calling for a fluid understanding of political identity that does not place different political struggles in a false opposition. She dismantles the absurd claim that Afghanistan was invaded to save women, and that homosexuals and immigrants alike should reserve their self-expression for private settings. She calls for a true universalism that sacrifices no one at the expense of others. In the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, her arguments appear more prescient and pressing than ever.
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
About the author
Christine Delphy
22 books56 followersChristine Delphy is a French sociologist, feminist, writer and theorist. She was a co-founder of the review Nouvelles questions féministes (New Feminist Issues) with Simone de Beauvoir in 1977.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
March 31, 2023
Excellent!!! Read basically all of this on the subway, Delphy absolutely devoured with this. Articulating French women’s situation and realities of Islamophobia and state terror and feminist approaches to philosophy and politics, this essay collection is powerful and pointed
September 15, 2016
Τον τελευταίο καιρό με αφορμή την απαγόρευση του ισλαμικού μαγιό σε κάποιες περιοχές της Γαλλίας έχει φουντώσει η συζήτηση για το αν είναι σωστή η απαγόρευση της ισλαμικής ενδυμασίας. Η θέση η δική μου είναι ότι οποιαδήποτε απαγόρευση ενδυμασίας είναι απαράδεκτη, μέσα στη συζήτηση όπως διαπίστωσα με απορία και με οργή πως υπέρ τέτοιων φασιστικών απαγορεύσεων τάσσονται πολλές φεμινίστριες με την αιτιολογία ότι η ισλαμική ενδυμασία των γυναικών είναι σεξιστικό σύμβολο που επιβάλλεται με τη βία, οπότε η απαγόρευση της θα ήταν ένα μέτρο που θα απελευθέρωνε αυτές τις γυναίκες από ένα μέρος της καταπίεσης.
Ερευνώντας αυτό το παράδοξο κατέληξα σε αυτό το βιβλίο που μου πρόσφερε περισσότερη ανάλυση, καθώς ομολογώ ότι σε αυτά τα ζητήματα δεν είμαι και ιδιαίτερα καταρτισμένος. Μέσα από τις σελίδες του αναδεικνύεται ο ρατσιστικός χαρακτήρας πίσω από τη σκέψη τέτοιων απαγορεύσεων και προσφέρεται μία εξήγηση για το πως πολλές φεμινίστριες έπεσαν στην παγίδα να τις υποστηρίζουν. Αυτό που μου άρεσε ιδιαίτερα είναι που παράλληλα επιχειρεί να διαλύσει την πλάνη που θέλει τη δυτική κοινωνία να έχει λύσει όλα τα προβλήματα των δικαιωμάτων των γυναικών, σε αντίθεση με τις κοινωνίες στις οποίες πρέπει να επέμβουμε για την απελευθέρωση τους.
Ερευνώντας αυτό το παράδοξο κατέληξα σε αυτό το βιβλίο που μου πρόσφερε περισσότερη ανάλυση, καθώς ομολογώ ότι σε αυτά τα ζητήματα δεν είμαι και ιδιαίτερα καταρτισμένος. Μέσα από τις σελίδες του αναδεικνύεται ο ρατσιστικός χαρακτήρας πίσω από τη σκέψη τέτοιων απαγορεύσεων και προσφέρεται μία εξήγηση για το πως πολλές φεμινίστριες έπεσαν στην παγίδα να τις υποστηρίζουν. Αυτό που μου άρεσε ιδιαίτερα είναι που παράλληλα επιχειρεί να διαλύσει την πλάνη που θέλει τη δυτική κοινωνία να έχει λύσει όλα τα προβλήματα των δικαιωμάτων των γυναικών, σε αντίθεση με τις κοινωνίες στις οποίες πρέπει να επέμβουμε για την απελευθέρωση τους.
May 28, 2015
Longer review upcoming.
The book deals with the oppression of all people commonly referred to as 'Others,' ie women, queer people, Guantanamo inmates, civilians bombed in Afghanistan by the forces of civilization, and 'Arab' women excluded from school by the same forces in France. Although there are differences of oppression in each group, they share traits through theoretical 'Other' lens (living under the thumb of the 'Ones'). Different societies use different mechanisms to frame some as 'Ones' and some as 'Others,' ultimately leading to a denial of equality, and abnormal or sub-human treatment. This instills negative beliefs about themselves, and deprives them of self-confidence, self-worth, and dignity. They doubt themselves. And to make matters worse, the political scene is solidly occupied by White men who give no sign of wanting to give up their positions. Et cetera.
Christine Delphy is a French writer, sociologist and theorist who co-founded Nouvelles Questions Féministes with Simone de Beauvoir.
The book deals with the oppression of all people commonly referred to as 'Others,' ie women, queer people, Guantanamo inmates, civilians bombed in Afghanistan by the forces of civilization, and 'Arab' women excluded from school by the same forces in France. Although there are differences of oppression in each group, they share traits through theoretical 'Other' lens (living under the thumb of the 'Ones'). Different societies use different mechanisms to frame some as 'Ones' and some as 'Others,' ultimately leading to a denial of equality, and abnormal or sub-human treatment. This instills negative beliefs about themselves, and deprives them of self-confidence, self-worth, and dignity. They doubt themselves. And to make matters worse, the political scene is solidly occupied by White men who give no sign of wanting to give up their positions. Et cetera.
Christine Delphy is a French writer, sociologist and theorist who co-founded Nouvelles Questions Féministes with Simone de Beauvoir.
January 2, 2016
Excellent and lucid arguments that shatter the false axioms so loved by many in France (and the West) concerning the veil and the "Islamic threat". The last chapter might be specially enlightening for those feminists struggling with the constructed and ultra-simplified dichotomy that is used in the ban-the-veil narratives.
The book is made of several articles previously published in French with an introduction for this English edition. The translator has added helpful notes for those not familiar with all the public discourse in France. Finally, although the focus is on gender it deals superbly with the concept of "the other" and otherness in a post-colonial setting.
The book is made of several articles previously published in French with an introduction for this English edition. The translator has added helpful notes for those not familiar with all the public discourse in France. Finally, although the focus is on gender it deals superbly with the concept of "the other" and otherness in a post-colonial setting.
June 5, 2021
Laïcité is such BS. Wow. I’ve known for a while but I didn’t know the intricacies of it all, namely the criminalisation of one religion and the tiresome call for the “liberation” of “third world women” to justify a insidious attack and Othering of Arab and Muslim populations. This all based on many ideas that produce a dichotomy between “us” and “them”: one being that in the West women are “free” and that sexism doesn’t exist—which is laughable.
October 9, 2017
It's good that french whites are speaking out against racism and it's something that they should definitely be doing but there's no real insights in this collection. Pretty 101 writing on racism is bad, formal equality is bad etc.
April 30, 2018
Brilliant book, slightly disjointed but very good explanation of impacts of structural Oppression, the intersections, state Oppression through policy and state cooption of liberation. It's a shame that the author implicitly does not extend this to include Disability
December 25, 2016
This is a very small book, and a deeply timely book at that. Delphy is a second wave feminist of the de Beauvoir mould, and takes intersectionality rather seriously. I first came across the concept of Othering when I read "The Second Sex". The concept is not dead, and is just as important as it was then.
An Other can only exist in opposition to an Individual. The birthplace of liberal thought, the individual is a fully actualised self, capable of expression, rationality and politeness. The Other, in contrast, is an ever present threat. De Beauvoir characterised women as the Great Other. But since her day, we can add homosexuals, racialised people and any minority.
The reason the Individual (read: white, heterosexual male) is so threatened by the Other, is because Individuals have held a monopoly on resources. Look at employment figures, look at life outcomes and look at who gets bombed in the name of liberation, and it is not the White, heterosexual male (though, White supremacist feminism may successfully replace them with White, heterosexual females).
Delphy skewers all the issues of racism and sexism in France using the veil and the war on terror as her lens through which to analyse. She points out that only Muslim women are killed in the name of "liberation". She points out that men of colour are deemed to be the only patriarchs (despite having campaigned for an end to domestic violence in the West), who are beyond repair. Women of colour are therefore doubly Othered. They are too "irrational" to leave their oppressors, how dare they love their brothers and fathers? Delphy points out that violence is now an Islamic monopoly. FGM (prevalent in Christian African nations, but absent in most Muslim nations), wife burning (a big problem in Hindu communities in India) are seen as exclusively Muslim issues.
Delphy points out that all oppressions are specific. Thus, white working class men (who are not bombed, but do the bombing) feel aggrieved that people of colour express anger. Indeed, why don't they just make polite protests through liberal democracy? Could it be because they have tried and failed in that approach? She is quick to note the tensions within sexism, racism and class. But, she is also keenly aware that "race" was constructed by white Europeans so as to create a norm. People of colour must assimilate, or face demonisation and condemnation. That is followed by wars of "liberation".
Finally, she looks at the problems of the veil. Characterising the problem as men who either want women covered head to toe, or stripped naked. Either way, men do not want women to make their own norms. This is because they benefit from liberal patriarchy and do not wish to actualise themselves as beneficiaries of the system.
With a focus on France, this book is important reading for all peoples in the West. It is a stunning critique of global patriarchy, and the nature of continued neo-colonial expansion now blessed by Europeans as wars waged in the liberation of those too stupid to recognise their own good. Read this book, find your rage and remember: resistance to this constant humiliation and the paranoia that locals in the west display (are people of colour integrating enough? Can they EVER integrate "enough"?) is THE only option since equality de jure has never translated to equality de facto.
An Other can only exist in opposition to an Individual. The birthplace of liberal thought, the individual is a fully actualised self, capable of expression, rationality and politeness. The Other, in contrast, is an ever present threat. De Beauvoir characterised women as the Great Other. But since her day, we can add homosexuals, racialised people and any minority.
The reason the Individual (read: white, heterosexual male) is so threatened by the Other, is because Individuals have held a monopoly on resources. Look at employment figures, look at life outcomes and look at who gets bombed in the name of liberation, and it is not the White, heterosexual male (though, White supremacist feminism may successfully replace them with White, heterosexual females).
Delphy skewers all the issues of racism and sexism in France using the veil and the war on terror as her lens through which to analyse. She points out that only Muslim women are killed in the name of "liberation". She points out that men of colour are deemed to be the only patriarchs (despite having campaigned for an end to domestic violence in the West), who are beyond repair. Women of colour are therefore doubly Othered. They are too "irrational" to leave their oppressors, how dare they love their brothers and fathers? Delphy points out that violence is now an Islamic monopoly. FGM (prevalent in Christian African nations, but absent in most Muslim nations), wife burning (a big problem in Hindu communities in India) are seen as exclusively Muslim issues.
Delphy points out that all oppressions are specific. Thus, white working class men (who are not bombed, but do the bombing) feel aggrieved that people of colour express anger. Indeed, why don't they just make polite protests through liberal democracy? Could it be because they have tried and failed in that approach? She is quick to note the tensions within sexism, racism and class. But, she is also keenly aware that "race" was constructed by white Europeans so as to create a norm. People of colour must assimilate, or face demonisation and condemnation. That is followed by wars of "liberation".
Finally, she looks at the problems of the veil. Characterising the problem as men who either want women covered head to toe, or stripped naked. Either way, men do not want women to make their own norms. This is because they benefit from liberal patriarchy and do not wish to actualise themselves as beneficiaries of the system.
With a focus on France, this book is important reading for all peoples in the West. It is a stunning critique of global patriarchy, and the nature of continued neo-colonial expansion now blessed by Europeans as wars waged in the liberation of those too stupid to recognise their own good. Read this book, find your rage and remember: resistance to this constant humiliation and the paranoia that locals in the west display (are people of colour integrating enough? Can they EVER integrate "enough"?) is THE only option since equality de jure has never translated to equality de facto.
April 21, 2020
An absolute must read. Delphy is cut throat, presenting necessary critical analysis of racist, xenophobic rhetoric wrongfully disguised as feminism.
May 20, 2015
Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley.
I first read The Second Sex when I was in graduate school, and one thing that puzzled me slightly about the book was the definition of other. I understand that the other was, for the most part in the work, a woman, but outside of that I didn’t know. Defining the other as simply a woman didn’t quite fit.
This is corrected or made clearer by Delphy’s work.
In part a work of feminism, in part a look at race and media, Delphy’s book will make you think. The primary focus is the place of Muslim immigrants, mostly from Africa in France. Delphy’s introduction was written after the Charlie Hebdo attacks and is one point where I disagree with her – it seems, if the covers are any indication, that Charlie Hebdo was out to get everyone (did you see the Christ, God, and Holy Ghost cover).
That aside, what is particularly interesting is when Delphy writes about the veil law. She ties it into more of an attack on the other than on women in general. Some of the best written parts are where she demolishes the arguments of those who support the banning of the veil law. (And wasn’t there a fuss about banning all religious grab in French public schools?)
But her comments about the other in French society – be it queer, female, or of dark skin – are interesting and give a different perspective to how the news reports what happens in France.
I first read The Second Sex when I was in graduate school, and one thing that puzzled me slightly about the book was the definition of other. I understand that the other was, for the most part in the work, a woman, but outside of that I didn’t know. Defining the other as simply a woman didn’t quite fit.
This is corrected or made clearer by Delphy’s work.
In part a work of feminism, in part a look at race and media, Delphy’s book will make you think. The primary focus is the place of Muslim immigrants, mostly from Africa in France. Delphy’s introduction was written after the Charlie Hebdo attacks and is one point where I disagree with her – it seems, if the covers are any indication, that Charlie Hebdo was out to get everyone (did you see the Christ, God, and Holy Ghost cover).
That aside, what is particularly interesting is when Delphy writes about the veil law. She ties it into more of an attack on the other than on women in general. Some of the best written parts are where she demolishes the arguments of those who support the banning of the veil law. (And wasn’t there a fuss about banning all religious grab in French public schools?)
But her comments about the other in French society – be it queer, female, or of dark skin – are interesting and give a different perspective to how the news reports what happens in France.
May 24, 2017
Totalement indispensable, à étudier dans les classes de Terminale.
March 29, 2020
La Delphy d'aujourd'hui devrait lire ce livre
May 7, 2021
The book talks about the mechanisms behind oppression whether by race, gender, class, or sexuality. It dives into how 'othering' works and how the hierarchies are created, sustained, and challenged.
The main focus of the book however is Islamophobia as a widespread form of social racism presented in both Europe and the US today. The context in which Christine Delphy operates is French and the author dissects the colonial past as well as instrumentalization of key values of the French Republic (i.e. laïcité - secularism) and the feminist movement against Muslims. She then talks at length about reconciliation that is required between anti-sexist and anti-racist movements in order to achieve equality and parity and to live up to the values that France claims to keep at its core.
I enjoyed the book, however, for those who are familiar with the Anglo-Saxon discourse about race, class, and gender this push for intersectionality might look too familiar and thus somewhat too trivial. Yet I'd like to remind you that France has a very different track record in terms of race discourse, hence this delay. Besides Islamophobia is often dismissed as rather an invention than a real problem and a type of social racism.
The other point I wanted to mention is that even though the title of the book suggests a lot of information on coopting feminism to support racism and then on reconciling feminism with anti-racism movement, the book does not give this discussion a lot of space. The context that provides an intellectual framework for understanding the general mechanics of the oppressive systems and Islamophobia in France, in particular, is so long that everything else feels too short and a bit hasty.
Otherwise, I highly recommend this book especially since there's very little discourse on the instrumentalization of feminism to favor racism.
The main focus of the book however is Islamophobia as a widespread form of social racism presented in both Europe and the US today. The context in which Christine Delphy operates is French and the author dissects the colonial past as well as instrumentalization of key values of the French Republic (i.e. laïcité - secularism) and the feminist movement against Muslims. She then talks at length about reconciliation that is required between anti-sexist and anti-racist movements in order to achieve equality and parity and to live up to the values that France claims to keep at its core.
I enjoyed the book, however, for those who are familiar with the Anglo-Saxon discourse about race, class, and gender this push for intersectionality might look too familiar and thus somewhat too trivial. Yet I'd like to remind you that France has a very different track record in terms of race discourse, hence this delay. Besides Islamophobia is often dismissed as rather an invention than a real problem and a type of social racism.
The other point I wanted to mention is that even though the title of the book suggests a lot of information on coopting feminism to support racism and then on reconciling feminism with anti-racism movement, the book does not give this discussion a lot of space. The context that provides an intellectual framework for understanding the general mechanics of the oppressive systems and Islamophobia in France, in particular, is so long that everything else feels too short and a bit hasty.
Otherwise, I highly recommend this book especially since there's very little discourse on the instrumentalization of feminism to favor racism.
January 16, 2022
Some great insights into the nature of French political culture, which can be applied to the greater political culture of the "Western" world. In assessing the lackluster liberal approach to idpol with some intelligent prognosis and the resulting hypocritical outcomes, Delphy has provided strong context into the roadblocks facing progressive movements for equality, the consequent political fracturing, and the resultant bumbling for attention.
With a fine material comb, she inquires into the true virtue and ideals which surround policies like the banning of Muslim headscarfs. She investigates who is affected and how, with great insight and detail, then takes this same model and transposes it to the war on terror at large. A thoroughly worthwhile read for any leftist or feminist interested in the politics of terror.
With a fine material comb, she inquires into the true virtue and ideals which surround policies like the banning of Muslim headscarfs. She investigates who is affected and how, with great insight and detail, then takes this same model and transposes it to the war on terror at large. A thoroughly worthwhile read for any leftist or feminist interested in the politics of terror.
February 2, 2021
"Separate and Dominate" is primarily about what it's like to be a Muslim woman living in France. I chose this book because I'm interested in learning more about persons of color who live in Europe. While Ms. Delphy's lens is narrower, she goes really deep into her subject by looking at her topic from sociological, political, psychological, and historical perspectives. She is a renowned scholar and has traveled the world sharing her expertise. "Separate and Dominate" is not an easy read but if you stick with it, you will be rewarded. Ms. Delphy pulls no punches in describing the harsh treatment of this group in French society.
September 1, 2021
Simple à lire. Les théories développées par Delphy dans les années 90 et au début des années 2000 sont aujourd’hui répandues.
Elle y explique le rapport entre lutte feministe et anti raciste soit l’intersectionnalisme. Mais aussi la tendance des pays occidentaux à épauler une cause quand ceci sert leurs intérêts de domination et à mettre la faute sur l’Autre plutot qu’à critiquer leur propre système.
Elle y explique le rapport entre lutte feministe et anti raciste soit l’intersectionnalisme. Mais aussi la tendance des pays occidentaux à épauler une cause quand ceci sert leurs intérêts de domination et à mettre la faute sur l’Autre plutot qu’à critiquer leur propre système.
August 9, 2022
Très bon, mais je ne pensais pas que le thème de ses textes seraient autant orienté sur l'anti-racisme. Ça m'a surprise. Par ailleurs, j'ai été agréablement surprise par la limpidité de son propos et sur la prise en compte de la critique des femmes racisées françaises sur les idées du féminisme de la deuxieme vague auquel Delphy est souvent associée. Peu être un peu redondant vers la fin, mais très pertinent tout de même
January 5, 2023
Intéressant, pas nécessairement convaincant.
Oublie un peu le besoin de survivre qui anime tout être vivant et qui est sa seule raison d’être, se reproduire (qui n’est certes plus si actuel) et l’influence qu’il a sur la perception de l’autre dans le sens de l’étranger… et donc de ce qui est différent. Je suis en train de lire Henri Laborit (médecin, biologiste…) et j’espère peut-être trouver des éléments de réponse.
Oublie un peu le besoin de survivre qui anime tout être vivant et qui est sa seule raison d’être, se reproduire (qui n’est certes plus si actuel) et l’influence qu’il a sur la perception de l’autre dans le sens de l’étranger… et donc de ce qui est différent. Je suis en train de lire Henri Laborit (médecin, biologiste…) et j’espère peut-être trouver des éléments de réponse.
February 8, 2022
C. Delphy est une penseuse absolument brillante. Ce groupe de texte publié en 2008, avec des textes datant d’aussi loin que 1997, est à la fois revigorant mais aussi déprimant : traitant de sujets comme le faux "universalisme", les accusations de séparatisme, les lois sur le port du voile, le patriarcat… RIEN n’a changé.
Un essai incroyable que tout le monde devrait lire.
Un essai incroyable que tout le monde devrait lire.
July 23, 2019
I always find theory difficult and this was on the easier end of the "have to think painfully hard" scale. Not as immediately understandable as Dworkin, but not much harder. And getting the French perspective was interesting.
December 27, 2019
A wonderful collection of fiery essays from a truly gifted writer: accessible, articulate, fast-paced, and extremely energetic. The introduction is an absolute must-read.
December 18, 2020
« Le mouvement féministe ne peut vivre que s’il devient réellement universel »
April 21, 2021
v much enjoyed, very interesting and informative and sarcastic and french
September 4, 2024
SO GOOD SO FUCKING RELEVANT!!! incredibly well articulated and i ate up the footnotes. everyone should read this <33
February 16, 2018
Recueil de textes de différents horizons - ce qui n'est jamais une bonne idée à mon avis. Ca donne un aspect déconstruit, trop hétérogène vu la diversité des occasions pour lesquelles les textes de base ont été rédigés, répétitif sur certains points, trop elliptique sur d'autres.
J'ai quand même beaucoup apprécié la lecture. "Elle assène, elle n'explique rien" a dit mon oncle, mais je ne suis pas sûre d'être d'accord, et aussi, j'ai aimé qu'elle soit parfois bien remontée (en particulier dans le chapitre "l'universalisme républicain contre les mouvements homos" car c'est quelque chose qui m'énerve horriblement aussi).
J'ai apprécié l'introduction - qui est le seul texte vraiment pertinent par rapport au titre. Je ne sais pas à quel point je suis d'accord avec mais la thèse est intéressante : en toute classification, il y a hiérarchisation puisque cette classification est faite par les dominants qui vont à partir d'eux créer -et donc nommer- des sous-catégories. Il faudra que je relise pour être plus certaine de ce que j'ai retenu.
Les chapitres suivants évoquent surtout la lutte anti-racisme, appliquée au droit de la guerre, à la loi anti-voile, ... J'ai trouvé qu'elle expliquait très bien en quoi Guantanamo était une horreur et que ses prises de position sur la guerre en Irak et en Afghanistan étaient intéressantes. Ca s'enchaîne assez bien avec un retour sur la société française, son combat contre la loi sur le voile et l'utilisation du féminisme pour justifier un racisme structurel.
J'ai aussi trouvé pertinente son analyse en terme de caste la société française où le stigmate de l'immigration se transmet de parent en enfant sans espoir de mobilité.
Je crois qu'elle est assez critiquée dans les milieux féministes te je me demande pourquoi. A un moment (passage sur les Indigènes de la république), je me suis rendue compte que je supposais qu'elle était blanche mais qu'en fait je n'en savais rien. Puis j'ai vérifié et elle est blanche et ça me déçois un peu que la porte-parole du mouvement des Indigènes soit une blanche :C Surtout qu'avec le discours qu'elle tient, j'aurais pensé qu'elle mettrait en avant l'importance de ne pas avoir une blanche pour représenter un mouvement comme ça.
J'ai quand même beaucoup apprécié la lecture. "Elle assène, elle n'explique rien" a dit mon oncle, mais je ne suis pas sûre d'être d'accord, et aussi, j'ai aimé qu'elle soit parfois bien remontée (en particulier dans le chapitre "l'universalisme républicain contre les mouvements homos" car c'est quelque chose qui m'énerve horriblement aussi).
J'ai apprécié l'introduction - qui est le seul texte vraiment pertinent par rapport au titre. Je ne sais pas à quel point je suis d'accord avec mais la thèse est intéressante : en toute classification, il y a hiérarchisation puisque cette classification est faite par les dominants qui vont à partir d'eux créer -et donc nommer- des sous-catégories. Il faudra que je relise pour être plus certaine de ce que j'ai retenu.
Les chapitres suivants évoquent surtout la lutte anti-racisme, appliquée au droit de la guerre, à la loi anti-voile, ... J'ai trouvé qu'elle expliquait très bien en quoi Guantanamo était une horreur et que ses prises de position sur la guerre en Irak et en Afghanistan étaient intéressantes. Ca s'enchaîne assez bien avec un retour sur la société française, son combat contre la loi sur le voile et l'utilisation du féminisme pour justifier un racisme structurel.
J'ai aussi trouvé pertinente son analyse en terme de caste la société française où le stigmate de l'immigration se transmet de parent en enfant sans espoir de mobilité.
Je crois qu'elle est assez critiquée dans les milieux féministes te je me demande pourquoi. A un moment (passage sur les Indigènes de la république), je me suis rendue compte que je supposais qu'elle était blanche mais qu'en fait je n'en savais rien. Puis j'ai vérifié et elle est blanche et ça me déçois un peu que la porte-parole du mouvement des Indigènes soit une blanche :C Surtout qu'avec le discours qu'elle tient, j'aurais pensé qu'elle mettrait en avant l'importance de ne pas avoir une blanche pour représenter un mouvement comme ça.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 27, 2015
Christine Delphy, author of Separate and Dominate (translated by David Broder) is apparently one of France’s leading feminists. Now, I’m the first to admit that I am not as well versed in feminist thinking as I would like to be – or as this book has inspired me to become – but I was surprised that someone would be a leading thinker in the field without my ever having heard their name. A quick Google, however, shows that she is little known in the Anglophone world, as she works primarily in French. That’s a pity, her work is certainly worth the read.
Separate and Dominate has 10 chapters, but the book could be split further into three parts; first establishing Delphy’s underlying hypothesis on the origins and structural nature of discrimination; next looking at racism in the war on terror and the abuse of feminist ideals as retrofitted justification of the war in Afghanistan; and finally turning back to France specifically to grapple with the big picture of racism and sexism through the controversial decision to ban the wearing of the veil in schools.
This was a fascinating read and, with the exception of the central portion on the War on Terror, can easily be extrapolated from its specific French context to a more global one. The conversations which this book stimulates are timely and highly relevant ones, despite the fact that this was originally published several years ago. As Muslim communities in Europe face increasing prejudice the problems which she talks about will only be exacerbated. In South Africa, where white feminists are the minority but often have the loudest voices, this should be compulsory reading. I will be thinking about the questions this raised in my brain for months to come, if not more.
Full review available at http://goodbyetoallthis.com/separate-...
Separate and Dominate has 10 chapters, but the book could be split further into three parts; first establishing Delphy’s underlying hypothesis on the origins and structural nature of discrimination; next looking at racism in the war on terror and the abuse of feminist ideals as retrofitted justification of the war in Afghanistan; and finally turning back to France specifically to grapple with the big picture of racism and sexism through the controversial decision to ban the wearing of the veil in schools.
This was a fascinating read and, with the exception of the central portion on the War on Terror, can easily be extrapolated from its specific French context to a more global one. The conversations which this book stimulates are timely and highly relevant ones, despite the fact that this was originally published several years ago. As Muslim communities in Europe face increasing prejudice the problems which she talks about will only be exacerbated. In South Africa, where white feminists are the minority but often have the loudest voices, this should be compulsory reading. I will be thinking about the questions this raised in my brain for months to come, if not more.
Full review available at http://goodbyetoallthis.com/separate-...
February 15, 2017
Disappointing beyond belief. For such a prominent feminist figure, Delphy misses the point entirely on several occasions. The book seems to be headed in the direction of intersectionality but never quite makes it as Delphy compartmentalizes gender, race and sexuality in binaries. Dry and unmoving.
December 31, 2015
L'avant-propos est dense, les articles moins. Écrits il y a une dizaine d'années, certains sont toujours très pertinents, je pense particulièrement à "Race, caste & genre en France".
Ça m'a donné envie de lire S. Bouamama & Letti Volpp ("feminism vs multiculturalism")et m'a convaincue qu'E. Badinter est une vieille réac raciste qui dit texto que le patriarcat n'existe plus guère en Occident, excepté chez les personnes de culture musulmane. Je retrouverai la citation exacte, c'est édifiant =>
"Franchement, depuis longtemps dans la société française de souche, que ce soit le judaisme ou le catholicisme, on ne peut pas dire qu'il y ait une oppression des femmes"
Arche 2003 http://www.pensamientocritico.org/eli...
" l'arrivée du 3è millénaire coincide avec un extraordinaire renversement des rapports de force. Non seulement le système patriarcal sera mort et enterré dans la plus grande partie de l'Occident industrialisé, mais on assistera à la naissance d'un nouveau déséquililbre, cette fois-ci au profit exclusif des femmes" in "Une prospective poour l'an 2000", 1987
Une féministe qui dit que le patriarcat est has been, comment dire...
Prétendre que le patriarcat est mort chez les blancs pour pouvoir taper sur les autres, c'est assez fort de café pour qn qui se prétend féministe : on voit bien comment la lutte féministe est instrumentalisée à des fins racistes par celles qui s'en réclament.
Idem pour Corinne Lepage & d'autres...
Ça m'a donné envie de lire S. Bouamama & Letti Volpp ("feminism vs multiculturalism")et m'a convaincue qu'E. Badinter est une vieille réac raciste qui dit texto que le patriarcat n'existe plus guère en Occident, excepté chez les personnes de culture musulmane. Je retrouverai la citation exacte, c'est édifiant =>
"Franchement, depuis longtemps dans la société française de souche, que ce soit le judaisme ou le catholicisme, on ne peut pas dire qu'il y ait une oppression des femmes"
Arche 2003 http://www.pensamientocritico.org/eli...
" l'arrivée du 3è millénaire coincide avec un extraordinaire renversement des rapports de force. Non seulement le système patriarcal sera mort et enterré dans la plus grande partie de l'Occident industrialisé, mais on assistera à la naissance d'un nouveau déséquililbre, cette fois-ci au profit exclusif des femmes" in "Une prospective poour l'an 2000", 1987
Une féministe qui dit que le patriarcat est has been, comment dire...
Prétendre que le patriarcat est mort chez les blancs pour pouvoir taper sur les autres, c'est assez fort de café pour qn qui se prétend féministe : on voit bien comment la lutte féministe est instrumentalisée à des fins racistes par celles qui s'en réclament.
Idem pour Corinne Lepage & d'autres...
July 31, 2015
I received this book from Goodreads in exchange for an honest review.A very deep and profound look at the intersections of racism and sexism, as well as a glimpse into classism and homophobia.While some of the chapters are a bit dense and take a while to get through, they are packed with information and in-depth explanations that give the reader a better understanding of the complexities of the issues discussed.The book focuses mainly on the ban of the Muslim veil, but also discusses Guantanamo Bay, affirmative action, and intersectionality, among other things. I really enjoyed Delphy's explanation of the importance of intersectionality and the impossibility of separating race and sex in issues such as the ban on the Muslim veil.Also, as an American who is fed American media every day, it was interesting and enlightening to read from a French perspective regarding various topics, dealing with specific American actions (Guantanamo Bay) and worldwide happenings.As stated previously, some of the chapters are little difficult to get through due to length and the depth of material, but the messages are definitely worth it.
December 15, 2015
I'm not sure what the publisher was going for with the cover of this book, but it made me a little uneasy to read it on public transport. That said, it's a great read that I'd recommend widely.
Delphy makes an excellent critique of "feminist" hypocracies involved in French policies directed at Muslim minorities, the international war on Afghanistan, and assumptions of universalism. Although not said specifically named as such (oddly, there is no explicit mention of intersectionality, however she does draw from several decolonial feminists), it is an intersectional examination of French society in the context of globalization.
"Islam has only ever been tolerated in France on the condition that it is discrete, preferably underground. And now these people are proud of it! There is something that defies sense here - the dominant common sense, anyway. We saw the same incredulous reactions over gay pride." (p 120-1)
Delphy makes an excellent critique of "feminist" hypocracies involved in French policies directed at Muslim minorities, the international war on Afghanistan, and assumptions of universalism. Although not said specifically named as such (oddly, there is no explicit mention of intersectionality, however she does draw from several decolonial feminists), it is an intersectional examination of French society in the context of globalization.
"Islam has only ever been tolerated in France on the condition that it is discrete, preferably underground. And now these people are proud of it! There is something that defies sense here - the dominant common sense, anyway. We saw the same incredulous reactions over gay pride." (p 120-1)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews