Patriarchy and Love. Anna G. Jónasdóttirʼ Political Theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.espo.n64a06Keywords:
political theory, feminism, patriarchy, exploitation, love, Latin AmericaAbstract
Icelandic political scientist Anna Jónasdóttir’s thesis on patriarchy is that it is currently based on the exploitation of women’s love by their sentimental partners. This paper aims to evaluate this influential feminist theory and its scope to explain the persistence of patriarchy in Latin America. The analysis consists of three parts: part one presents the author’s central theses on patriarchy and its connection with love; the second part points out the limitations of the proposal for understanding patriarchy in Latin America, where women are marginalized because of love, but also because of social inequality, violence, and colonial practices in the region; the third part underlines the contributions of Jónasdóttir’s analysis to clarify widespread evils among Latin American women, such as intimate partner violence and misogyny in general. The conclusion is that, despite the theoretical and methodological limitations, Jónasdóttir’s theory helps clarify some oppression phenomena suffered by women in our region.
The analysis consists of three parts: part one exposes the author's central theses on patriarchy and its connection with love. The second part points out the limitations of the proposal for understanding patriarchy in Latin America. Women are marginalized because of love but also due to social inequality, violence, and colonial practices in this region. Part three underlines the contributions of Jónasdóttir's analysis to clarify widespread evils among Latin American women as intimate partner violence and misogyny in general.
Downloads
References
(1) Banco Mundial. (s. f. a). Desempleo, mujeres (% de la población activa femenina) (estimación modelado OIT). https://datos.bancomundial.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.FE.ZS?name_desc=false
(2) Banco Mundial. (s. f. b). Desempleo, varones (% de la población activa masculina) (estimación modelado OIT). Desempleo, Varones. https://datos.bancomundial.org/indicador/SL.UEM.TOTL.MA.ZS?name_desc=false
(3) Barriteau, Eudine. (2011). Theorizing Sexuality and Power in Caribbean Gender Relations. In: Anna. Jónasdóttir; Bryson, Valerie, & Jones, Kathleen, B. (Eds.). Sexuality, Gender and Power. Intersectional and Transnational Perspectives (pp. 75-91). New York: Routleged.
(4) Barriteau, Eudine. (2019). What Love has to do with it? Sexuality, Intimacy and Power in Contemporary Caribbean Gender Relations. Caribbean Review of Gender Studies Issue, 13, pp. 297-330. https://sta.uwi.edu/crgs/june2019/documents/CRGS_13_Pgs297-330_VEBarriteau_WhatLovehastodowithit.pdf
(5) Bartky, Sandra. (1990). Feminity and Domination. Studies in the Fenomenology of Opression. New York: Routledge.
(6) Bourdieu, Pierre. (1999). Meditaciones pascalianas. Barcelona: Anagrama.
(7) Bourdieu, Pierre. (2013). La dominación masculina. Barcelona: Anagrama.
(8) Bourdieu, Pierre. (2016). La distinción. Criterio y bases sociales del gusto. Madrid: Taurus.
(9) Bourdieu, Pierre y Passeron, Jean Claude. (1996). La reproducción. Elementos para una del sistema de enseñanza. México, D. F.: Fontamara.
(10) Capetillo, Luisa. (1907). Ensayos libertarios. San Juan: Real Hermanos.
(11) Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL). (2021, febrero 10). La pandemia del COVID-19 generó un retroceso de más de una década en los niveles de participación laboral de las mujeres en la región. https://www.cepal.org/es/comunicados/la-pandemia-covid-19-genero-un-retroceso-mas-decada-niveles-participacion-laboral
(12) Cornell, Drucilla. (1998). At the Heart of Freedom. Feminism, Sex, and Equality. Princeton: Princeton University. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400822553
(13) De Beauvoir, Simone. (2013). El segundo sexo. Bogotá, D. C.: Random House Mondadori.
(14) Espasandín, María. (2018). Articulaciones entre marxismo y feminismo: ayer y hoy. Katál, 21 (3), pp. 584-593. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-02592018v21n3p584
(15) Esteban, Mari Luz. (2011). Crítica del pensamiento amoroso. Barcelona: Bellaterra.
(16) Firestone, Shulamith. (1971). The Dialectic of Sex: The Case For Feminist Revolution. New York: Bantam.
(17) Golmann, Joëlle Sarah. (2016). What’s love got to do with it? Un análisis crítico feminista del amor en parejas heterosexuales de clase media en la ciudad de Bogotá [Tesis inédita de maestría]. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D. C.
(18) Gregoratto, Federica. (2016). Why Love Kills: Power, Gender Dichotomy, and Romantic Femicide. Hypathia, 32 (1), pp. 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12308
(19) Gregoratto, Federica. (2017). Love is a Losing Game: Power and Exploitation in Romantic Relationships. Journal of Political Power, 10 (3), pp. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2017.1382172
(20) Gunnarsson, Lena. (2015). Amarlo por quien es: la microsociología del poder. Sociológica, 30 (85), pp. 235-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2017.1382172
(21) Paredes, Julieta y Guzmán, Adriana. (2014). El tejido de la rebeldía. ¿Qué es el feminismo comunitario? La Paz: Comunidad Mujeres Creando Comunidad.
(22) Heller, Agnes. (2009). A Theory of Feelings. Lanham: Lexington.
(23) Herrera, Coral. (2010). El romanticismo patriarcal. Creando Pueblo. https://creandopueblo.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/herrera-gocc81mez-coral-el-romanticismo-patriarcal.pdf
(24) Hooks, Bell. (2001). All About Love: New Visions. New York: Harper.
(25) Jónasdóttir, Anna. (1993). El poder del amor. ¿Le importa el sexo a la democracia? Madrid: Cátedra.
(26) Jónasdóttir, Anna. (2011). What Kind of Power is ‘Love Power’? In: Anna, Jónasdóttir; Bryson, Valerie & Jones, Kathleen B. (Eds.). Sexuality, Gender and Power. Intersectional and Transnational Perspectives (pp. 45-60). New York: Routleged.
(27) Jónasdóttir, Anna. (2018). The Difference that Love (power) Makes. In: Adriana, García, Lenna, Gunnarsson & Anna, Jónasdóttir (eds.). Feminism and the Power of Love. Interdisciplinary Interventions, (pp. 15-34). New York: Routleged. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315200798-2
(28) Kollontai, Alexandra. (1978a). Theses on Communist Morality in the Sphere of Marital Relations. In: Alix, Holt (Ed.). Selected Writings of Alexandra Kollontai (pp. 225- 231). Westport: Lawrence Hill.
(29) Kollontai, Alexandra. (1978b). Sexual Relations and the Class Struggle. In: Alix, Holt (Ed.). Selected Writings of Alexandra Kollontai (pp. 237- 249). Westport: Lawrence Hill.
(30) Lagarde, Marcela. (2001). Claves para una negociación feminista del amor. Managua: Puntos de Encuentro.
(31) Lagarde, Marcela. (2015). Los cautiverios de las mujeres. Madresposas, monjas, putas, presas y locas. México, D. F.: Siglo XXI.
(32) Lugones, María. (2003). Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes: Theorizing Coalition Against Multiple Oppressions. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
(33) Lugones, María. (2008). Colonialidad y género. Tabula Rasa, 9, pp. 73-101. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.340
(34) Manne, Kate. (2018). Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Oxford: Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190604981.001.0001
(35) Manne, Kate. (2020). Entitled. How Male Privilege Hurts Women. New York: Crown.
(36) Millett, Kate (2000). Sexual Politics. Illinois: University of Illinois.
(37) Nussbaum, Martha. (1999). Sex and Social Justice. Oxford: Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195112108.001.0001
(38) Observatorio de Igualdad de Género de América Latina y el Caribe. (2019, noviembre). La medición del feminicidio o femicidio: desafíos y ruta de fortalecimiento en América Latina y el Caribe. CEPAL. https://oig.cepal.org/sites/default/files/femicidio_web.pdf
(39) Obsservatorio balcani e caucaso (2017, November 28). Feminicide: the numbers en Europe. https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/eng/Areas/Europe/Femicide-the-numbers-in-Europe-184329
(40) Quijano, Anibal. (2014) Cuestiones y horizontes. De la dependencia histórico-estructural a la colonialidad/decolonialidad del poder. Buenos Aires: Clacso.
(41) Segato, Rita. (2015). La crítica de la colonialidad en ocho ensayos. Y una antropología por demanda. Buenos Aires: Prometeo.
(42) Senado de la República. (2019, octubre 11). En Colombia aumenta brecha laboral entre hombres y mujeres. https://www.senado.gov.co/index.php/el-senado/noticias/380-en-colombia-aumenta-brecha-laboral-entre-hombres-y-mujeres
(43) Thomas, Florence. (1994). Los estragos del amor. El discurso amoroso en los medios de comunicación. Bogotá, D. C.: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
(44) Thomas, Florence. (2006). Conversaciones con Violeta. Historia de una revolución inacabada. Bogotá, D. C.: Aguilar.
(45) Vera, María. (2019). Feminismos contemporáneos: más allá del sujeto político «mujer». [Material del curso Introducción a las teorías feministas]. Uabierta, Universidad de Chile.
(46) Wollstonecraft, Mary. (2005). Vindicación de los derechos de la mujer. Madrid: Itsmo.
(47) Young, Iris Marion. (1987). Impartiality and the Civic Public: Some Implications of Feminist Critiques of Moral and Political Theory. In: Benhabib, Seyla & Cornell, Drucilla (Eds.). Feminism as Critique. On the Politics of Gender, (pp. 57-76). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
(48) Young, Iris Marion. (2005). On Female Body Experience: “Throwing Like a Girl” and Other Essays. Oxford: Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195161920.001.0001
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Martha Elena Grajales Usuga
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Estudios Políticos authorizes the copy of articles and texts for academic purposes or the internal use of institutions as long as the proper citation of the source is provided. Total or partial reproduction of the journal with different purposes should have an explicit authorization by the Institute of Politic Studies of the University of Antioquia.
The views and opinions expressed in the articles are those of the authors and do not necessary reflect or bind those of the Institute of Political Studies of the University of Antioquia.
