| How do we who situate ourselves within women's communities, that is feminist, womanist, mujerist, and others---relate to one another? In the midst of the growth of Euro-American feminist, womanist, mujerista, Asian-American theology and ethics there have been and continue to be critiques of essentialism. Euro-American feminists have been accused of giving their definition of women's experience a universal value, in other words, essentializing women's experience. This dissertation analyzes the responses of Sharon Welch and Sheila Davaney to the problem of essentialism in Euro-American feminism by exploring the role of women's experience within the problem of essentialism. Serving as a framework for the problem of essentialism are the critiques and perspectives of many women of color.; Two central issues emerge from this discussion, which are addressed in the final chapter and creative work. First, in order to be in dialogue with other women and in order to effectively lean from and offer insight to other groups of women, Euro-American feminists must acknowledge their role as oppressor as well as oppressed. Their understanding and definition of women's experience, must be nuanced to include other facets such as classism, racism, and imperialism even if that experience is not of oppressed, but of oppressor. Second, even as feminists struggle to develop a nuanced understanding of women's experience and recognize the plurality of visions and values for women's liberation, feminists must employ a method of adjudicating between both our own and other's visions and values for women's liberation. Sharon Welch emphasizes the playfulness and tenuous nature of developing theology and ethics. Sheila Davaney challenges feminists' preferential choice of women's experience for the work of liberation, claiming that we must develop a way of adjudicating amongst all proposals, not just those of women---an approach which she calls historical pragmatism. Recognizing the partiality of our perspectives and the plurality of other voices of liberation does not carry us necessarily towards total relativism. Adjudicating amongst these visions actually requires less our willingness to take charge and control the development of women's theology and ethics, and more that we be willing to take risks. |
