“Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

“Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose first appeared in the Cambridge Journal of Anthropology in Autumn 2018 (Volume 36, Number 2, pp. 34–52, doi:10.3167/cja.2018.360205). This article critically explores what it means to decolonize feminist thought and activism within the academic sphere, challenging assumptions that university feminism is disconnected from real-world struggles. Lukose argues that feminist knowledge and politics share a complex and interwoven history, shaped by ongoing efforts to address both colonial legacies and contemporary power dynamics. She emphasizes the importance of integrating intersectionality and a “politics of location” into feminist discourse, particularly in the #MeToo era where Western perspectives often dominate the conversation around sexual violence and gender justice. By reflecting on a diverse feminist archive, Lukose traces how earlier movements have paved the way for a more inclusive feminism that transcends generational and geopolitical boundaries. Her work is significant within feminist literature and literary theory as it calls for an expanded, decolonial framework that acknowledges the role of race, postcolonial history, and localized contexts in shaping feminist identities and knowledge production, urging scholars to resist universalized views of gender oppression and adopt a pluralistic approach to feminist solidarity.

Summary of “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

1. Introduction: Setting the Stage for Decolonizing Feminism: Lukose opens by positioning the #MeToo movement within a global context, noting its impact on feminist discourse while critiquing its limitations. She highlights how the movement often operates from a Western-centric perspective, which may exclude voices and experiences of women from non-Western and postcolonial backgrounds (“the universalizing approach of the #MeToo movement raises new questions for decolonizing feminism,” Lukose, 2018).
2. Feminism in the University and Beyond: The article discusses the dual role of feminism as both a political and academic project, arguing that the university serves as a site for feminist knowledge production that is deeply engaged with real-world struggles. Lukose challenges the notion that academic feminism is disconnected from everyday activism, asserting instead that universities are influential spaces that shape and inform feminist activism outside academia (“feminism in the university is in and of this world, bridging knowledge and action,” Lukose, 2018).
3. The Role of Intersectionality in Decolonial Feminism: A core concept in Lukose’s framework is intersectionality, which she views as essential to a decolonized feminism. By addressing overlapping systems of power such as race, class, and colonial history, intersectionality allows for a more inclusive approach to feminist theory. This framework enables a nuanced understanding of oppression that goes beyond the Western feminist perspective (“intersectionality serves as a critical lens for decolonial feminism,” Lukose, 2018).
4. Politics of Location and the Feminist Archive: Lukose explores the “politics of location” in feminist theory, which emphasizes the significance of one’s cultural and historical context in shaping feminist perspectives. Drawing on a feminist archive that includes various generations and geographies, she examines how different feminisms have been articulated over time and how they contribute to today’s decolonial discourse (“the politics of location challenges the singular narratives in feminist discourse,” Lukose, 2018).
5. Historical Legacies and Decolonial Imperatives: Lukose delves into the history of feminist thought, emphasizing its longstanding decolonial imperative. She critiques how Western feminism has often universalized its experiences, overlooking the unique struggles and insights of women from marginalized backgrounds. This perspective is crucial for developing a decolonized feminist framework that remains attentive to diverse histories and contemporary issues (“decolonizing feminism requires confronting the universalizing tendencies within feminist history,” Lukose, 2018).
6. Generational Tensions in Feminism: Addressing generational divides, Lukose reflects on differences in feminist approaches between older and younger generations, particularly in their responses to the #MeToo movement. She highlights how these tensions reveal underlying complexities in feminist discourse, including debates around sexual politics, consent, and victimhood (“the #MeToo era brings generational tensions to the forefront, impacting feminist solidarity,” Lukose, 2018).
7. Intersectional Feminism and the Influence of Tarana Burke: Lukose notes the importance of recognizing the origins of #MeToo with Tarana Burke, an African American activist who initiated the movement in 2006 to address sexual violence among girls of color. This history serves as a reminder of the need for an intersectional approach to feminism that remains inclusive of marginalized voices from different racial and socioeconomic backgrounds (“the movement’s roots with Tarana Burke highlight the need for a truly intersectional #MeToo,” Lukose, 2018).
8. Decolonial Feminism as a Framework for Global Solidarity: Lukose argues that a decolonized feminism offers a more inclusive vision for global solidarity, moving beyond Western frameworks to recognize the varied experiences of women worldwide. She suggests that this approach will strengthen feminist movements by fostering a broader, more representative alliance of voices (“decolonial feminism fosters a global solidarity that transcends Western hegemony,” Lukose, 2018).
9. Implications for Feminist Literature and Theory: Lukose’s work encourages a rethinking of feminist literature and theory by integrating postcolonial and intersectional perspectives. She calls for an expanded feminist canon that includes diverse voices, reflecting the complex realities of women’s lives globally and resisting the universalized narratives that have historically dominated feminist theory (“this decolonial approach enriches feminist literature, making it more inclusive and reflective of global realities,” Lukose, 2018).

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

Literary Term/Concept	Definition	Relevance in “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era”
Decolonial Feminism	A feminist framework focused on dismantling colonial influences within feminist theory and practice.	Lukose emphasizes the importance of a decolonial approach that critiques Western-centric feminist frameworks, advocating for inclusion of non-Western perspectives and diverse narratives (Lukose, 2018).
Intersectionality	The concept of overlapping social identities and experiences that contribute to unique systems of oppression.	Intersectionality is central to Lukose’s argument for a decolonial feminism, helping to address how race, class, and colonial history intersect with gender (Lukose, 2018).
Politics of Location	The recognition that one’s social, historical, and geographic positioning affects perspective.	Lukose uses this to argue that feminist movements need to be context-specific, shaped by the unique experiences of each location rather than adopting a universalized approach (Lukose, 2018).
Generational Tension	Differences in perspectives between older and younger feminists.	Lukose explores how generational divides in feminist thought impact responses to the #MeToo movement, particularly in how concepts like victimhood and empowerment are viewed (Lukose, 2018).
Universalizing Horizon	The tendency to adopt a single, overarching perspective as representative of all experiences.	She critiques the #MeToo movement’s universalizing tendencies, arguing that it risks marginalizing non-Western and intersectional feminist voices (Lukose, 2018).
Postcolonial Critique	Examination of the impacts of colonial history on societies, identities, and knowledge production.	Lukose employs postcolonial critique to challenge Western feminist assumptions, proposing a feminism that recognizes colonial history’s influence on gendered oppression (Lukose, 2018).
Feminist Archive	The body of feminist texts, history, and movements informing contemporary feminist discourse.	She draws from the feminist archive to highlight diverse histories and practices, advocating for a decolonial approach informed by a range of feminist narratives (Lukose, 2018).
Solidarity	The unity or agreement in shared interests, objectives, or standards among a group.	Lukose advocates for global feminist solidarity that respects diversity, emphasizing that solidarity should not be imposed but built on inclusive and intersectional foundations (Lukose, 2018).
Knowledge Production	The processes and institutions that create and validate knowledge.	Lukose addresses how feminist knowledge is created within academic institutions, urging scholars to consider how academia shapes feminist discourse and activism (Lukose, 2018).

Contribution of “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose to Literary Theory/Theories

• Decolonial Theory and Feminism: Lukose’s work advances decolonial theory within feminist discourse by critically analyzing how mainstream feminist movements, such as #MeToo, often prioritize Western perspectives, thus marginalizing non-Western and postcolonial voices. She argues for a decolonial feminism that actively resists Western-centric narratives, emphasizing the importance of including voices from the Global South and other marginalized groups (“decolonial feminism requires the dismantling of Western hegemony in feminist discourse” Lukose, 2018).
• Intersectionality and Identity Politics: Lukose strengthens intersectional theory in feminist literary discourse by advocating for an approach that addresses intersecting oppressions related to race, class, gender, and colonial history. She critiques the limited scope of #MeToo as it has circulated primarily in the West, suggesting that intersectional feminism must extend beyond inclusion to fundamentally reshape feminist narratives (“intersectionality serves as a critical lens for addressing diverse forms of oppression within decolonial feminism” Lukose, 2018).
• Politics of Location in Feminist Theory: By emphasizing the “politics of location,” Lukose contributes to feminist theories that prioritize context-specific narratives. She argues that understanding a feminist movement’s impact requires attention to each location’s unique cultural, historical, and political landscape, rather than applying a universal standard of feminism (“the politics of location challenges universalizing approaches in feminist discourse” Lukose, 2018).
• Postcolonial Feminist Theory: Lukose’s article critiques postcolonial feminist theory, particularly its focus on disrupting universalizing Western narratives of gender and sexuality. She argues that postcolonial feminist frameworks must adapt to contemporary movements like #MeToo, ensuring they address diverse cultural perspectives and avoid reinforcing a singular feminist experience (“decolonial efforts must incorporate the lessons of postcolonial critique to resist hegemonic feminist narratives” Lukose, 2018).
• Generational Theory within Feminism: Lukose introduces the concept of generational tensions within feminist movements, highlighting how different generations respond to movements like #MeToo. By analyzing these generational differences, she contributes to generational theory in feminist literary studies, suggesting that feminist solidarity requires bridging divides between younger and older feminists (“intergenerational dialogue is essential for a decolonized feminist solidarity” Lukose, 2018).
• Feminist Knowledge Production: Through her examination of feminist scholarship within academic institutions, Lukose contributes to critical theories on knowledge production. She challenges the notion that academic feminism is separate from activism, arguing that universities play a crucial role in shaping feminist discourse that impacts public movements like #MeToo (“feminist knowledge production within universities shapes broader feminist movements” Lukose, 2018).

Examples of Critiques Through “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

Literary Work	Critique through “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era”	Key Concepts from Lukose
“Jane Eyre” by Charlotte Brontë	Jane Eyre can be critiqued for its Eurocentric, colonial outlook, particularly in the portrayal of Bertha Mason, the “madwoman in the attic,” who represents colonial otherness. Lukose’s framework would challenge Brontë’s treatment of Bertha, urging an understanding of Bertha’s position within colonial oppression.	Decolonial Theory, Politics of Location
“The Second Sex” by Simone de Beauvoir	De Beauvoir’s work, while foundational, often assumes a Western perspective on womanhood, overlooking the intersection of gender with race, class, and colonial histories. Using Lukose’s lens, one would critique The Second Sex for its universalizing portrayal of women’s oppression without accounting for intersectional identities.	Universalizing Horizon, Intersectionality
“Wide Sargasso Sea” by Jean Rhys	Wide Sargasso Sea offers a postcolonial response to Jane Eyre, centering the experiences of Antoinette/Bertha. Lukose’s decolonial feminism would support Rhys’s effort to give voice to a marginalized, Caribbean character, while suggesting that even this narrative could further explore intersectional struggles.	Postcolonial Feminist Theory, Intersectionality
“Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe	Achebe’s novel critiques colonialism, but Lukose’s framework would further examine how it handles gender dynamics within traditional Igbo society, questioning whether the story reflects intersectional gender issues that emerge in colonial and postcolonial contexts.	Decolonial Theory, Politics of Location, Intersectionality

Criticism Against “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

• Risk of Overemphasis on Western-Centric Critique: Some critics may argue that Lukose’s focus on critiquing Western-centric feminism might inadvertently overshadow local issues and movements in non-Western contexts. This could lead to an overemphasis on the Western influence rather than providing a balanced exploration of indigenous feminist perspectives.
• Challenges in Practical Application of Decolonial Feminism: Lukose’s call for decolonial feminism, while theoretically compelling, may face criticism for lacking practical frameworks or clear guidance on how to implement decolonial principles effectively within existing feminist movements, especially those with deeply ingrained structures.
• Potential for Alienating Younger Feminist Generations: Her emphasis on generational divides in feminism could be seen as reinforcing division rather than fostering intergenerational solidarity. Critics may feel this approach could alienate younger feminists or create unnecessary boundaries within feminist discourse.
• Broad Scope of Intersectionality: While intersectionality is central to Lukose’s argument, some may argue that her approach is overly broad, potentially diluting the specificity of issues unique to certain marginalized groups. This could lead to criticisms that the framework of intersectionality, as applied here, does not fully address specific systemic oppressions.
• Limited Engagement with Non-Western Feminist Scholarship: Although the article critiques Western dominance in feminist discourse, critics may argue that Lukose does not fully engage with non-Western feminist scholarship and indigenous feminist voices. This might suggest a gap in fully integrating diverse global perspectives.

Representative Quotations from “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“This article explores what it means to decolonize feminism in the university today.”	Lukose sets up the central inquiry of her work, examining how the university as an institution can either separate feminism from social movements or support a broader decolonizing feminist project.
“Feminism in the university is in and of this world.”	Lukose emphasizes that academic feminism should not be isolated from real-world struggles and social contexts, countering perceptions of academic feminism as detached.
“The #MeToo era has foregrounded the universalizing horizon of feminism, posing new challenges for this project.”	She discusses how #MeToo’s global reach introduces both unifying themes and complex differences that challenge the concept of a singular, universally applicable feminism.
“Intersectional feminism” … “proceeds under the banner of diversity and is often linked to the idea that women have multiple identities that need to be included.”	Lukose examines the modern use of intersectionality, sometimes reduced to diversity and inclusion rather than as Crenshaw’s original critique of intersecting power structures affecting women of color.
“The universalizing horizons of feminism and the relations between feminisms have, of course, been long-standing lines of contestation.”	Lukose addresses historical debates within feminism about universal and particular experiences of gender, suggesting that these tensions are essential to ongoing feminist discourse and alliances.
“One way in which feminism in the university is in and of this world is to recognize that the contours of our current public conversations and mobilizations about feminism are complexly related to concepts and ideas forged by a political movement.”	Lukose illustrates the intertwined nature of feminist theory and practice, where ideas generated in academia influence public feminist movements and vice versa.
“While feminist knowledge projects have a foundational decolonizing imperative, the current #MeToo moment has demonstrated how knowledge and power are complexly intertwined in ways that cannot be taken for granted.”	This points to the significance of examining knowledge-power relations within feminist activism, especially in the #MeToo era, which highlights structural power and its impact on marginalized voices.
“Calls for an ‘intersectional feminism’ today have proceeded under the banner of diversity and more often than not been linked to the idea that women have multiple identities that need to be included.”	Lukose critiques how intersectionality has been used as a checklist for diversity, contrasting this with its original purpose of addressing intersecting oppressions in law and social policy.
“The tensions between MacKinnon’s universalizing definition of sexual harassment and Crenshaw’s arguments about intersectionality demonstrate the persistence of feminism as a horizon that seems to always trip over a universal definition of patriarchy, sexism and womanhood.”	Here, Lukose addresses the complexities of feminist discourse, suggesting that universal definitions often fall short in addressing intersectional nuances in issues like sexual harassment.
“It is important to remember that feminist interventions within the terrain of knowledge have always had a decolonizing imperative.”	Lukose emphasizes that feminist scholarship’s foundational aim has been to deconstruct and challenge dominant narratives, making decolonization a central objective within feminist theory and practice.

Suggested Readings: “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era” by Ritty Lukose

1. Lukose, Ritty. “Decolonizing Feminism in the #MeToo Era.” The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, vol. 36, no. 2, 2018, pp. 34–52. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26945999. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.
2. Arvin, Maile, et al. “Decolonizing Feminism: Challenging Connections between Settler Colonialism and Heteropatriarchy.” Feminist Formations, vol. 25, no. 1, 2013, pp. 8–34. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43860665. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.
3. KUUMBA, MONICA BAHATI. “The Limits of Feminism: Decolonizing Women’s Liberation/Oppression Theory.” Race, Sex & Class, vol. 1, no. 2, 1994, pp. 85–100. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41680222. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.
4. Thobani, Sunera. Hypatia, vol. 20, no. 3, 2005, pp. 221–24. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3811126. Accessed 4 Nov. 2024.