F.E.A.S.T. Conference 2019

by Jamie Ritzo and Laura Brown

October 3-6, 2019 marked the tenth official FEAST (Feminist Ethics and Social Theory) Conference, along with the 20-year anniversary of the first FEAST proto-conference. Feminist scholars convened in Clearwater Beach, Florida to this year’s theme: “The Future of Feminist Ethics: Intersectionality, Epistemology, and Grace.” We are unable to discuss all of the great work that was presented at the twenty-two sessions, but encourage you to check out the program so that you can get a sense of just how outstanding this conference was. To quote Brittney Cooper, the presenters at FEAST put on a clinic fueled by “supernatural excellence.”  

FEAST is perhaps the most diverse it has been, both in terms of attendees and topics. That diversity contributed to one of the very best conferences we have attended. We are third and fifth-year graduate students, and we would be thrilled if all conferences in philosophy were as invested in issues that matter. Unexpected combinations—even contradictions—of ideas led to intriguing conversations wherein looking forward to the future of feminist ethics required revisiting the past. The future of feminist ethics, if this conference is any indication, is secure. A new generation of imaginative thinkers—a group deeply indebted to forebears who pioneered the scholarship that makes FEAST possible—seems poised to push feminist thinking into new and exciting directions.

One of the remarkable things about this conference was how each panel flowed into the other, as themes and topics were weaved throughout the presentations. Being the lone person in a department or institution researching on feminist issues can be isolating, so it was nice to see other feminist thinkers throughout the country asking the same sort of questions and reading the same literature. Yet, the conference was not an echo chamber. As evidenced by the difficult dialogue that Jeanine Weekes Schroer and Melissa Kozma hosted on “‘White Feminism’ and ‘Grace,’” we do not all agree on the exact path forward. For example, questions were raised about whether we should even be evaluating whether women of color should be tasked with gracefully responding to unwitting racism, or whether the main challenge today is for white women who are feminists to learn to be graceful in situations in which they are uncomfortable. Many agree, however, that we have enough commonality to forge our collective way.

The conference was anchored around two powerful keynotes. On Friday night, a packed room gathered to hear a conversation between Brittney Cooper and Kristie Dotson about black feminist thought. Let us say that we have not seen a keynote in the form of a discussion before, but a dialogue is what philosophy is all about. It was incredible to see two brilliant women philosophizing live. Kimberlé Crenshaw’s “intersectionality” centered the discussion. Dotson and Cooper began by claiming that intersectionality does not imply identity politics, which they reminded attendees, Crenshaw acknowledges in her seminal law review article. Cooper discussed her role in the #SayHerName campaign and the importance of investing in the kind of analytics that critique the state. She noted that intersectionality is primarily a critique of power. While Dotson and Cooper acknowledged potential worries for concepts like intersectionality (or the work of W.E.B. Du Bois or Pauli Murray), they put this complex inherited work into context. Dotson and Cooper argued that black thinkers have inherited work that was created under the reality of severe oppression. This required these thinkers to invent brand new concepts. Though some of the work may appear problematic, they claimed, these thinkers have laid the groundwork for black feminist thought. Dotson argued that intersectionality helps us keep track of the multistability of oppression. Depending on our own range of ontological reality, intersectionality pushes us to consider other perspectives and stories, which is important because no single story can capture the entirety of what is going on socially. Cooper also discussed embodied discourse and its challenges, including the ways in which black women have tried to create some level of congruence with the way that their bodies are perceived and the social discourse about black women. Cooper noted that black women are dealing with a present reality of assault and are “fighting back by going out and contesting the discourse about how black women are supposed to be.”

Talia Bettcher joked about having to follow Cooper and Dotson, but wowed us with her talk on transfeminism. Bettcher’s Daily Nous blog post, “When Tables Speak,” was a point of departure for a presentation that blended the modes of oppression trans people face with María Lugones’ concept of relationality. Bettcher began by demonstrating the evolution of Crenshaw’s “intersectionality.” She then discussed the rejection of the gender binary and complications that creates for trans people trying to gain social recognition for who they are. Bettcher also noted that the work we do in conversation with each other is important. Quoting Lugones, Bettcher argued that one of the tasks of philosophy is to reach out and communicate creatively with each other and truly engage in conversation.

 Abigail Gosselin and Christine Wieseler facilitated a discussion on dis/ability. Gosselin discussed the use of seemingly innocuous language like “crazy” and how to confront users of this language while engaging in self-care. Wieseler analyzed the harm that occurs when disabled people are not thought of as sexual beings and how this affects self-esteem and social reactions. Nicole Dular and Casey Rebecca Johnson analyzed the phenomena of mansplaining inside and outside of academia, an undertheorized form of epistemic injustice. Lorraine Mayer, Kassiah Sankar, and Kristy Ballantyne discussed the underpublicized and undertheorized harms against indigenous women, focusing specifically on murdered and missing indigenous women in Canada.

We were particularly enthusiastic about the author meets critics panel on Camisha Russell’s The Assisted Reproduction of Race. Qrescent Mali Mason argued that Russell’s framing of race as technology helps us see race as a construction. On Russell’s view, practices are sites where race is reconstructed and maintained, and technology is political. Mason cited Brittany Howard’s 2019 album Jaime, and specifically the song “Goat Head,”as an example of songwriting and performance as a technology of race. A queer, biracial black woman from the South, Howard’s personal relation to herself is fundamental to understanding the ways in which the album produces and is produced by constructions of race. Mason offers Howard’s songwriting as an example which “highlights the nonsensicality of treating race as natural” and also as an example of the power of the race idea to influence the technology of race. The sense of defiance in “Goat Head” allows Howard to resist the intent of the hate act described in the song, which allows her a semblance of power and enables her to center herself in the narrative by “taking up the race idea by placing the personal in the realm of the political.” Mason’s application of Russell’s view to the technology of art production highlights how important Russell’s work is in understanding the relationship between race and technology.

Calling the book “required reading,” Rónké A. Òké used Kwame Anthony Appiah and African literary scholarship as a backdrop to engage Russell’s work as following the lineage of identifying the idea of “not what race is, but, what race does.” Òké particularly focused on Russell’s treatment of the relationship between race and space in Chapter 4’s “Race, Blood, and American Kinship” section. Òké questioned how race, blood, and kinship might work outside of the US concept. Drawing on black feminist views of motherhood and work on decolonizing gender, Òké raised questions about agency and also women’s motivations for seeking out assisted reproductive technology, citing the pressure to become a mother in the Nigerian context specifically. Shaeeda Mensah explored ideas of mixed-race identity and the social and political implications of the assumed link between assisted reproductive technologies and infertility and how this bears on notions of who should be a parent. Questioning this assumed link, Mensah cited lesbian parents who do not have an issue with fertility, but who are seeking out assisted reproductive technology for other reasons, as a case in which parents-to-be might choose assisted reproductive technology for reasons unrelated to fertility.

One touching session celebrated the work of Joan Callahan, a foremother of FEAST. Although friends and colleagues acknowledged her legacy as a powerhouse in the fields of feminist theory, philosophy of law, and more, the session focused on how she applied her philosophical perspective beyond academe. Callahan devoted a great deal of time to archiving women doing philosophy. She was an exceptional teacher and graduate student mentor. Callahan was also on the front lines for LGBT rights in Kentucky. Her life merged theory and practice in a way that we should all aspire to achieve.

As is the case at any academic conference, the sheer brain power assembled in one space alongside the intensity of the topics was overwhelming. Informal discussions over breakfast and drinks, as well as evening socials balanced the academic aspect. Good conversation could be found at lunch.

There was a large graduate student turnout this year, which kicked off with a graduate student meet and greet on Thursday evening. New this year was a graduate student book raffle featuring the hottest new books in feminist philosophy. Graduate students will write reviews of these works. The work presented by our fellow graduate students was excellent. Rebekah Sinclair and Maggie Newton won the award for the top graduate essay for one that they co-wrote: “Haunting Ourselves: Lugones, Ortega, and Anzaldúa on a New (Old) Model of the Multiplicitous Self.” It was a beautifully and carefully written piece that connected the themes of epistemology, intersectionality, and grace from the conference.

When asked to speak to a highlight from the conference, one graduate student stated, “For me, the biggest highlight is the opportunity to network with exciting scholars in the field of feminist philosophy. Everyone is approachable and the atmosphere is very welcoming, which makes it easy to strike up a conversation. The connections I’ve built through FEAST, whether with faculty or with other graduate students, are really meaningful to me.”Echoing this sentiment, graduate student and FEAST participant Caleb Ward observed, “The most striking thing as a newcomer to FEAST is the sense that it is a community of thinkers whose work on shared challenges has been made possible both by supporting one another and holding one another accountable. There was a committed sense that people are in this for the long term. More than once I heard questions after presentations that began, “I know you’ve thought about this because I’ve been asking you for years…” There was a sense that there were grievances of the past—about respect, inclusion, division of intellectual labor—that had been (and are still being) worked through, but that the work Layli Maparyan calls “standing-in” — being present as a voice of difference in environments where you are both ‘an insider’ and ‘the opposition’– had shifted the community toward more self-reflective, inclusive, and incisive forms of theorizing and collaboration.”

Undergraduates are also becoming involved with FEAST. The next FEAST will include an undergraduate panel. The FEAST conference was featured on social media this year, spearheaded by senior philosophy major Spencer Nabors of Spelman College. You can peruse the highlights at #FEAST2019, which include plenty of respect, admiration, and encouragement on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram among the philosophers. As young philosophers who have witnessed plenty of academics tearing each other down, we were thrilled to see all of this support. 

FEAST provides feminist philosophers the space to interrogate values and methodology, discuss trailblazing research, and network with the very best in our field. It manages to challenge participants while simultaneously fortifying them. We both walked away with innovative questions to hone our current scholarship and new research, such as to what extent feminist philosophy can make use of problematic scholarship or scholarship in dominant frameworks? What counts as an act of resistance or of epistemic resistance? We also came away with great literature recommendations, including Serene Khader’s Decolonizing Universalism, Brittney Cooper’s Eloquent Rage, and Camisha Russell’s The Assisted Reproduction of Race. We were fortunate to attend.

Many thanks to the 2019 FEAST program co-chairs Gaile Pohlhaus, Jr. and Jeanine Weekes Schroer, Asha Bhandary (FEAST Chair), as well as the rest of the programming committee for a wonderful event. We would also like to express our appreciation to the employees of the Sheraton Sand Key Resort who worked tirelessly in the background to ensure we had a marvelous experience.

Jamie Ritzo is a PhD candidate at the University of Iowa whose main areas of research are social and political philosophy and feminist ethics. She is currently serving as the graduate student representative for FEAST.

Laura Brown is a doctoral student in the philosophy department at the University of Iowa. Her research interests include political philosophy, feminist philosophy, and philosophy of law.