Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T09:04:36.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern Gender System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

María Lugones
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The coloniality of power is understood by Anibal Quijano as at the constituting crux of the global capitalist system of power. What is characteristic of global, Eurocentered, capitalist power is that it is organized around two axes that Quijano terms “the coloniality of power” and “modernity.” The coloniality of power introduces the basic and universal social classification of the population of the planet in terms of the idea of race, a replacing of relations of superiority and inferiority established through domination with naturalized understandings of inferiority and superiority. In this essay, Lugones introduces a systemic understanding of gender constituted by colonial/modernity in terms of multiple relations of power. This gender system has a light and a dark side that depict relations, and beings in relation as deeply different and thus as calling for very different patterns of violent abuse. Lugones argues that gender itself is a colonial introduction, a violent introduction consistently and contemporarily used to destroy peoples, cosmologies, and communities as the building ground of the “civilized” West.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 22 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Writing Against Heterosexism , Winter 2007 , pp. 186 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexander, M. Jacqui, and Mohanty, Chandra, eds. 1997. Feminist genealogies, colonial legacies, democratic futures. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Allen, Paula Gunn. 1986/1992. The sacred hoop: Recovering the feminine in American Indian traditions. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Amos, Valerie, and Parmar, Pratibha. 1984. Challenging imperial feminism. In Feminism and ‘race,’ ed. Bhavnani, Kum‐Kum. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anzaldúa, Gloria. 1987. Borderlands/la Frontera: The new mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute.Google Scholar
Brown, Elsa Barkley. 1991. Polyrhythms and Improvisations. In History Workshop 31.Google Scholar
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2000. Black feminist thought. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1995. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In Critical race theory, ed. Crenshaw, Kimberlé, Gotanda, Neil, Peller, Gary, and Thomas, Kendall. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Espiritu, Yen Le. 1997. Race, class, and gender in Asian America. In Making more waves, ed. Kim, Elaine H., Villanueva, Lilia V., and Asian Women United of California. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Julie. A. 2002. Definitional dilemmas: Male or female? Black or white? The law's failure to recognize intersexuals and multiracials. In Gender nonconformity, race, and sexuality: Charting the connections, ed. Lester, Toni. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Horswell, Michael. Toward an Andean theory of ritual same‐sex sexuality and third‐gender subjectivity. In Infamous desire: Male homosexuality in colonial Latin America, ed. Sigal, Pete. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lorde, Audre. 1984. The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. In Sister outsider. Trumansburg, N.Y.: The Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Lugones, María. 2005. Radical multiculturalism and women of color feminisms. Revista Internarional de Filosofia Poltica.Google Scholar
Lugones, María. 2003. Pilgrimages/peregrinajes: Theorizing coalitions against multiple oppressions. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
McClintock, Anne. 1995. Imperial leather: Race, gender, and sexuality in the colonial contest. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Oyewùmí, Oyéronké. 1997. The invention of women: Making an African sense of Western gender discourses. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Quijano, Anibal. 1991. Colonialidad, modernidad/racionalidad. Peru Indigena 13 (29): 11–29.Google Scholar
Quijano, Anibal. 2000a. Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y America Latina. In Colonialidad del saber, eurocentrismo y ciencias sicales. CLACSO‐UNESCO 2000, Buenos Aires, Argentina .Google Scholar
Quijano, Anibal. 2000b. Colonialidad del Poder y Clasificacion Social. In Festschrift for Immanuel Wallerstein. Special issue, Journal of World Systems Research 5, no. 2 (summer/fall).Google Scholar
Quijano, Anibal. 2001/2002. Colonialidad del poder, globalización y democracia. Revista de Ciencias Sociales de la Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León 4, nos. 7–8 (September 2001–April 2002): 1–23.Google Scholar
Sigal, Pete. 2003. Gendered power, the hybrid self, and homosexual desire in late colonial Yucatan. In Infamous desire: Male homosexuality in colonial Latin America, ed. Sigal, Pete. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Spelman, Elizabeth. 1988. Inessential woman. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
Takaki, Ronald. 1993. A different mirror. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar