Applications in Intersectional Feminist Logic

Chapter 1: A Transformative Intuitionist Logic for Examining Negation in Identity-Thinking

Negation often reinforces problematic habits of othering, but rethinking negation can make good on feminist hopes for logic as a transformative space for inclusion. As Plumwood argues in her 1993 paper, not all uses of negation in the context of social identity are inherently problematic, but the widespread implicit use of classical negation has limited our options with respect to representing difference, ultimately reinforcing dualisms that essentialize social differences in problematic ways. In response to these limitations, I take inspiration from Dembroff's recent work on the metaphysics of genderqueer identity to build models of social identity using the Heyting-Brouwer logic developed by Rauszer in 1974. Ultimately, I argue that these models demonstrate both how classical negation reinforces problematic habits of othering and how alternative forms of negation can transform our treatment of social identity altogether. (This chapter is also forthcoming in a special issue of The Australasian Journal of Logic. Learn more here »)

Chapter 2: Re-Evaluating The Master's Tools for an Authentically Intersectional Approach to Feminist Logic

In early work on feminist logic, there has been significant reference to the now classic Audre Lorde quote: "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." Typically, this quote is referenced because it offers a powerful way to articulate one of the major concerns regarding the viability of feminist logic: is logic one of the master's tools? And, if so, does that mean it cannot be used for liberatory projects? However, as I demonstrate here through a series of applications in Heyting-Brouwer logic (following on the work done in Chapter 1), it is clear that when we take the broader context of her comments into account, Lorde offers far more than a helpful metaphor. In fact, her critique of the limitations of white American feminism provides powerful criteria for a mutual, non-dominant understanding of difference built directly upon foundational practices of intersectional activism. This, in turn, provides a meaningful contrast to Plumwood's focus on dualisms involving negation, since Lorde's critique directs attention toward broader systemic methods for representing differences among social groups in a manner that is compatible with the demands of contemporary intersectional feminism.

Chapter 3: Embracing Intersectional Models of Difference for Resistance and Solidarity

In this chapter, I broaden the application of Heyting-Brouwer logic from a narrow focus on the social identity of particular individuals to consider social movements more generally. To do so, I leverage Audre Lorde's understanding of difference (as developed in Chapter 2) to provide a basis for connecting our individual social positions, mindsets, and need for survival to collective advocacy. Then, taking inspiration both from Lorde's own practices of advocacy and from more contemporary social movements, I create models of resistance and solidarity in action to demonstrate how quiet resistance allows us to sustain ways of being under conditions of oppression, how active resistance destabilizes limiting assumptions in the push for greater systemic change, and how cultivating solidarity stabilizes broader, more flexible models to support a more inclusive future. Ultimately, I argue that these models provide a powerful way to visualize common challenges faced by social movements, to articulate what it costs for differently positioned individuals to take action, and to reassess what features we should prioritize when looking for a good feminist logic.