Reply to comment

It seems the only conclusion to be drawn from all three theorists is that there will always be an other. The point is to own the otherness and make it work for you, rather than against you.

What Hegel says about the other not coming fully into existence unless it becomes a self first, and recognizes itself as an other to a different self, seems to be how all these monsters are created. If the self identifies something as an other, the other doesn't necasarily recognize that fact until the other itself says that is an other. Thus, what I feel it really comes down to is the biology that de Beauvoir brought up. Since women are biologically inferior we became the other to men, and we've been attempting to make ammends and become equal. But, as de Beauvoir also pointed out, its ingrained in our psyche that women are inferior to men, and it is difficult to overcome that.

I agree with the differentiation jrizzo points out between de Beauvoir and Stryker's take on "otherness," however I don't believe that reclaiming the other will make it impossible for people to see the "other" as human beings first. I feel that reclaiming the other will give the other power so that it becomes a self and will not be objectified like an other is. Typically an "other" is in the minority, and even if it remains in the minority, as long as it gains power/authority it will stop being an "other" and become a "self".