CONSENT, AGENCY AND ALTRUISM. REFLEXIONS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF SURROGACY

被引:0
作者
Hernandez Corrochano, Elena [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nacl Educ Distancia, Madrid, Spain
来源
FEMINISMO-S | 2022年 / 39期
关键词
surrogacy; consent; agency; altruism;
D O I
10.14198/fem.2022.39.05
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
This paper explores three concepts, consent, agency and altruism, used in the discourse favourable to surrogacy, which should not be seen as an attempt to address the topic itself. It is a discourse with a plurality of interlocutors who, from very different ideological positions, use similar arguments to defend their position. The study of these three concepts has been carried out within the framework of French Materialist Feminism (FMF), using the category sex/class for the analysis of the data extracted from the ethnographic research conducted on the GPO in Spain and Mexico. The section on consent addresses, among other issues, the construct of motherhood and "the ideology of shared desire", important topics to deepen the rhetoric of free choice, monopolized by the favourable discourse to interpret the actions of women involved in this practice.The concepts of agency and altruism, increasingly used by surrogacy supporters to signify the actions of donor and gestating women, are approached in the text from a feminist critique. This analysis demonstrates how this discourse in favor of surrogacy uses these terms from the point of view of the self-sufficiency - not autonomy - of the individual, hiding the commoditization of women's reproductive potential and the control exercised by the patriarchal system over human reproduction. The article concludes by pointing out how it is the mutual recognition expressed by the women participating in the practice -as dominated subjects- that moves them to action. An action that mainly benefits the alliance of two systems of oppression: patriarchy and neoliberalism.
引用
收藏
页码:123 / 148
页数:26
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [31] Ortner Sherry, 2016, Antropologia y teoria social. Cultura, Poder y agencia
  • [32] Otegui P., 2006, Revista Empresa y Humanismo, VIX, P137
  • [33] Pitch Tamar, 2003, DERECHO CONSTRUCCION
  • [34] Ragone H., 2007, ANTROPOLOGIA PARENTE, P559
  • [35] Regalado M. D., 2017, FEMERIS, V2, P10, DOI [10.20318/ femeris.2017.3756, DOI 10.20318/FEMERIS.2017.3756]
  • [36] Rodriguez N., 2017, ACTA U LODZIENSIS FO, V12, P31, DOI [10.18778/1505-9065.12.04, DOI 10.18778/1505-9065.12.04]
  • [37] Rubin Gayle., 1986, REV NUEVA ANTROPOLOG, VVIII, P95
  • [38] Segalen M, 2010, TALLANDIER, DOI [10.3917/talla.segal.2010.01, DOI 10.3917/TALLA.SEGAL.2010.01]
  • [39] The new reproductive technologies, the old paternity
    Stolcke, Verena
    [J]. PAPELES DEL CEIC-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON COLLECTIVE IDENTITY RESEARCH, 2018, (02):