Suchergebnisse

"Staking Claim analyzes Hawai'i at the crossroads of competing claims for identity, belonging, and political status. Judy Rohrer argues that the dual settler colonial processes of racializing native Hawaiians (erasing their indigeneity), and indigenizing non-Hawaiians, enable the staking of non-Hawaiian claims to Hawai'i"--Provided by publisher

"Where dominant citizenship narratives have heretofore focused on either the state or the nation as qualifiers of belonging, this book draws from the interdisciplinary fields of queer theory, critical race theory, feminist political theory, disability studies, and indigenous studies to further an evolving discussion of what it means to be an American citizen in the Obama era. Rohrer demonstrates that this discussion requires an understanding of the machinations of governmentality and biopolitics in the (re)production of the (proper) citizen. "--

Examines the the historical and contemporary place of haoles (white people) in Hawaii, recognizing this as a form of American whiteness specific to Hawaii, and arguing that "haole" was forged and reforged over two centuries of colonization and needs to be understood in that context

I am addressing this paper to other white temporarily-able-bodied settler feminists interested in moving, not just toward a queer (queerer?) horizon, but toward a nonbinary liberatory futurity as a collective political aspiration (not an identitarian goal of self-actualization). In this paper, I consider how we might mobilize the nonbinary as a freedom practice, a practice building toward a future where we are all free. Imagining and creating a liberatory inclusive future necessarily requires dismantling the constrictions of reproductive futurity, constrictions built on binary analytics. This paper begins with an outline of how a sense of urgency, legal and medicalized frameworks, and anti-victimism have dominated post- Dobbs responses and reinvigorated an allegiance to retrograde, repressive reproductive futurity. This brief discussion of post-Dobbs responses sets the stage for an exploration of a more expansive, inclusive, collective futurity beyond the settler state, a freer futurity made possible by mobilizing a nonbinary intersectional critique anchored in queer/crip/Indigenous analytics.

Abstract: No one wants to be "rightsized," particularly not feminists, and especially not feminists in gender, women's, and sexuality studies programs and departments (GWSS). Yet that's one of the multiple threats we are now facing, and it is both internal and external. These attacks on GWSS and our cousins are not new, but both the university administrators and the politicos are taking advantage of the current pandemonium to ramp up their ferocity. As a GWSS director of one of the many programs under threat, what I offer is not a right-eous-resistance-to-right-sizing manifesto but a tentative gesture at possible GWSS (re)purposings. I put these rightsizing threats in context of pandemic-inspired calls for radical transformation rather than returns to normalcy. This is not a nostalgic plea for saving something familiar (perhaps a proper object called GWSS, perhaps ourselves as "what a feminist looks like"), nor the staging of a rescue mission into enemy territory (as if we weren't also complicit and always already on stolen land in the imperial university). Instead, I stretch toward an irreverent killjoy stance while exploring queer and trans joy and futurity, kin-making/revealing, and (re)purposing/redistribution as frameworks that open possibilities for other futures.

This paper is part of a larger project that explores haole (white people, foreigners) as a colonial form of whiteness in Hawai'i—as a dynamic social assemblage. Haole was forged and reforged in over two centuries of colonization, and it must be understood through that history. I use the recent Supreme Court decision in Harold F Rice v Benjamin J Cayetano, 528 US 495 (2000 ), as an entry point into the interrogation of haole. Framed by the dominant discourse, the case appeared to be about Native Hawaiians (asking questions about who they are and what rights they have), and not about haole (assuming there are no questions as to who they are and what rights they have).

The Rice case illustrates how Western law renders indigenous claims inarticulable by racializing native peoples, while simultaneously normalizing white subjectivity by insisting on a color-blind ideology. The inherent contradiction in these two positions—race matters/race does not matter—is played out in the frictions surrounding the Rice decision and is evidence of the cracks in the hegemony of Western law that complicate any easy binary of colonizer–colonized. Through an analysis of Rice, I explore how the Western legal framework is set up to accept the teleological narrative of the development, to problematize native identity, and to naturalize white subjectivity. I then broaden the lens to explore the ways Rice points to an epistemological disconnect between Western notions of the production of knowledge and indigenous articulations of the same.

Feminism and War reveals and critically analyzes the complicated ways in which America uses gender, race, class, nationalism, imperialism to justify, legitimate, and continue war. Each chapter builds on the next to develop an anti-racist, feminist politics that places imperialist power, and forms of resistance to it, central to its comprehensive analysis