Hekman's Analysis

In a critique of Hill Collins’ (and others’) approach, Hekman, attempts to clarify why “subjectivism” might be perceived as problematic in standpoint theory as a methodological unit of analysis (Hekman, 1997). Hekman asserts that standpoint theory is becoming too nebulous; that specifically, it comes down to pragmatism, or the relativism in what is considered “true” in experience. She sought to address the way in which feminist theorists justified the historical and social oppression of women and condemned the fact that they use their experiences for credibility because the same could just as well be used as a method by the dominant group. Hekman supports other critics who posit that the use of constellations of experiences undermines its purpose – that the diversities among women become too complex and the ability to speak for everyone is virtually impossible. …show more content…
However, Hill Collins (1997), in a clear and swift rebuttal, notes that Hekman simply misunderstood the context of her view on standpoint theory. She says while standpoint theory does focus on unique experiences of women, it is not as individualized as Hekman implies; that is, it focuses on the uniqueness in shared group experiences. Also emphasized here, is the power of these common experiences. She says that this view does not diminish individualized experiences of the marginalized. Additionally, Hill Collins had already acknowledged this in a past paper, noting that even though people have shared identities/experiences, it does not automatically mean that it will resonate with those who share the same identity. Rather, that it contributes to the knowledge within a community of shared experiences, which create source of power and consciousness within their marginality (Collins,