A Genealogy of Alienation in Post-Beauvoirian Philosophies of Gender

这个项目的目的是，首先，阐述西蒙·德·波伏娃在《第二性》中如何发展出一种唯物主义的异化理论，其次，考虑这种对波伏娃的解读如何帮助我们重读受她思想影响的性别哲学家。现存的关于博沃伊尔人异化的文献(诚然很少)拒绝用马克思主义的术语来解释她的性别形而上学，尽管有大量证据表明她属于马克思主义。例如，托里尔·莫伊认为，博沃伊尔的异化受到黑格尔的辩证法和拉康关于欲望的描述的影响(莫伊，1992)。在这篇文章中，马克思无处可寻。克里斯蒂娜·阿普在她对博沃伊尔式异化的解读中倾向于马克思主义，但这一简短的探索是对她关于被动的社会建构的更广泛论证的事后思考(Arp，1995：174)。从《第二性》开始，关于女权主义哲学的批评文学也同样反对强调波伏娃的唯物主义，这样的影响网络很少根据她的马克思主义来概述(这一规则的两个简短例外是：Bergoffen，2012：368-70和van Leeuwen，2018)，而且从未涉及异化。因此，我的核心研究问题将是：波伏娃在《第二性》中对性别差异的描述，特别是这种形而上学的异化本质，在多大程度上是一种唯物主义命题？而这种唯物主义对于我们如何阅读受波伏娃里程碑式文本影响的性别理论意味着什么？通过揭示波伏娃性别哲学的唯物主义细微差别，我将证明她认为是理解性别差异的根本的他者辩证法不仅是一种形而上学的辩证法，而且是一种政治辩证法。通过波伏娃自己的异化理论重新构建后博沃伊尔女权主义思想史，这个项目将展示调和后博沃伊尔性别哲学的贡献与波伏娃唯物主义所提出的政治紧迫性的价值。这将包括波伏娃影响的三组女权主义者的仔细阅读：20世纪70年代的唯物主义女权主义者(特别是克里斯汀·德尔菲，舒拉米斯·费尔斯通和莫妮克·维蒂希)，稍晚的精神分析女权主义者(特别是卢斯·伊里加雷和朱迪斯·巴特勒)，以及2000年后的新唯物主义女权主义者(特别是卡伦·巴拉德，罗西·布雷多蒂和保罗·普雷西亚多)。正如标题所示，这个项目将是一部福柯意义上的知识史家谱，既不寻求建立其研究对象的起源，也不想象其研究对象的目的论。当然，波伏娃对异化的定位并不是后博沃伊尔女权主义背离的原始纯洁，我将要分析的女权主义者也不属于异化可能达到其目标的轨迹。相反，我将追溯的历史将是异化的各种出现和消失的谱系，拒绝将这些事件置于任何元历史目的论中。

The aim of this project is, first, to elaborate how, in The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir develops a materialist theory of alienation, and, second, to consider how this reading of Beauvoir can help us reread philosophers of gender influenced by her thought. The (admittedly sparse) extant literature on Beauvoirian alienation resists interpreting her metaphysics of gender on Marxist terms, despite the vast evidence of her Marxist affiliations. Toril Moi, for instance, argues that Beauvoirian alienation is influenced by Hegel's dialectic and Lacan's account of desire (Moi, 1992). Marx, in this essay, is nowhere to be seen. Kristina Arp gestures towards Marxism in her reading of Beauvoirian alienation, but this brief exploration functions as an afterthought to her broader argument on the social construction of passivity (Arp, 1995: 174). Critical literature on feminist philosophy since The Second Sex is similarly averse to highlighting Beauvoir's materialism, with such networks of influence rarely being outlined in light of her Marxism (two brief exceptions to this rule are: Bergoffen, 2012: 368-70 and van Leeuwen, 2018) and never with respect to alienation.My core research questions will thus be: To what extent is the account of sexual difference that Beauvoir offers in The Second Sex, and especially the alienated nature of this metaphysics, a materialist proposition? And what does such materialism mean for how we read gender theory influenced by Beauvoir's landmark text? By unearthing the materialist nuance of Beauvoir's philosophy of gender, I will show that the dialectic of Otherness that she argues to be fundamental for understanding sexual difference is not only a metaphysical dialectic, but also a political one. And by re-framing the history of post-Beauvoirian feminist thought through Beauvoir's own theory of alienation, this project will demonstrate the value of reconciling the contributions of post-Beauvoirian philosophies of gender with the political urgency that Beauvoir's materialism posits. This will comprise of close readings of three groups of feminists whom Beauvoir influenced: 1970s materialist feminists (especially Christine Delphy, Shulamith Firestone, and Monique Wittig), slightly later psychoanalytical feminists (especially Luce Irigaray and Judith Butler), and post-2000 new-materialist feminists (especially Karen Barad, Rosi Braidotti, and Paul Preciado).As the title suggests, this project will be a genealogy in the Foucaultian sense of a history of knowledge that neither seeks to establish origins nor imagines the teleology of its object of study. Beauvoir's positing of alienation is, of course, not an original purity from which post-Beauvoirian feminism deviates, nor do the feminists I will analyse belong to a trajectory within which alienation may reach its telos. Rather, the history I will trace will be a genealogy of alienation's various emergences and disappearances that refuses to situate such events within any metahistorical teleology.