Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:32:04.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Once More into the Breach with Modernity: Rejoinder to Inglehart and Norris, and Young

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2006

Julia Adams  and
Ann Shola Orloff
Julia Adams
Affiliation:
Yale University
Ann Shola Orloff
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

With respect to modernity and women's place in it, Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris and Iris Marion Young are sharply at odds. Young sees a rending and tearing of the social fabric, and no determinate relationship between gender equality and modernity, while Inglehart and Norris think modernization and women's rights are seamlessly joined at the hip. We think that neither of these analytical stances will do. Our assessment extends from a concept of modernity that embraces a relational complex of features and tendencies—one that is analytical, not normative, and that must always be historically situated. Modernity is a vulnerable achievement rather than the secure culmination of automatic social processes. When called to its defense, we have argued, feminists and small-d democrats may sometimes have to endorse means and modes of coercion controlled by imperfectly democratic states.For their criticisms and suggestions, we thank Rachel Epstein, Bonnie Honig, David Weakliem, and Linda Zerilli. They bear no responsibility for the substance of our rejoinder, even if their arguments with us did help us think it through.

Type
CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER AND POLITICS
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , September 2005 , pp. 500 - 508
Copyright
© 2005 The Women and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association

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

Adams, Julia, Elisabeth S. Clemens, and Ann Shola Orloff, eds. 2005. Remaking Modernity: Politics, History and Sociology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Adams, Julia, and Ann Shola Orloff. 2005. “Defending Modernity? High Politics, Feminist Anti-Modernism, and the Place of Gender.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 166–82.Google Scholar
Archibugi, Daniele, and Iris Marion Young. 2002. “Toward a Global Rule of Law.” Dissent 49 (Spring): 27–32.Google Scholar
Boot, Max. 2003. The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power. New York: Basic Books.
Ferguson, Michaele. 2005. “‘W’ Stands for Women: Feminism and Security Rhetoric in the Post-9/11 Bush Administration.” Politics & Gender 1 (March): 9–38.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Pippa Norris. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Moaddel, Mansoor. 2005. Islamic Modernism, Nationalism, and Fundamentalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Treiman, Donald J. 1970. “Industrialization and Social Stratification.” Special Issue: “Stratification Theory and Research.” Sociological Inquiry 40: 207–34.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Young, Iris Marion. 2003. “The Logic of Masculinist Protection: Reflections on the Current Security State.” Signs 29: 1–25.Google Scholar