Imagining new dialogues about human rights: The implications of Charles Taylor’s theory of recognition for global feminism
| Date | 01 June 2014 |
| Published date | 01 June 2014 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1755088214522740 |
Journal of International Political Theory
2014, Vol. 10(2) 127 –147
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1755088214522740
ipt.sagepub.com
Imagining new dialogues
about human rights:
The implications of Charles
Taylor’s theory of recognition
for global feminism
Monica Mookherjee
Keele University, UK
Abstract
This article explores the implications of Charles Taylor’s politics of recognition for
a global feminist theory. The main contention is that Taylor’s thought implies an
innovative dialogue about human rights that assists a flexible understanding of diverse
women’s needs. This central claim is developed, however unexpectedly, by focusing on
the controversial practice of footbinding. Prevalent in imperial China, this debilitating
convention was supported by values that contrast markedly with those of the modern
West. The case thus confronts global feminists with the serious issue of comprehending
sympathetically the lived concerns of diverse human beings, while reacting critically
to the oppression that they may experience. A creative reading of Taylor’s theory
here yields, I argue, commitments to two normative claims that I call ‘narrativity’ and
‘instability’. Together, these claims promise not a static form of recognition based on
uncontroversial rights to autonomy or bodily integrity but an imaginative dialogue which
is sensitive to cultural differences in the interpretation of human needs and critical of
culturally diverse forms of oppression. The critique of footbinding implied by Taylor’s
thought is finally developed through comparison with contemporary cosmetic surgeries
in the West. The study reveals a feminist politics of recognition attuned to subaltern
struggles over the meaning of human rights and of women as active participants in this
vital, ongoing work.
Keywords
Charles Taylor, dialogue, feminism, footbinding, human rights, recognition
Corresponding author:
Monica Mookherjee, School of Politics International Relations and Philosophy (SPIRE), Keele University,
Keele ST5 5BG, UK.
Email: m.mookherjee@keele.ac.uk
522740IPT0010.1177/1755088214522740Journal of International Political TheoryMookherjee
research-article2014
Article
128 Journal of International Political Theory 10(2)
Introduction
Much recent theoretical attention has been devoted to the nature of global feminism.
While this attention has largely concentrated on reconciling First World women’s appar-
ent preoccupation with civil rights with the material concerns of women in developing
countries, a further difficulty relates to the frequently deep cultural differences arising
between women. The problem arises where some of the world’s traditions, and women
within them, may endorse non-liberal views about the just distribution of resources and
power between the sexes. Here, global feminists have been wary of ambitious defences
of the universality of liberal rights, and of underlying values such as autonomy and indi-
viduality. They have sought to avoid, that is, a neo-imperialistic position that privileges
Western values over the concerns of women in different cultural locations (Charlesworth,
2000; Jaggar, 2000). Yet, the distinction between avoiding cultural imperialism and
descending into relativism has not proved straightforward. Global feminists typically
wish to challenge gender discrimination beyond national and cultural borders, but this
project has been beset with dilemmas through history. As Catharine MacKinnon (2006)
ruefully explains in Are Women Human?
Both women’s subordination and their resistance to it have been global all along, predating
what is called globalisation – a moment of perception catching up to women’s long-time
reaction … Gender inequality is a global system. National particularities give some of its forms
the exemption of culture … rendering every form of oppression known to woman as culturally
universal (so we ‘can’t’ do anything about it) or culturally specific (so we ‘shouldn’t’ do
anything about it). (p. 13)
Taking these concerns seriously, this article claims that a creative reading of Charles
Taylor’s theory of recognition provides a helpful feminist framework for a mutually
transformative dialogue about needs, values and rights. For, in his essay ‘The Politics
of Recognition’ (hereafter PR), Taylor examines the modern need for the recognition
of identity. He argues that, in claims ranging from struggles for national self-
determination to women’s campaigns for maternity provision, one finds a common
demand to have one’s distinctive norms affirmed by others. By exploring and in one
respect extending Taylor’s thought, my argument replies first to the charge that his
account recognises only identities congruent with modern liberalism (Dumm, 1994;
Patrick, 2001). Second, it meets the objection that Taylor’s formulation of recognition
fails to respond to feminist concerns about structural or systemic domination
(Nicholson, 1996; Wolf, 1992).
My argument proceeds as follows. First, I outline the dilemma confronting global
feminism by focusing on enduring controversies about footbinding. This practice may
appear at first an unexpected focus for contemporary feminist research, as it seems
straightforwardly and unacceptably oppressive to women. However, ambiguities con-
cerning the motivations of women who bound their daughters’ feet reveal the need for
cross-cultural dialogue about human rights seldom appreciated by legalistic approaches
to international justice. Such a dialogue is initially promised by Taylor’s commitment to
recognition, specifically in what I label his ‘narrativity’ claim. For Taylor, expressive
human beings, constituted by their moral languages, possess the capacity to reflect on
To continue reading
Request your trial