Uztaro

Teorialari feminista gehienek J. J. Rousseau, patriarkado modernoaren aita bezala aurkezten digute. Halarik ere, klasiko honen pentsamenduaren ezaugarririk nabarmenena, bere aberastasuna da. Aberastasun honek, hain zuzen ere, mila gairi buruzko beste horrenbeste iruzkin egin ahal izatea dakar. Azken honen adierazle dugu 80ko hamarkadaren amaieran sorturiko bestelako hausnarketak, zeintzuek feminismoaren korronte nagusiak proposaturiko interpretazioaren ondoan kontrajarria den beste bat aurkezten baitute. Horrela, demokrazia nazionalaren teorialariaren pentsamenduan, egon badago diskurso sexista bat; baina, diskurso horrek ez gaituela derrigor eramaten emakumeen hiritartasuna ukatzera.

 

The majority of feminist theoreticians present J.J. Rousseau as the father of modern patriarchy. Nonetheless, one of the fundamental characteristics of his work is its richness, making it possible for there to be multiple interpretations of the many subjects he dealt with. The reflections made at the end of the 1980s by a series of feminist authors are an example of this, reflections counterpoised in a certain sense to those put forward by the greater part of feminist theoretical production. Thus, while sexist discourse is evident in the thought of the theoretician of national democracy, this discourse does not necessarily lead to a denial of citizen ship to women.