The East-West dialogue: methodical diversity and frailties of feminist accounts

Abstract

This paper investigates the commonalities and differences of contemporary feminist theories by proffering a comprehensive comparative analysis of the Western feminist agenda and Chinese woman’s concerns in relation to the philosophical discourse on global justice. Interpretation of feminist accounts delineates the persistent gender inequalities presented by Western feminist thinkers, such as Maria Lugones, Elizabeth Spelman, and Sally Haslanger, while highlighting the historical and constitutional approach to understanding the roots of gender distinctions and norms in Chinese culture through the philosophies of Ruism, Daoism, and Buddhism, as well as the Civil Code of marriage. Reflection assesses the extent of translatability concerning feminist matters given the dissimilar social contexts and political circumstances between China and the United States. This paper draws attention to the need for embracing the historical and cultural heterogeneity of grievances of women from all over the world to acknowledge the cross- and multi-cultural conditions regarding the life prospects of both men and women. Such initiatives encourage mutual engagement in promulgating the multiplicity of feminist voices to prompt more productive conversations about the identities and meanings of masculinity and femininity instead of expecting or imposing a universal consolidation of woman’s experiences.