"Disciplining”Ｗｏｍｅｎ，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎ ｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄＳｔａｔｅｓａｎｄJapan：

１

"Disciplining”Ｗｏｍｅｎ，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎ ｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄＳｔａｔｅｓａｎｄJapan：

Factalssues,andQuestionsl

ＤｉａｎａＫｈｏｒ

ＡWomen'sStudiesmajorshouldbeabletodothefO11owing：

Demonstrateunderstandingofthesocialconstructionofgenderandsexual ity；

Demonstrateanunderstandingofthｅｗａｙｓｔｈａｔｗｏｍｅｎ，slivesareshapedby largesocialstructuresandconventionsofrepresentation；

Demonstrateanunderstandingoftheintersectionalityofdifferentdimensions ofsocialorganizationsasconceptsandaslivedexperience；

Identifymechanismsofoppressionandresistance；

Analyzetheroleofsociallocationandpowerintheproductionofideas,theo‐

riesandrepresentations；

Understandandappreciatemultipleperspectives;and

Makeconnectionsbetweenabstractknowledgeandsocialactivism

（Zimmerman2005:35-36）

Ｂｙ１ｌＷｏｍｅｎ,sStudies，,wemeantheinter･disciplinarystudyofwomenandof problemsrelatedtowomen，predicatedonarespectforwomenashuman beingsanddedicatedtoathoroughreconsiderationfromawomen,ｓｐｏｉｎｔｓｏｆ ｖｉｅｗｏｆａｌｌｐｒｅｅｘｉｓｔｉｎｇａcademicdisciplines、

Women，sStudieshasdevelopedamidsttheincreasingworld-widede‐

mandfortherecoveryandrespectofhumanrightsingeneral,ａｎｄｗｅｈｏｐｅｔｏ ｓｅｅｉｔｃｏｎｔｉｎｕｅｔｏｅｘｐａｎｄｉｎｔｈｅｆｕｔｕｒｅ．

（StatementissuedbythelnauguratiｏｎＣｏｍｍｉｔｔｅｅｏｆＴｈｅＷｏｍｅｎ,s StudiesAssociationofJapaninl97９（http://wwwjoseigakkai-jporg/eng／

index-ehtml)）

Atthequietandspaciousarchiveslibrary,layingvolumeaftervol of“StanfordUniversityBulletin'’０ｎａ“cradle”ｔｏprotect“age。

ＵｌｎｅＯＩ－ごＩａｎｌＯｒｄＵｎｌｖｅｒＳ１[ＶＵｕｌｌｅｔ１ｎ.￣Ｏｎａ

２

materialso”andgoingthroughtherecordsofthe``FeministStudies'，pro‐

gram,ＩｓｔｕｄｉｅｄｏｎｅｐｉｅｃｅｏｆｔｈｅｈｉｓｔｏｒｙｏｆWomen，sStudiesintheUnited States,ｏｒrather,Ｉｒｅｌｉｖｅｄａｈｉｓｔｏｒｙｏｆｗｈｉｃｈｌｗａｓａｐａrt・TheFeminist StudiesprogramwasestablishedafewyearsbeforeIstartedgraduate schooLWhenamajorwasapproved,Ｉｒａｎｄiscussionsessionsintheinter‐

disciplinarylntroductionofFeministStudies（FS101）formotivatedand exceedinglyintelligentundergraduateswhowoulddｏｔｈｅｉｒｐａｒｔｉｎｖａｒｉ‐

ousfieldstomakeAmericansocietyamoregender-equalsociety､２stan‐

fordUniversitywasconsideredalatecomer，establishingitsFeminist Studiesprogram,morecommonlycalledWomen，sStudieselsewhere,in thel980s・ThefirstWomen，sStudiesprogramintheUnitedStateswas establishedinSanDiegoStateUniversityinCaliforniainl969,ａｎｄｔｈｅ

"definitionU，ｏｆWomen,sStudiescitedabovewasbyafeministscholar deeplyinvolvedindevelopingtheprogramthere・Ｂｙｔｈｅｌ９９０ｓ，there weremoｒｅｔｈａｎ６００Ｗｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesprogramsandabachelor,ｓｄｅｇｒｅｅ ｗａｓｏｆｆｅｒｅｄｉｎｍｏｒｅｔｈａｎ２００institutions・Master,sanddoctoraldegrees alsobegantobeofferedlnl995,about20programshadformaldepart‐

mentalstatus（Boxerl998)．

ＴｗｏｍｏｎｔｈｓａｆｔｅｒｍｙｔｉｍｅｔｒａｖｅｌａｔＳｔanford,Iattendedaninterna‐

tionalconferenceonwomeninSeoul,atEwhaWomansUniversity,the pioneerinstitutioninWomen，sStudiesinAsiaTherewerenumerous informativeandexcitingpanelsonthedevelopmentofandissuescon‐

frontingWomen,sStudiesmvariousAsiancountries・Onepan-Asian paneladdressedtheissuesofstateinterventionandcontrolandtheuseof gender-mainstreamingtoreplacefeminisminlndonesia;themobilization ofwomeninthedemocraticmovementinthePhilippinesthel970sand thedevelopmentofwomen，sstudiesafterwards;professionalizationinthe contextoftheinstitutionalizationofWomen,sStudiesinIndia,ａｎｄｓｏｏｎ Ｔｈｅｄｉｓｃｕｓｓａｎｔｃｏｍｍｅｎｔｅｄｏntheissueofgovernmentcontrolandinter‐

vention・Then，sheposedaquestiontothepanelistｓａｂｏｕｔ“the poststructuralistideaofthediscursivelyconstitutedfragmentaryself，, (myparaphrase）inrelationtowomenandfeminisminＡｓｉａＡｆｔｅｒｔｈｅ

UDisciplining0,Women，sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan ^３

questionwasposed,therewassilenceforwhatfeltlikealongtimebefore

themoderatorsteppedinandopenedupthefloorforcommentsandques‐

ｔｉｏｎｓｔｏｇｉｖｅｔｈｅｐａｎｅｌｉｓｔｓｔｉｍｅｔｏｔhinkoverthe“difficultquestion.,，The

issuesdiscussedandthequestiｏｎｐｏｓｅｄａｔｔｈｅｅｎｄｒｅｆｌｅｃｔｅｄｂａｃｋｔｏme theincoherentsetofquestionsoccupyingmymindeversincesearching theFeministStudiesarchivesatStanfordUniversity，condensingina

singlemomenttwodecadesofmyexperienceandobservatｉｏｎｏｆｔｈｅｄｅ‐

velopmentofWomen，sStudiesConceptualizingthedevelopmentof

Women,ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎｔｅｒｍｓｏｆｅａｒｌｙｏradvanceddevelopmentinthe

`Westo，andlateorretardeddevelopmentinAsiadoesnotcapturethe

meaningofthedifferent“languages，,spokenbythepanelists- languagesｔｈａｔｈａｖｅｅｖｏｌｖｅｄａｌｍｏｓｔｉｎｔａｎｄｅｍｗiththedevelopmentof

feministscholarshipover20yearsintheUnitedStatesandEurope,ｂｕｔ

ｓｐｏｋｅｎａｔｏｎｅａｎｄｔｈｅｓａｍｅｔｉｍｅｉｎＡｓｉａＩｔｉｓａｌｓｏｎｏｔｏｎｌｙａｂｏｕｔａｎ ｏｐｐｏｓｉtionbetweenfeministpraxisandabstracttheorizing，although

thereisanelementofthat,Itisaboutthegapandcontradictionsbetween feministtheorizingandWomen，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓａｓａｎｍｓｔｉｔｕｔｉｏｎｏｎｔｈｅｏｎｅ hand,andthematerialcontextsinwhichWomenIsStudiesoperateand feministtheoriesarearticulatedandcirculatedontheother・Ｉｔｉｓｍｙｎｅｅｄ ｔｏｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄｔｈｉｓｇａｐａndresolvethecontradictionsthatmotivatedme toundertakeaprojectｏｎＷｏｍｅｎ,sStudiesinJapan,andthispaperisa preliminaryreporｔｏｆｍｙｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｓｏｆａr,andmoreimportantly,anarticu‐

lationofthequestionsyettobeansｗｅｒｅｄ

ｌｎｔｈｉｓｐａｐｅｒ,IwilldiscussthedevelopmentofWomen'sStudiesand teaseoutthecontroversialissuesthathaveemergedsincethefirst WomenIsStudiescoursesweretaughtintheUnitedStates，providing comparablemformationonJapanandAsiawheneveravailable・Through thisoverview，Ihopetoraisespecificresearchquestionsforamorecom‐

prehensiveanalysisofWomenosStudiesinJapan．

４

TheDevelopmentofWomen，sStudies

Scholarshavepointedtoafewfactorsthatfacilitatedthedevelop‐

ｍｅｎｔｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ,sStudiescoursesandprogramsmtheUnitedStates:the

largercontextsofthewomen，smovement,heightenedconsciousnessof

genderissues,massivechangesintheuniversitywherestudentsbecame activeindemandingchangesinthecurriculum，ｔｈｅｉｎｃｒｅａｓｅｉｎｗｏｍｅｎ

ｗｉｔｈＰｈ､DsandfacUltymemberswhoinitiatedchangesintheirprofes‐

sionalorganizationsandcourses,andreactionstoincidentsofdiscrimina‐

tionagainstwomenosuchasdenialoftenuretowomenfacultymembers・

Thefactorsoperatedindifferentｃombinationsondifferentcampuses,ｂｕｔ ｏｎｅｏｒｍｏｒｅｏｆｔｈｅｓｅｆａｃｔｏｒｓｗｅｒｅapparentlyinstrumentalinbringing aboutthefirstWomen,sStudiescoursesandprograms（Boxerl998；

OBarrl994；Messer-Davidow2002IUniversityofWisconsinWomen，s

StudiesConsortiuml999).３

However,thesenarrativeswerewrittenyearsafterWomen'sStudies

wereestablished・Ｔｈｏｓｅｗｒｉｔｔｅｎｉｎｔｈｅｍｉｄｓｔｏｆｔｈｅｄｅｖelopmentof Women,sStudieshaveaslightlydifferentstorytotell，revealingmore conflictsandproblemsthantheretrospectiveanalysessuggest・

Articleswritteninthel970sandl980sdelineatedthe“largercon‐

texts'，moreconcretely,describingthe“non-curricularcourses',thatcame

beforeWomen，sstudies（Tobiasl978）andtheintellectualpluralismand thelackofstructuralhomogeneityofAmericanuniversities(Evansl9811

Atthesametime，theyalsodescribedtheresistanceagainstWomen0s

Studiesintheearlyyears（Rowlandl982),warnedofthedangerof"re‐

pressivetolerance"ｏｆWomen,sStudies（Evansl981),andrecognizedthe

resilienceofacademicinstitutionsagainstchanges（Tobiasl978).イ

AllinalLwhateverthespecificfactorsatwork,thefirstWomen，s StudiescoursesandprogramsintheUnitedStatesweretheresultofa

bottom-upprocessinvolvingstudentactivism，ｆｒｅｑｕｅｎｔｌｙｉｎａｃｏｎｔｅｘｔ

ｗｈｅｒｅｑｕｅｓｔionswereraisedaboutthemissionaｎｄｍｅａｎｉｎｇｏｆｔｈｅ

"Disciplining，，Women0sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan５ universityasaneducationalinstitutionInAsia,whilefeministacadem‐

icsweredirectlyinvolvedindevelopingWomen,sStudiescoursesand programs,thestateandothersupra-nationalagenciesaswellasgrass･

rootsmovementsplayedsignificantroles,frequentlyinthecontextof

politicａｌｒestiveness，democratizationandgrowingmodernization、Ｆｏｒ

example,themodernizationprojectinKorea,thehelpoftheCanadian lnternationalDevelopmentagencyandtheAsianandPacificDevelop mentCentreinMalaysia,theBeijingConferencel995andBasicLawfor GenderEqualSocietyinl999iｎJapan,ａｎｄwomen，smassorganizations connectedtothestateinChina,Vietnam,andLaoswereallsignificantin thedevelopmentofWomen，sStudiesintherespectivecountries (Resurreccion2004)．

Apparently,manyinthefirstgenerationoffeministscholarsinboth theUnitedStatesandAsiabroughtwiththemintotheacademeexperi‐

encesinthefeministandotherprogressivemovementsinthel960sand l970s・However,therearesignificantdifferencesｉｎｔｈｅｐａｔｈｏｆｄｅｖｅｌｏｐ‐

ｍｅｎｔｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ，ｓＳｔudiesinthetworegions,namely,ａbottom､updevel opmentthatfocusedfirstonundergraduateeducationintheUnited Statesandalargelytop-downdevelopmentfocusingonresearchinmany Asiancountries、InJapan,ｆｏｒexample,eventhoughthefirstWomen's StudiescourseswereactuaUyofferｅｄｔｏｕpper-levelundergraduatestu‐

dentsinl974inSophiaUniversity（Hara2004),thesubsequentdevelop‐

mentfocusednotonundergraduateeducationbutresearchcentersand institutesBythelatel990s,therewereresearchcentersandinstitutesin l3institutions，accordingtoonestudy（Hara2004)，ａｎｄｔｗｏｍａｊｏｒ Ｗｏｍｅｎ,sStudiesAssociationswerefoundeｄｉｎｌ９７７ａｎｄｌ９７９、

OchanomizuWomen，sUniversity（GenderStudiesCenter）andTohoku

University（GenderLawandPolicyResearchCenter）receivedthe

“CenterofExcellence”awardsfromtheMinistryofEducatiｏｎ，Culture，

Sports，ScienceandTechnologyin2000and200a5Josailnternational UniversitystartedofferingthefirstMaster1sdegreeinWomen,sStudies inJapaninl996,andvariousinstitutionsnowofferPhD・sintheHumani．

６

tiesandSocialScienceswithaWome､'ｓStudies/GenderResearchcon-

centration・Ｏｎｔｈｅｏｔｈｅｒｈａｎｄ,ｉｔｗａｓｏｎｌｙｉｎ２００５ｔｈａｔｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔｕｎｄｅｒ‐

graduateconcentrationinGenderStudiesmthecountrybegantobe offeredatthelnternationalChristianUniversityinthePrograminGender

andSexualityStudiesundertheauspicesoftheCenterforGenderStud

ies，ItispossiblethatthispatternofdevelopmentinJapanhaslimitedthe

infiltrationofWomen'sStudiesinhighereducation,ｍａｄｅWomen，sStud‐

iesvulnerabletobacklashes,suchasthecurrentattackongender-free

education，andsteeredfeministscholarshipinthedirectionofabstract theorizingdissociatedｆｒｏｍthematerialconditionsofwomen6

SourcesofConflictsandTensioninWomen，sStudies

TheinstitutionalizationofWomen，sStudiesininstitutionsofhigher

educationmtheUnitedStatessawtheemergenceofconflictsandtension amongfeministscholarsandeducatorsovercoreissuesrelatedtothe

integrationofWomen，sStudiesintothecorecurriculum,ｔｈｅａｕｔｏｎｏｍｙｏｆ Ｗｏｍｅｎ,sStudies，feministpedagogyⅢtherelationshipbetweenpolitics andscholarship/education,ａｎｄｅｖｅｎｔｈｅｉｍ/possibilityofWomenIsStud‐

ｉｅｓＭａｎｙｏｆｔｈｅｓｅｉｓｓｕｅｓｅｍｅｒｇｅｄｉｎｔheearlystagesofAmerican Women，sStudiesandstillhauntittoday、Thelackofcomparabledebates

onmosｔｏｆｔｈｅｓｅｉｓｓｕｅｓａｎｄｔｈｅｐarticularformthedebatestakeonthe restinJapanandotherAsiancountriescanexplainthecurrentinstitu‐

tionalizationofWomen，sStudiesandhasimportantimplicaｔｉｏｎｓｆｏｒｉｔｓ

ｆｕｔｕｒｅｉｎｔｈｅｒｅｇｉｏｎ．

(Ａ）AcademicFeminism:ContradictioninTerms？

Women，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎｉｔｓｅａｒｌｙｙｅａｒｓｍｔｈｅＵｎｉtedStateswasoften depictedasthe“academicarm''０ffeminismorthefeministmovement・

WhetherWomenosStudiesisanacademicdisciplinewasfirstdiscussedin

al979NWSAmeeting,ｂｕｔｉｔｉｓｓｔｉｌｌａｎｉｍｐｏｒｔａｎｔｉｓｓｕｅｔｏday（Boxer

l998).７Ｔｈｅｒｅｗａｓａｎｄｉｓａｃｌａｓｈｎｏｔｏｎｌｙｂｅｔｗeenactivistsandscholars

UDisciplining0'WomenosStudiesintheUnitedStateｓａｎｄＪａｐａｎ ^７ overallegiancestotheuniversityorthemovement1butalso``fracturing,, ｉｎｔｈｅａｃａｄｅｍｅｂｅｔｗｅｅｎｔｈｏｓｅｗｈｏｓｅｅWomen，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓａｓａ“potential revolutionaryforce'，ａｎｄｏｔｈｅｒｓｗｈｏｓｅｅｉｔａｓａｎｅｍｅｒｇｉｎｇｄisciplinethat needstoestablishitslegitimacy（Messer-Davidow2002;Showalterl971，

citedinMesser-Davidow2002:121)．

Regardlessoftheparticularstancetaken,feministscholarsgenerally noticethecontradictorypositionofWomen，sStudies,ａｓａｂｒａｎｃｈｏｆｏｒａｔ ｌｅａｓｔｈａｓｉｔｓｒｏｏｔsinthefeministmovement,ｂｕｔｎｏｗｓｉｔｕａｔｅｄｉｎａｐｕｒ‐

portedlyapoliticalacademy、Theinterpretationofthiscontradiction，

however,varies，Ｓｏｍｅｍｉｎｉｍｉｚｅｔｈｅｉｍｐｏｒｔｏｆｓｕｃｈｃｏｎtradictionbyar‐

guingthatWomenOsStudies，withitsrootsinactivism，providesa counterforcewithintheuniversity,ｗｈｉｃｈｉｓｉｔｓｅｌｆｉｓａｓｉｔｅｏｆｓｔｒｕggleto ensurethatknowledgeisnotproducedsolelyintheinterestsofthepow‐

erful(Kessler-Harrisl992;Evansl982)．Indeed,someconsiderthetension betweentheacademyandpoliticalmovementnecessary,andarguethat Women，sStudiesshouldmaintainthebalancebetween“women，，ａｎｄ

"Studies,Ⅱ（Stimpsonl996;Edwardsl978)．However,lookingattheacad‐

emymoreclosely,somehavequestionedthepossibilityofsuchabalance Rowland（1987）pointsoutthattheemphasisonindividualisminthe academyishostiletothenecessarycooperationandconnectionamong femmistsinit（seealsoGunewl987;Martin2000)．Whileitmightbetrue thatthesucceｓｓｏｒｆａｉｌｕｒｅｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesdependsonhowmuchit contributestotheintellectualdiscoursearoundwhichhighereducation institutionsareconstructed（Kessler-Harrisl992),de-radicalization,elit‐

ismandthedevelopmentofesotericscholarshipcouchedinabstractinac‐

cessiblelanguagecouldestrangeWomen,sStudiesfromitsactivistroots andcreateahierarchyamongwomen（Rowlandl987;CurrieandKazi l987；seealsoJohnsonl987；Messer-Davidow2002)．Ｉｎａｒｅｃｅｎｔｒｅ‐

assessmentofWomen'ｓStudies,WeigmanexploreshowWomen，sStudies couldbe"tootheoreticalandnottheoreticalenough,toopoliticizedornot politicalenough,，,andsuggeststhat“thepossibilityofwomenosstudies residesingeneratingtheanalyticperspectivenecessaryforapprehending

８

themostparadoxicalfeaturesofU,Sacademicfeministdiscoursetoday：

itsstrugglewiththeformsandconsequencesofacade加jc/b”〃ｉｓ加itself，，

(2005$４２)．

Closelyconnectedtotheissueofactivismandscholarshipistheway ofteachinginaWomen，sStudiesclassroom,orfeministpedagogy・Ｅｍ‐

phasizingtheimportanceofwhatistaughtandhowitistaught,andrec ognizingthepowerinequalityintheclassroom,feministpedagogyispart

ofthechallengetomainstreamacademia（Rowlandl987;Kleinl987)．

Feministteachershaveusedinnovativemethodssuchasforming（ＣＯ､‐

sciousness-raising）ｓｍａｌｌgroups,makingstudentskeepjournalsabout theirexperiencesinrelationtoclassmaterials,ｄｒａｗｉｎｇｏｎｗｏｍｅｎ，sexpe‐

riencesas"texts,'，ａｎｄｓｏｏｎ（Freedman,1990;Rowlandl987)．However，

thornyquestionsremain,including,ｆｏｒexample,ｈｏｗｏｐｅｎｉｔｓｈｏｕｌｄｂｅ ｆｏｒａｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｔｏargueagainstallfeministpositionsortobeanti-feminist，

ｗｈａｔｔｏｄｏｗｉｔｈｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓｗｈｏｈａｖｅ“learnedwell'，enoughtorepeatfemi‐

nistrhetorictosatisfyexpectations（Rothfieldl987).８Inaddition,there areother“practicalissues'，regardingacademiccredibility,thedifficulty offeministevaluationofstudents，andjobmarketsforgraduates

(Rowlandl987)．Whereassomeseetheexcitementaswellasproblemsin

feministexperimentationinteachingandlearning,othersareconcerned aboutthemainstreamingofWomen，sStudiesQuestionshavebeen raisedaboutwhetherWomen，sStudieshasbecome“academicalized，，and cometoresembletraditionalteachiｎｇｉｎｔｈｅａｃａｄｅｍｅ,killingｔｈｅ“spirit，，

ofWomen,sStudiesintheprocess（Miesl990;Ruggierol990)．

Thedebatesconcerningthetensionbetweenpoliticsandscholarship sｈｏｗａｎａｗａｒｅｎｅｓｓｏｆｔｈｅａｃａｄｅｍｙａｓａｎinstitutionofinequalityanda closeconnectionbetweenthefeministmovementandWomen,sStudies，

ｗｈｉｃｈａｒｅｉｎｔｕｒｎｃｏｎｎｅｃｔｅｄｔｏｔｈｅｇｒassrootsoriginofWomen,sStudies，

thecriticalnumberofestablishedwomenfacultymembersintheuniver‐

sityintheUnitedStates,andtheinstitutionalizationofWomen，sStudies intheundergraduatecurriculum，InJapan,whileasizeableproportionof thefirstgenerationoffeministscholarsintheacademiawereactivistsin

"DiscipliningI'Women'sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan ^９ theZZmzz加減bzJmovement，ｔｈｅｎｕｍｂｅｒｏｆｗｏｍｅｎｆａｃｕｌｔｙｍｅｍｂｅｒｓ，let alonefeministscholars,stilldoesnotgenerallyconstituteacriticalminor‐

itythatcanimplementorinitiatechangesintheUniversity・Further,the top-downdevelopmentandfocusonresearchratherthanundergraduate educationmighthavefacilitatedtheestrangementofWomen,sStudies fromfeministactivism1makingtheissueofpoliticsandscholarship largelyirrelevant・TheestablishmentofadvanceddegrｅｅｓｉｎＷｏｍｅｎ，s Studiesorconcentrationsingenderresearchatthepostgraduatelevel beforethatofundergraduateeducationalprogramsmightalsohaveledto theprofessionalizationoffeministscholarsandscholarship,preventinga thoroughdebateaboutpoliticsandscholarship、Ｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔｓｉｇｎｏｆａｓｙｓ‐

tematicinfiltrationofWomen'sStudiesintotheundergraduatecurricu‐

lumcanbeseeninaliberalartsuniversity・Willsucheffortbereplicated inotherhighereducationalinstitutions？Wouldthenewlycredentialed

"feministscholarso，beshoulderingtheeducationofundergraduates？Ｉｆｓｏ，

ｗｈａｔｔｙｐｅｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ１ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｃａｎｗｅｅｘｐｅｃｔｔｏｓｅｅｉｎｔｈｅｎｅｘｔｄｅｃａｄｅｏｒ ｓｏ？Inaddition,thefundingoffeministscholarshipandprojectsbythe MinistryofEducation，Culture，Sports，ScienceandTechnologymight haveturnedWomen1sStudiesintoasymboｌｏｆ“corporateexcellence',ａｔ ａｔｉｍｅｗｈｅｎｔｈｅａｃａｄｅｍｉａｉｓｂｅｉｎｇａbsorbedintothecapitalistcorporate world,adaptingitsvaluesofconsumerism,efficiency,andproductivity､９ Cansuchlegitimizationbeseen,atleastpartially,ascooptation？Ｃｏｕｌｄ ｔｈｉｓｂｅｔｈｅｒｅａｓｏｎｗｈｙｔｈｅｒｅｉｓnoconcertedcritiquefromWomen，ｓＳｔｕｄ ｉｅｓｏｆｔｈｅａｃａｄｅｍｉａａｓａｎｉｎｓｔｉtutionofinequalityandextantknowledge asperpetuatinginequality？Hasstatelegitimizationmadetheprojectof Women,sStudiesoneofadaptationinsteadofresistance？Ｍｏｒｅgenerally，

ｗｈａｔｉｓｔｈｅｉｍｐｌｉｃａｔｉｏｎｏｆｔｈｅ“corporaticization,，ｏｆｔｈｅｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙｆｏｒａｎ ａｃａｄｅｍｉｃｐｒojectlikeWomen，sStudiesthatisconnectedtotheelimina‐

tionofinequalitW10Toanswerthesequestionsandtoconfirmorrefute thespeculationslmadeabove,ｗｅｎｅｅｄｔｏｆｉｒｓｔｈａｖｅａｓｏｌｉｄｇｒａｓｐｏｆｄｅ‐

tailsinthedevelopmentofWomen，sStudies・Ｔｏｔｈｉｓｅｎｄ,Ｉｐｌａｎｔｏａｎａ‐

ｌｙｚｅｔｈｅｃｏｎｔｅｎｔａｎｄｔｙｐｅｏｆｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｃｏｎｄｕｃｔｅｄｂｙｙｏｕｎｇｆｅｍｉｎｉｓｔ

10

scholarsingraduateprogramsaswellasfeministscholarshippublished inthemajorfeministjournalsinJapan、Agoodunderstandingofthe

stateoffeministscholarshipinJapanisneededtoanswersomeother questionsposedinlatersectionsaswelL

(B）Autonomyorlntegration？Women，sStudiesasanindependent

existenceorabasisformainstreaminggenderandfeminisminto thecorecurriculumandextantdisciplmes

AutonomousWomen'sStudiesreferstoboththestructuralindepend‐

enceofWomen'sStudiesasaprogramordisciplineα〃dtheacademic independenceofaperspectiveorapproachthatconsistsｉｎ“ａｎｅｗｆｒａｍｅ‐

work,anewdiscourse,conceivedofmisolationfromtheimposedreality oftraditionalacademics”（KirschnerandArchl984:150)．Inpractice,this

usuallymeanssettingupWomen'ｓStudiesasaseparateprogramoraca‐

demicdepartmentintheuniversity.“Integration”referstothetransfor‐

mationofextantcurriculumandscholarshipinestablisheddisciplines throughtheintegrationoffeministscholarship，Ｉｔｈａｓｂｅｅｎｃａｌｌｅｄｂｙ

ｍａｎｙｎａｍｅｓ，including“curriculumtransfOrmation,”“integration,'，

"mainstreaming,”“curriculumbalancing,',ａｎｄｓｏｏｎ、Inpractice,ｉｔｔｙｐｉ‐

callyinvolvessettingupworkshopsforexistingfacultymemberstocriti‐

callyre-assessthesyllabiofthecoursestheyteach，includematerials

relatedtowomenandintegrateafeministperspectiveand/ormaking

Women'sStudiesorgender-focusedcoursespartofthecorecurriculumor generaleducationrequirements・Ｂｙｌ９９２,２００curriculumtransformation projectswerereportedintheUnitedStates（Boxerl9981Thechoice

betweenremaininganindependentprogramandbeingintegratedinto

thecurriculumisinrealitydeterminedmostlybypracticalconcerns,ｂｕｔ the“choice”continuedtobeasourceofconflictinthel990swithin Women，sStudiesandbetweenWomen,sStudiesandmoremainstream

academicdepartments（see,forexampleUniversityofWisconsiｎＳｙｓｔｅｍ

Ｗｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesConsortiuml999;alsoZmoroczekandDuchenl991；de GrootandMaynardl9931Itisthereforeimportanttoteaseoutthetheo．

I0Disciplining，，Women，sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapａｎｌｌ reticalissuesinvolved

Apopularpositionisthatautonomyandintegrａｔｉｏｎａｒｅｔｗｏｓｉｄｅｓｏｆ ｔｈｅｓａｍｅｃｏｉｎｂutthatastrongWomen，sStudiesprogramisnecessaryif oneweretotransformthecurriculumsuccessfully（Mclntoshand Minnichl984)．InthecontextwhereWomen，sStudiesisabsentasan independentprogram,however,integrationeffortsandrequiredcourses maystrengthenWomen，sStudiesfacultymembersbyincreasingtheper‐

ceivedvalueandneedforWomen，sStudiescourses（Spanierl984)．

TheargumentagainstsettingupWomenosStudiesasanindependent entityemphasizestherisksofmarginalizationandghettoization・Ｆｏｒ example,theStanfordFeministStudiesprogramwasneverenvisionedto beafullyautonomousdepartment,theargumentbeingthatanewdepart‐

mentwouldbemargmalizedjustbecauseoftheconcentrationofpolitical powerintheestablisheddepartments（Christopherl995)．Thereisalsoa riskofbeing“disciplined，，intheprocessofbeingestablishedｉｎｔｈｅｕｎｉ‐

versity（Messer-Davidow2002)．

Theopinionsagainstintegrationaremany、Somewritesweeping

statements,arguingthatintegrationistprojectsareconservative,andthat Women，sStudiesexistsasaseparateentitｙｉｎｉｔｓｏｗｎｒｉｇｈｔ（Bowlesand

Kleinl983)．OthersdoubtifWomen'ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓａｓａｎｅｗｂｏｄｙｏｆｋｎｏｗｌ‐

edgeandtheorycanbesuccessfullyassimilatedintoextantdisciplines

sinceitisnotdefinedjustbyasubjectmatter（women),ｂｕｔａｌｓｏｂｙｔｈｅ ｃｏｍｍｕｎｉｔｙｏｆＷｏｍｅｎｏｓStudiesscholarsandasharedpatternofthinking andanalysis（Rosenfeltl984;Coynerl9861Thereisalsotheissueofnot

beingabletocontrol,shapeandcoordinatethedisseminationofthenew knowledgeaboutwomeｎｉｆＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesisnotanindependententiｔｙ

(Rosenfeltl984;seealsoChildersl984)．Somepondertheeffectofintegra‐

tioninconnectiontothelargerissueofdisciplinarity・Ｆｏｒexample,Ｓｍｉｔｈ

(1992）notesthateffortstointegratemustinvolveacceptanceofboththe

ideaofdisciplinarityandtherealityofthedisciplines、Todevelop

Women0sStudiesseparately,ｏｎｔｈｅｏｔｈｅｒｈａｎd,involvesmovingoutside andbeyondacademicdisciplines,questioningthevalidityandvalueｏｆ

1２

disciplinarityandrejectingthecapacityofthedisciplinestogeneratethe

kindsofknowledgethatwomeｎｄｏｏｒｍｉｇｈｔｎｅｅｄａｎｄｗａｎＬＣｏｙｎｅｒ (1986）arguessimilarly1notingspecificallythatcorrectingbiases,adding information，orevenmodifyingsomekeyconceptsdonotnecessarily

constitutemuｃｈｏｆａｃｈａｌｌｅｎｇｅｔｏｔｈｅｂａｓｉｃｆｒａｍｅｗorkofthetraditional disciplines、Empiricalcasessuggestthatthisisalegitimateconcern・At StanfordUniversity,forexamplacurriculumtransformationconsistedin includingaGenderStudiesdistributionrequirement,buttheresultsfeU shortofthegoalｔｏ"addressgenderinallitsmanifestationo,:manycourses thatfulfilledtherequirementwerecompensatoryinnature,withmateri‐

alsonwomenaddedwithoutacriticalalterationofthecontentfroma genderperspective（Christopherl995)．

Theissueofintegrationversusautｏｎｏｍｙｈａｓｂｅｅｎｃｏｒｅｔｏｔｈｅｄｅｖｅｌ‐

opmentofWomen'sStudiesintheUnitedStates・InJapan，while Women，sStudiescoursesarebeingofferedintheuniversityinJapan，

mostofthesecoursesareofferedaselectivesandtaughtbypart-time

instructors（Khorl996)．Further,withthepartialexceptionofthePro‐

graminGenderandSexualityStudiesinthelntemationalChristianUni・

versity,whichapparentlymakesuseoftheflexibilityintheliberalarts curriculumforinterdisciplinary“concentrations,”Women'ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｄｏｅｓ ｎｏｔｙｅｔｅｘｉｓｔａｓａｎｕｎｄergraduateprogramHowever,Women0sStudies doeshaveanindependentexistenceasresearchinstitutesandsitesfor training（orcredentialing）feministscholars，Researchinstitutesand graduateschoolsarearguablybasesofpowerintheuniversity,ｂｕｔｗｈａｔ ｄｏｅｓｉｔｍｅａｎｆｏｒＷｏｍｅｎ,ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｔｏｂｅｉｎｔｅｇｒａｔｅｄｉｎｔｏｔｈｅｕniversity，

sanctionedbytheMinistryofEducation，Culture，Sports，Scienceand Technologymsomecases？Doesitfacilitatethe“disciplining”ｏｆ Women，sStudies？or,doesitconsolidatethepositionofWomen'sStudies inhighereducation？Ｉｆｉｔｉｓｔｈｅｌａｔｔｅｒ，ｗｉｌｌｉｔｌｅａｄｔｏｔｈｅｃｒｅａｔｉｏｎｏｆａ ｇｅｎｅrationofelitefeministscholarsandtheestrangementofWomen，ｓ

Ｓｔｕｄｉｅｓｆｒｏｍｔｈｅ“political'，concernsoffacilitatinggenderequality？ｏｒ，

alternativelyowillitleadtｏａｐｏｗｅｒｂａｓｅｔｈａｔｃａｎｂｅｕｓｅｄｔｏｆａｃｉlitatethe

"Disciplining,,Women,sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapａｎ ^ｌ３ integrationofWomen，sStudiesintoundergraduateeducation？Ａｔｔｈｉｓ ｍｏｍｅｎｔ,thefirstgenerationsof“officiallytrained'，feministscholarsare securingfull-timepositionsinuniversities，eventhoughopportunities remainlｉｍｉｔｅｄａｎｄｔｈｅｎｕｍｂｅｒｉｓｓｔｉｌｌｓｍａｌｌ、Anundergraduateconcen‐

trationingenderandsexualitystudieshasbeenestablished,andfeminist researchprojectsandcentersarebeingrecognizedandfundedbythe government・Alltheseencouragingsigns,however,ａｐｐｅａｒａｔｔｈｅｓａｍｅ ｔｉｍｅａｓａｓｅｖｅｒｅｂａcklashagainstgender-freeeducation,andbyextension Women，sStudiesandfeministscholarship,isunderwayThereisnobet‐

tertimetocloselyobserveandchartthedirectionofWomen1sStudies．

(C）Thelmpossibilityof"Women，sStudies'，？Gender,Women，

andtheSubjectofWomen，sStudies

Ａｆｅｗｉｓｓｕｅｓａｒｅｅｍｂｅｄｄｅｄｈｅｒｅｔｈａｔｒｅｌａｔｅｔｏｔｈｅｎａｍｉｎｇｏｆ Ｗｏｍｅｎ，sStudies,thesubjectofWomen，sStudies,ａｎｄultimately,ｔｈｅ

"ｉｍ/possibility，'ｏｆWomen`ｓStudies，

Ａｔｔｈｅｂｅｇｉｎｎｉｎｇ,Women'sStudieswasthepreferredname,although therewerealternativeslikeFeministStudiesatStanfordUniversitvand theProgramfortheStudyofＷｏｍｅｎａｎｄＭｅｎｉｎＳｏｃｉｅｔｙａｔｔｈｅＵｎｉｖｅr・

sityofSouthernCalifornia，Perhaps，ｔｈｅａｍｂｉｇｕｉｔｙｏｆｔｈｅｎａｍｅ

"Women0sStudieso’一ｔｈｅｉｎｄｅｔｅｒｍｉｎａｎｃｙｏｆｗｈｅｔｈｅｒｉｔｉｓａｓｔｕｄｙｏｆ ｗｏｍｅｎｏｒｂｙｗｏｍｅｎｏｒｂｏｔｈ一wasattractivetothepioneersThecon‐

troversysurroundingre-naming“Women，sStudies”ａｓ“GenderStudies”

firstemergedinthel980sandearlyl990sintheUnitedStatesⅢａｔａｔｉｍｅ ｗｈｅｎｐｕｂｌｉｓｈｅｒｓｗｅｒｅａｌｓｏｒeplacing‘`WomenosStudieso，ｂｙ“Gender Studies，，intheircatalogues（Boxerl998)．Ａｔｔｈａｔｔｉｍｅ"GenderStudies，，

ｗａｓｓｅｅｎａｓａｌａｂｅｌｔｈａｔｃｏｕｌｄｂｅｓｔｒａtegicallvusedtoappealtotheacad ｅｍｙｉｎｉｔｓｓｅｅｍｉｎｇｎｅｕｔｒａｌｉｔｙａｎｄｉｎclusiveness-afterall,“gender，,isan objective,scientificconceptanditincludesｍｅｎａｓｗｅｌｌａｓｗｏｍｅｎ（see alsoBoyd2005;Evansl990;Auslanderl997lForthesamereaSons,ｈｏｗ‐

ever,manyhaveresistedre-naming“Women'ｓStudies”ａｓ“GenderStu‐

dies.，，Someareconcernedthattheterm“gender，'facilitatesanemphasis

1４

ondifferenceratherthaninequalityandoppression,andthattheso-called

"inclusiveness”mightactuallyopenthedoortopeopｌｅｗｈｏｄｏｎｏｔｉｄｅｎ‐

tifyasfeministsorwhorejectfeministtheoryandmethodology・Inits worstinstantiation，“GenderStudiesU,couldreflectanexplicitlyanti‐

feministbacklashbyde-legitimizingthｅｓｔｕｄｙｏｆｗｏｍｅｎａｓａｇｒｏｕｐａｎｄ ａｃａｔｅｇoryofanalysisandmakingwomeninvisibleagain（Yeel997；

Evansl990;Kleinl991;deGrootandMaynardl993;seealsoZmoroczek andDuchenl991oｎｔｈｅＵ.Ｋ､)．Inotherwords,intheearlyyears“Gen‐

derStudies，，wasseenasconservativeandde-radicalizing．

“Genderstudies,,asanalternativetoWomen,sStudiestooka1`radi‐

cal”ｔｕｒｎｌａｔｅｒｉｎｔｈｅｍｉｄｔｏｌａｔｅｌ９９０ｓ,aidedbythepostmodernistchal‐

lengetothesubject"women.I，ulnthepostmoderncritique,thecategory of“women“isconceptualizedasdiscursivelyCreate｡，andtheassumed homogeneityof“ｗｏｍｅｎｏ，infeministresearchandWomen'sStudiesis seenasunwarranted（BaithwaiteetaL2004;Ｂｒｏｗｎ1997;deGrootand

Maynardl993;seealsoFussl991;Butlerl990andl991)．Indeed,Ｂｒｏｗｎ

(1997）arguesforthe"impossibilityofWomen，sStudies,"notinghowthe orgamzationofWomen'sStudiesaroundasingularidentityinhibitsits abilitytoaccountforthecomplexitiesofthesubject・

ThepostmodernistchallengetofeminismandWomen1sStudieswas seenｂｙｓｏｍｅａｓｓｕｓｐｉciousbecausethecaUto`ldecentralizethesubject”

ｃａｍｅａｔａｔｉｍｅｗｈｅｎＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudieshadjustbeguntowidenitscon‐

ceptofwomentoincludehistoricallymarginalizedgroups（Yeel997;see

alsohooks,1990;Morleyl999)．Otherfeministswhorespondtothepost‐

moderncriticismandrecognizetheｔｅｒｍｏｆｏ`ｗｏｍｅｎ，Oasfragmentaryand unstablelikewisearguestronglyinfavorofretainingboththesubjectof

"women，,ａｎｄｔｈｅｎａｍｅ``Women'ｓStudies,，asapoliticalstrategyandfor itsintellectualvalue（Weigman2005;Yeel997)．Byretaining“Women，s Studies,”Ｙｅｅ（1997）arguesthat“Woman，,ｃａｎｒｅｔａｉｎｉｔｓｐｌａｃｅｏｎｔｈｅ ａｇｅｎｄａａｓacontested,visible,complexcategoryofanalysisthatvalidates theexistenceofwomenasagroupinsocietyandaddressessexismand racismintheproductionoffeministscholarship（seealsoGuy-Sheftall

ODisciplining',Women'sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapａｎ ^ｌ５ 1997)．TakingalongerhistoricalperspectivaZimmerman（2005）demon‐

stratesthatWomen'ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｓａｎｄｈａｓａｌｗａｙｓｂｅｅｎａｆｉｅldinmotion:the materialbasisofwomen'soppressionwasemphasizedinthel970sand l980s,ａｎｄｔｈｅｎｏｔｉｏｎｏｆ"Woman”asadiscursivecategoryinthelatel980s andl990sWhileacknowledgingtheimportanceandcontributionoｆｔｈｅ ｅｍphasisonlanguagadiscourse,andsubjectivity,Ｚｉｍｍｅｒｍａｎ（2005）

reiteratestheimportanceofnotlosingsightofwomen，slives,experience，

bodiesandoppressionShefurtherarguesthatthesubjectofWomen，s Studiesisstillwomen，ｂｕｔｔｈａｔｔｈｅｓｅｗｏｍｅｎａｒｅ“multifaceted，multi‐

lingual,andmultivalent”（p､36）（seealsoKennedyandPiettel991;Ｂrim‐

stonel991)．Inasimilarlineofargument,othershaveemphasizedthe importanceofretainingidentity-basedanalysisoflivedexperience,given thatsystemsofoppressionstillexist（see,forexampleBoyd2005)．Push‐

ingtheargumentfurther,Martin（2005）arguesthat“[q]uestionsabout womenandgenderhavｅｔｏｂｅｃｏｍｅｐａｒｔｏｆｌａｒｇｅｒａｎｄｌｅｓｓｏｒganized mixesinordereffectivelytoidentifyanddistinguishthemselvesagain”

(p､130）（seealsoJakobsen2005)．Thedebatesconcerninggender,women，

andthesubjectofWomen，sStudiesarestillverymuchalive,andhave expandedtoincludeexplorationsofthetensionandconnectionbetween Women，sStudiesandQueerStudies,whichhasanimpactalsoontheway programsingenderandsexualityarestructured（see，forexampla Auslanderl997)．

Similarissuesconcerning“gender”ａｎｄWomen，sStudieshavebeen raisedinJapanaSwell、JustasintheUnitedStates,ｔｈｅｉｓｓｕｅｏｆ“Gen‐

derStudies,,emergedfirst・Inthemid-1990s,intheprocessofresearching Women'sStudiesinJapan,IheardatasymposiumonWomen，sStudiesin Kyotol2adebateabｏｕｔｔｈｅｂｅｎｅｆｉｔｓａｎｄｐｒｏｂｌｅｍｓｏｆｎａｍingnewlyestab‐

lishedresearchcenters“ＧｅｎｄｅｒStudies，，insteadof“Women，sStudies.”

TheanxietyconcerningthecooptatｉｏｎｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ,sStudiesbythe authorities("itisnotrighttonameitinawaytoappeasetheQ/isα〃inthe government，'）andtheapparentpracticalityofadoptingGenderStudies asanameparallelsthediscussionｉｎｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄＳｔａｔｅｓｓｏｍｅｌＯｙｅａｒｓａgo．

1６

JustasintheUnitedStates,GenderStudieshasalsotakenaradicalturn inrecentyears,butunderverydifferentcircumstances、Ｉａｍｑｕｉｔｅｃｏｎ‐

vincedthatthebacklashagainstgender-freeeducationandtheavoidaｎｃｅ ｏｆｔｈｅｔｅｒｍ“gender-free，，bylocalgovernments，whichhadpreviously championedsomeofthemostthoroughgender-freeeducationcampaigns inJapan（see,forexample,AsaietaL2003andOkuyama2005foranover‐

view),hasinadvertentlyradicalizedtheconceptof"gender,0,makingits users“feminists0”alabelthatperhapselicitsvariousradicalimagesand associationsmJapan，andcreatinganopportunityforeducatorsin Women'sStudiestore-thinktheconceptof“gender.”Whilesomehave criticizedtheuseoｆｈａｍ虎α"αinakeywordinfeministscholarshipand

politicswhichmakesitpronetomisunderstanding（see,ｆｏｒexample，

Funahashi2003),IthinkitispreciselybecausethereisnodirectJapanese equivalentofthewordthatallowsfeministscholarstomjectaradical meaningintoit,whetherintentionalornot､'３

Ｔｈｅ“radicalization'，ofgenderthroughthe“gender-freebacklash，，ｉｎ ＪａｐａｎａｐｐｅａｒｓｔｏｍｅａｎｅｘｅｍｐｌａｒｏｆcoalitionpolitiＣｓ,withacademics appearingtogetherwithschoolteachersinsymposiumsattendedby“or‐

dinarycitizens，]aswellasacademics・ｌＩＨａｐｐｅｎｉｎｇａｔａｌｍｏｓｔｔｈｅｓａｍｅ ｔｉｍｅbutexclusivelyintheacademeisthepostmodernchallengeto Women'ｓStudies,orrather1thegrowingimportaｎｃｅｏｒｅｖｅｎ`oinstitution‐

alization”ofJudithButlerinthefieldofgenderandsexualityinJapan､l5 SomeknowledgeofJudithButler1sworkhasapparentlybecomea“pre‐

requisite"foranyoneinterestedingenderandsexuality（or,indeed,any‐

oneintheacademe,fromanecdotalevidence）eversinceGe"deγＴ1ｍ切りに wastranslatedmtoJapaneseinl999、Indeed,Butler，stalkinJanuary2006 atOchanomizuWomen，ｓＵｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙｄｒｅｗａｃｒｏｗｄｏｆｃｌｏｓｅｔｏ１０００．Ａｌｌ ｔｈｉｓ，however，cannotbeequatedwiththepostmodernchallengeto Women,ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄＳｔａｔｅｓｓｏｍｅｌＯｙｅａｒｓａｇｏｌｎｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄ Ｓｔａｔｅｓ,theissuesevolvedoverafewdecades,andthepostmodernchal‐

lengetothecategory“women，'ｃａｍｅｗｈｅｎＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudieswasmarking its20thanniversaryandwasanestablished“field”ｏｒｅｖｅｎ“discipline''ｉｎ

"Disciplining.'Women'sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapａｎｌ７ majoruniversities,supportingnotonlyfeministresearchandscholarship butalsoundergraduateeducation.'６Participantsinthedebatesconcem‐

ingtheim/possibilityofWomen,sStudiesinthelightofthepostmodern challengeincludefeministscholarsofdifferentresearchareas，discipli‐

narytrainingI7,aswellasundergraduateandgraduateteachingexperi‐

encesThecircumstancesinJapanarequitedifferent、Asnotedabove，

Women'sStudieshasitsimpactmostlyinresearchandscholarship（of establishedscholarsandscho]arsmtrainingatthegraduatelevel),and itspresenceinundergraduateeducationpbycomparison,isnegligibleMy impressionisthattheintroductionofpostmodernismorspecificallyBut‐

ler，ｓｗｏｒｋｉｎｔｈｉｓｃｏｎｔｅｘｔｈａｓｎｏｔｉｎｖｉｔｅdanexchangeofideasthatare rootedinscholarshipα"deducationandpolitics,buthasstayedmostly withinscholarship,andonethatlwouldcharacterizelooselyas“modern thoughti，andphilosophy、ＷｈｉｌｅｔｈｅｆｌｏｗｏｆｎｅｗｉｄｅａｓｍｔｏＷｏｍｅｎ's Studiesshouldbeencouraged,thede-centeringofwomenasasubject,the focusonabstracttheorizing,ａｎｄｔｈｅｇｒｏｗｉｎｇｈｏｍｏｇｅｎｅｉｔｙｉｎｆｅｍｉnist researchdefinedbyafocusonpostmodernismareallPossj6Jedevelop‐

mentsthatcouldundercuttheeffectivenessofWomen，sStudiesinJapan asan“academicarmoffeminism,０，especiallyinthelargercontextofa societythathasalevelofgendermequalityfarhigherthanthatofits counterpartsintheindustrializedworld・ｌ８０ｆｃｏｕｒｓｅ,noneofthesedevel‐

opmentsareinevitable,andallareempiricalquestionstobeexploredand answeredWillthelatestdevelopmentinfeministscholarshipinJapan leadtoconversationsamongWomen1sStudiespractitionersfromdiffer‐

entdisciplinarybackgroundsandresearchexperiences？Willcertain voicesdominateandothersbesilenced？ＷｉｌｌＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesfinditself increasinglyconfinedwithinsmallercirclesofacademicspecializations？

WhichbooksarebeingtranslatedfrｏｍｔｈｅＷｅｓｔａｎｄｂｅｃｏｍｅｉｍｐｏｒｔａｎｔ ａｎｄｗｈｉｃｈａｒｅｎｏｔａｎｄｗｈｙ？Willthelatesttheoriesreplacetheoldones，

ｏｒｗｉｌｌｎｅｗａｎｄｓｈα”dparadigmsemergethatshowinfluencesofbothold andnewideas？Ｉｐｌａｎｔｏｅｘｐｌｏｒｅｔｈｅｓｅａｎｄｏｔｈｅｒｑｕｅstionsthroughover‐

timeanalysesofthecontentofWomenosStudiesprograms，journal

l8

articles,andbookstranslated．

ConcludingThoughtsand（More)Questions

InmyfirstresearchprojectinJapanaboutfeministgrassrootsorgan‐

izingandWomen，sStudies（Khorl996;1999)，thequestionofwhether feminismanｄＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesinJapanwereimportedfromtheWest loomedlargeTherapiddevelopmentofWomen,ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎＡｓｉａｉｎｔｈｅ ｐａｓｔｄｅｃａｄｅａndtheincreaseininteractionsamongAsianfeministschol‐

arsandeducatorspromptedmetoasknewquestionsaboutWomen，s StudieｓｉｎＡｓｉａＤｒａｗｉｎｇｏｎｍｙｅｘｐｅｒｉｅｎｃｅｓａndresearchonWomen，s StudiesintheUnitedStates,Itracedthedevelopmentofandidentified theissuesofconflictsanddebatesinWomenosStudiesintheUnited States、ＵｓｉｎｇｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄＳｔａｔｅｓａｓａｂａｓｉｓｆｏrcomparison,Ipresentedmy observationsofWome､'sStudiｅｓｉｎＪａｐａｎａｎｄｏｔｈｅｒＡｓｉａｎcountries，

speculatedandposedquestionsaboutfuturedevelopmentsManyofthe questionslaskedandissueslidentifiedareempiricalquestionstobe exploredsystematically,Whichincludemainlythe`ucontent''０fWomen0s Studiesresearchandeducationalprograms,ｔhemeaningandimplications ofthelegitimizationofWomen，sStudiesorfemmistscholarshipas

"CentersofExcellence,,，theimplicationsoftherapiddevelｏｐｍｅｎｔｏｆａｄ‐

vanceddegreesandslowdevelopmentofundergraduateprogramsm Women'sStudiesforfeministscholarshipandeducation．

TeachingacourseonFeministTheory(myinterpretationofツe"｡ααわれ,'）

broughtmebackto“old,，feministtexts,includingBettyFriedan，ｓＴｈｅ Ｆと”〃j"eM1ystj9“AdrienneRich,ＳＣＯ”邸JSCぴＨｂｊｅｍｓ〃"αJ”α"ｄLes‐

6jα〃Ｅ〕pisね〃Ce,ａｎｄｍａｎｙｏｔｈｅｒｓｏｆｔｈａｔｅｒａ・Iwashesitantinpresenting thetextｓｉｎｃｌａｓｓ－theywereold,outoffashion,unsophisticated,limited，

andcomprehensible（ratherｔｈａｎ`0incomprehensible,”ａｓ“sophisticated，，

theoriesapparentlyshouldbe)．Ｉｎｔｈｅｃｌａｓｓｗａｓａｙｏｕｎｇｗｏｍａｎｗｉｔｈａ ｂackgroundinfeministscholarship、Ｈｅａｒｉｎｇｈｅｒｓａｙｔｈａｔｓｈｅｗａｓｍｏｖｅｄ

“DiscipliningD,Women，sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan １９

totearsreadingTﾉieF1gmmjstjM〕ﾉsti9郷e,Ifeltagainstronglythatthereis

mｕｃｈｔｏｌｅａｒｎｆｒｏｍｅｖｅｎｏｌｄｔｅｘｔｓｗｉｔｈobviouslimitations，ｔｈａｔ Women，sStudieswillbenefitfrommoreratherthanlessdebateswithin thefeministcommunity,anddiversityinratherthanhomogenizationof perspectives．

Notes

llcouldnothavelaunchedthisresearchwithouttheone-yearsabbatical leavegrantedbyHoseiUmversity,whichgavemeamuch-neededblockof timetoimmersemyselfinWomen0sStudies（again）andfreedmetoattend overseasandlocalconferencesandsymposiumsonWomen，sStudiesand genderandsexualityresearchlalsoappreciatedthemanyconversations withKamanoSaoriaboutWomen，sStudiesinJapan,whichbothclarified andenrichedmythinkingaboutvariousrelatedissues、

２Foraprofessor,ｓｖｉｅｗｏｆｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔＦｅｍｉｎｉｓｔＳｔｕｄｉｅｓclasses,seeFreedman

（1990)．

３Laterprogramsapparentlydevelopeddifferently・Theymighthavebeen influencedbyandreceivedsupportfromestablishedprogramsandinter‐

campuscooperation,ａｓｏｎｓｏｍｅｃａｍｐｕｓｅｓｉｎｔｈｅＵｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔyofWisconsin system，initiatedprimarilybyestablishedwomenfacultymemberswith researcｈｉnterestsingenderandfeminism,suchasStanfordUniversity`or eveninitiatedfrom``above,MsuchastheUniversityofSouthernCalifornia

（UniversityofWisconsinWomen'sStudiesConsortiuml999;Christopher l995;Bannerl986)．

４Theresilienceofacademicinstitutionsagainstchangeswasidentifiｅｄａｓ ｏｎｅｒｅａｓｏｎｗｈｙｓｏｍｅＷｏｍｅｎ'sStudiesprogramssimulatedotherestab lishedprograms,suchasEthnicStudiesprograms（Tobiasl987)．

５ResearchcentersrelatedtogenderstudiescouldalsobenefitfromaCOE grantedtotheuniversityortoa"largero1projectintheuniversity・Forex‐

ample，symposiumsrelatedtogenderissueshavebeenｃｏ－ｈｏｓｔｅｄｂｙｔｈｅ ＣｅｎｔｅｒｆｏｒＧｅｎｄｅｒＳｔｕｄｉｅｓａｎｄｔｈｅＣＯＥｇｒａｎｔｅｄｔｏ“ComprehensivePeace Studies，，atthelnternationalChristia、University,thethirdandmostrecent onefocuseｄｏｎ“ＨｕｍａｎＳｅｃｕｒｉｔｙａｎｄＧｅｎｄｅｒｉｎＡｓｉａ:NaturalSciencePer、

spectives-BodyKnowledge，andGenderinAsiao，（October6-8,2006)．

６Japanrankedl4thintheGender-relatedDevelopmentlndexbut44thinthe GenderEmpowermentlndexin2003・Theformermeasuresinequalityin education，healthandlongevity，andincomawhilethelattermeasures powerinequality・Japanisbehindalmostallcomparableindustrialized

2０

nationsinGEMranking（HumanDevelopmentlndicators2003)．

Inmakingthisclaimabouttheoryandmaterialconditionsofwomen,Iam neitherdevaluatingtheorynorsuggestingthattheoryandpracticｅａｒｅｏｐ‐

posedtoeachother・Rather,IamthinkingalongthesamelineasAdrienne Richwhenshedeclares,poetically:“Theory-theseeingofpatterns,ｓｈｏｗ‐

ｉｎｇｔｈｅｆｏｒｅｓｔａｓｗｅｌｌａｓｔｈｅｔｒｅｅｓ－ｔｈｅｏｒｙｃａｎｂｅａｄｅｗｔｈａｔｒｉｓｅｓｆｒｏｍｔｈｅ ｅａｒｔｈandcollectsintheraincloudandreturnstoearthoverandover、Ａｎｄ ｉｆｉｔｄｏｅｓｎ，ｔｓｍｅｌｌｏｆｔｈｅｅａｒｔｈ,ｉｔｉｓｎ,ｔｇｏｏｄｆｏｒｔｈｅｅａｒｔｈ，,（Rich，1986：

213-214)．

７Ｔｈｅｉｓｓｕｅｈｅｒｅｉｓｎｏｔｊｕｓｔａｂｏｕｔｐｏｌｉticsandscholarship,butalsoabout whetherWomen,sStudiesshouldbeestablishedasanindependentdisci‐

ｐlineintheuniversitvorwhetheritshouldbeintegratedmtoextantcur‐

riculumanddisciplinesThelatterissueisthefocusofthenextsection．

８１ncidentally,ＴａｊｉｍａＹｏｋｏａｌｓｏｐｏｉｎｔｅｄｏｕｔｔｈｅｓａｍeproblemwithmale studentsinherclasses,attheinterviewlconductedwithheronFebruary ９，１９９５（seeKhorl996)．

９Japaniswitnessingasimilardevelopmentoftheacademiaas"theWesto,ｉｎ ｔｈｅｐａｓｔｔｗｏｄｅｃａｄｅｓｏｒｓｏ・Fordetailedanalysesofthe“capitalization”of theuniversity,seeMohantv2003;Etzkowitz,Webster,andHealeyl998;Starr l987;Readingsl99a

lOIhavesituatedallthesequestionsinthecircumstanｃｅｓｏｆｔｈｅｄｅｖｅｌｏｐｍｅｎｔ ｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ１ｓＳtudiesbecausethesecircumstancescanoverridetheinten tionsofindividualfeministscholars

llThiswａｓｎｏｔｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔｔｉｍｅｔｈｅｃａｔｅｇｏｒｙｏｆ“women，'wasthetargetofcriti．

ｃism・Intheearlyl980s,ｔｈｅｔｅｒｍ“women'，ａｎｄWomen,sStudiesitselfwere criticizedforbeingnon-inclusivebecausewomenactuallymeantmiddle class，white，heterosexualwomen，providingtheimpetusforthecritical integrationofraceandclassintofeministscholarshipandWomen,sStudies

（see,forexample,ＢａｃａＺｉｎｎｅｔａＬ１９８６)．

l2ThesymposiumwasattendedbypeopleactiveinWomen，sStudiesinan academicsetting，ｉｎｃｌｕｄｉｎｇａｆｅｗｏｆｔｈｅＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesprofessorsand researcherslinterviewedformyproject（seeKhorl996)．

l31ndeed,inasessiononAsianfeministtheoryattheSeoulconference,the discussionafterthepaneltouchedonthede-radicalizationofWomen,ｓＳｔｕｄ ｉｅｓｂｙｔｈｅｕｓｅｏｆｔｈｅｎａｍｅＧｅｎｄｅrStudies・Ｔｈｅ“consensus”ｉｎｔｈｅｒｏｏｍ，

dominatedbyparticipantsfromtheUnitedStatesandAustralia,revealed thedifferencebetweenthesituationinｔｈｅＷｅｓｔａｎｄｔｈａｔｉｎＪａｐａｎｌｎｒｅ‐

sponse,Iraisedthequestionthat“gender”couldberadicalinaplacewhere itisanimportedtermwithoutaclearlocaltranslationAndoneJapanese feministscholarsecondedmyopinion,referringtohowthe“GenderStudies Center"ｓｈeestablishedincludedexplorationoflesbians,sexualitiesandthat

`Disciplining,，Women,sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan ^２１ therewasnothing“conservative”aboutｉｔ・Indeed，myexperienceinthe classroomcorroboratedit・Studentsfoundtheterm“gender1Ialotmore radical（or,indeedscarier）ｔｈａｎｔｈｅｔｅｒｍ“women,'ｏｒWomen，sStudies Europeanscholarshavealsopointedoutthedifferenttranslationsofthe word"gender'，ｉｎEurope（ZmoroczekandDuchenl991)．

１４Thesymposiumontheconceptofmgender，，iｓａｇｏｏｄｅｘａｍｐｌｅ（Mimto-ﾉｂｚＪ ｄｑ〃obyodos"jShj〃Sc"、,Marcｈ25,2006)．Thecontroversysurroundingthe replacementofUenoChizukoasalecturerintheKokubun-ji（city‐

sponsored）HumanRightsLecturesforthereasoｎｔｈａｔｓｈｅ?、ｇｈｔｕｓｅｔｈｅ ｔｅｒｍｏｒｃｏｎｃｅｐｔｏｆ“genderfree,，providedfurtheropportunitiestodissolve theboundaryseparatingacademicsandnon-academics・

l5ThedialoguebetweenUenoChizukoandTakemuraKazuko（whotrans‐

latedButler,ｓＧｅｍｅ７Ｔｍ秘ble）mighthavecapturedmetaphoricallｙａｍｏ‐

ｍｅｎｔｗｈｅｎ“old-stylefeminism,,'whichtreatswomenlargelyasamaterial subject,encountered"newstylefeminism0，，whichtreatswomenasadiscur‐

sivelyconstructedsubject（TakemuraandUenol999)．

ｌ６１ｄｏｎｏｔｗａｎｔｔｏｅｘａｇｇｅｒａｔｅｔｈｅｄｅgreetowhichWomenlsStudiesisestab‐

lishedandlegitimizedmtheUnitedStates,andldefinitelydonotconsider ittｏｂｅｉｎｔｈｅ“mainstream”asestablisheddisciplinessuchasSociology，

PoliticalScience，andComparativeLiteratureare、However，ｗｈｅｎｃｏｍ ｐａｒｅｄｔｏJapanⅢitisbeyonddoubtthatthefieldisstructurallyadvanced l71nter-disciplinarityhasbeenaconcerninWomen,ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓｉｎｔｈｅＵｎｉｔｅｄ

Ｓｔａｔｅｓｓｉｎｃｅitsinception,withsomearguingthatWomen1sStudiesjsnotso muchinterdisciplinaryasmultidisciplinary（see,forexample1Boxerl998a；

AUenandKitchl998)．Myimpressionisthatwhileatanyonepointintime thefieldisperceivedasdominatedbytheSocialSciencesortheHumanities，

ｔｈｅｒｅｉｓａｌｓｏａｃｌｅａｒｃｏｍｍｉｔｍｅｎｔｔｏｔheinclusionofalldisciplinesforＧｄ皿“‐

〃０打,especiallyattheundergraduateleveLInotherwords,ｔｈｅcommitment toundergraduateeducationencouragesabalanceofdisciplinaryperspec tives,ｅｖｅｎifinter-disciplinarityisstillunrealizableThenegligiblepres‐

enceofWomen，sStudiesinundergraduateeducationinJapan,ontheother hand1mighthavemadeiteasierforonedisciplineorsub-disciplinetodomi‐

natescholarshipanddiminishtheneedforinterdisciplmaryexchange・

ｌ８Ｔｈｅｒｅｉｓｎｏｔｈｉｎｇｉｎｅｖｉｔａｂｌｅａｂｏｕｔａｌｌｔｈｉｓ，ｏｆｃｏｕｒｓｅＴｈｅｉｎｓｉｇｈｔｓｆｒｏｍ ｐｏｓｔｍｏｄernismhavebeencombinedwiththeinsightsof（pre‐

postmodernist?）feminismtoresultinsensitiveanalysisandviablepolitics undersimilarcircumstances（see,forexamplaWong2006)．

References

Allen,JudithA､andSallyL・Kitch､１９９８“DisciplinedbyDisciPlines？ＴｈｅＮｅｅｄ

2２

foranlnterdisciplinaryResearchMissioninWomenIsStudies.,'F1gmi〃たＺ Ｓｍｄｊｅｓ２４:275-300.

ＡSai,ＨａｒｕｏｅｔａＬ２００３．〃"｡α･Fo↓河ｉ－Ｓｃｉ/byo脱ｚＪｂａｓｓ/ti?192Ｊ（Ge"ａｅ１色Fﾂ192/Sex‐

Ｅｕ群czzjね〃Bashi〃g)．Tokyo:OtsukiShoten

Auslander,Leoral997.“ＤｏＷｏｍｅｎ，ｓ＋Feminist＋Men，ｓ＋LesbianandGay

＋QueerStudies＝GenderStudies?，,ｄｉｉＺ/ｉｅ７ｍｃｃｓ９:1-30．

BacaZinn,Maxine,LynnWeberCannon,ElizabethHigginbotham,andBonnie ThorntonDilL1986.`ITheCostsofExclusionaryPracticｅｓｉｎＷｏｍｅｎ，ｓＳｔｕ‐

ｄｉes.'，Ｓ`970s:ﾉmmzaJq／Ｗｂｍｅ加加Ｃ“…α"aSocjeryll:290-303．

Banner,ＬｏｉｓＷ､1986.01Women,sStudiesandMenosStudies:AnAlternativeAp‐

proach.',Ｗ､抗e〃芯Ｓ畝d宛ｓ〃jemQtjo〃αＪＦｂｍ加９:１４１－１４４

Bowles,G1oriaandRenateDuelliKlein､198ａＴ/ＩＧＯ流esQ／Ｗｍｚｅ"IsSmdies.Ｌon‐

ｄｏ､:RoutledgeandKeganPauL

Boxer,MarilynJ1998.〃he〃Ｗb柳e〃ＡｓｂｔｈｅＱ耳esZjO":Ｃ…tiｿＺｇＷＤ醜醜怠Ｓｊ“ｉＢｓ ｍ.Ａ腕e減cZzBaltimoreandLondon:TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress、

1998a.“RemappingtheUniversity:thePromiseoftheWomen，sStudies PhD,"彫れ”ｓｊＳｔｍｉｂｓ２４(2):389-405．

Boy｡,NanAlamilla2005.`WhatDoesQueerStudiesOfferWomenosStudies？

TheProblemandPromiseoflnstability,,,ｐｐ９７－１１０,i、Ｅ､Ｌ･KennedyandA・

Beins（eds.),Ｗ０腕e"芯Ｓ伽djes/bγZheFm"”:Ｆｂ”αａｒｍ"s,励彪〃QgzzZf"ＳＰｂＪｊ‐

rjcs・NewBrunswick,NewJerseyandLondon:RutgersUniversityPress、

Braithwaite,Ann,SusanHeald,SusanneLuhmann,andSharonRosenberg2004、

TmzJbJj堰Ｗb抑e〃1ｓＳｔ"d海s：Ptzs2SbPInesemsα"dPbssjbi!"花sToronto：

SumachPress

Brimstone,Lyndie､1991.0ｌＯｕｔｏｆｔｈｅＭａｒｇｉｎｓａｎｄｌｎｔｏｔｈｅＳｏｕｐ:SomeThoughts onlncorporation,，'ｐｐ､119-130ｉｎＯ“ｑ/theMz種"s:ＷＯ碗e"芯Ｓｍｄｊｅｓ伽功ｅ ｊＷ，ze2ibSeditedbyJAaronandS､Walby,London,NewYorkandPhiladel‐

phia:ＴｈｅFalmerPress・

Brown,Wendy､1997."ThelmpossibilityofWomen1sStudies.，，。jﾉﾌﾞbね"ｃｅｓ９:７９－

１０１．

Butler,Judith､1991."ImitationandGenderlnsubordination,,,ｐｐ､13-31,ｉｎＤ・Ｆｕｓｓ

（ed.)Ⅲ”side/O皿ZfLesbiα〃TWemCS,ＧａｙＴｈｃｏ河es・NewYorkandLondon：

Routledge．

1990.ＣｅｍｅｒＴｍｚＪｂＪａＦ℃”"is加α〃[ZﾒﾉteS郷DDBだわ〃けItZC〃rjU/､ＮｅｗＹｏｒｋ London:Routledge

Chjlders，Mary、1984．“Women，sStudies：ＳｉｎｋｉｎｇａｎｄＳｗｉｍｍｉｎｇｉｎｔｈｅＭａｉｎ・

Stream.”Ｗb池e〃ｉｓＳｍｄｉｅｓ”temqtjo〃αＺＦＷｕＪｍ７:161-166．

Christopher，Susan1995．“RequiredKnowledge：IncorporatingGenderintoa CoreCurriculum.''ＰｈＤ・Dissertation,SchoolofEducation,StanfordUniver‐

sity,Stanford

Coyner,Sandral986・i1TheldeasofMainstreaming：Women，ｓＳｔｕｄｉｅｓａｎｄｔｈｅ

``Discipliningo,Women'sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan２３ Disciplines.''Ｆ》Ｄ"〃〃ｓⅧ:87-95．

Currie,ＤａｗｎａｎｄＨａｍｉｄａＫａｚｉ、1987.“ＡｃａｄｅｍｉｃＦｅｍｉｎｉｓｍａｎｄｔｈｅＰｒｏｃｅｓｓｏf De-radicalization:Re-examiningthelssues."鹿沈i"jStReuj巳zu:77-98．

DeGroot,JoannaandMaryMaynardl993.``Facingthel990s:Problemsand PossibilitiesforWomen，sStudieso'，ｉｎＪ・ｄｅＧｒｏｏｔａｎｄＭ・Maynard（eds)，

Ｗｍｔｅ"､Ｓ〃ａｉｅｓｉ冗仇eI990s:、ｏｆ"ｇＴﾉzj昭ｓＤｉＺ(９７℃"１６ﾉ？ＮＹ:Ｓｔ・Martin,s

Press

Edwards，Ｍａｒｙ1.1978．“Women､sStudiesCurriculumDevelopment：AView fromtheUnitedStates,”ＷO伽e"ゼＳ雌djcsﾉjMCｿamtjo"αl“αγ蛇γｌｙ,ｌ:387-395．

Etzkowitz,Henry,AndrewWebster,andPeterHealey､1998.CnPjUZzJiZjｱＺｇＫ)mzuル edg巳Ｗ′zu〃t"sectわれｓｑ/ﾉ"“stぴα〃ｄＡｃａｄ…ね、Albany:StateUniversity ofNewYorkPress、

Evans,Ｍａｒｙ，1981．“Women'sStudiesResearchintheUnitedStates:AReview andDiscussion.,,ＷｍｗＩｓＳｔ“iesmjemQtjo〃αｌＱ“γ蛇γｌｙ４:221-224.

1982．``InPraiseofTheory：ＴｈｅＣａｓｅｆｏｒＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudies.”鹿加j"jst Re"iezU:61-74.

1990.“TheProblemofGenderforWome､，sStudies”Ｗ､腕e〃ｉｓＳｔｍｊ‘ｓ

”ぬmaZio"αＪＦｂｍ加１３:457-462．

Freedman，EstelleB1990．“SmallGroupPedagogy：ConsciousnessRaisingin ConservativeTimes.''jVWSAノDlmzal2:603-623．

Funahashi，Kuniko2003．“Joureiseiteiwomeguru‘koubou,karamietekita mono:kongowotenbousurutameni'，(Ｔｈｅ``fight,，overtheenactmentofan ordinanceforthePromotionofGenderEquality：Issuesthathavebecome visiblethroughthefightandourfuturechallenges),ノbseigmb四（Women,s Studies）１１:37-49．

Fuss1Diana､1991.“DeckingOut:Performingldentities,”ｐｐ､1-12,inidem（ｅｄ)，

伽sj(ｆ２/OmTLesbiq〃Theo漉s，ＧａｙＴｈｅｏ流es・NewYorkandLondon：

Routledge

Gunew,Snejal987.“IsAcademicSisterhoodanOxymoron?''Ｗｂｍｅ"IsStzJajbs bzZemczjjo"ｑＪＦｂ池沈１０:533-536．

Guy-SheftallIBeverly，ｗｉｔｈＥｖｅｌｙｎｎＭ、Hammonds、1997．“WhitherBlack Women,sStudies・Interview.,ﾛﾛiﾘﾂｾｱwzcesJＡノリ郷ｍａＪＱ／Ｆと腕i"ｉｓｊＣｍｍｍノ Ｓｍａｉｅｓ,９(3):31-45．

hooks,belL1990・ｙｂａｍｊ"gTRace,Ｃｅ"｡“α"ａＣｍｍｍＪＰｂＪｊＵｉｃｓ・Boston:SouthEnd Press・

HumanDevelopmentlndicators2003

http://hdr・undp・org/reports/global/2003/indicator/indic2071Lhtml Jakobsen，JanetR2005．．`DifferentDifferences：TheoryandthePracticeof

Women，sStudies,.，ppl25-142,ｉｎＥＬ・KennedyandA・Beins（eds)，Ｗｂ‐

抑“否Ｓ畝djCs/ｂｒｔｈｅＦｍ四忽Fb""dZz(io"s,mZc7TDgntjO"s,Ｐｂ“Ｃｓ、NewBruns‐

wick,NewJerseyandLondon:RutgersUniversityPress．

2４

Johnson,Louise,1987.``IsAcademicFeminismanOxymoron?,,Ｗ､加師lsShjafes

"ZemqZjo"αＪＦｂｍｍ１０(5):529-532

Kennedy,MaryandBre1hedPiette､1991.“FromtheMarginstotheMainstream：

IssuesaroundWomen，sStudiesonAdultEducationandAccessCourses,１，

ｐｐ３０－４０ｉｎＪ､ＡａｒｏｎａｎｄＳＷａｌｂｙ（eds.),Ｏ“q/theMnﾂ1gj7ZsJWb鵬"IsSZzJd‐

ｉｅｓ珈肋ejVY"gtfes,London,NewYorkandPhiladelphia:TheFalmerPress，

Kessler・Harris,Alice､1992."TheViewfromWomen，sStudies.,'Ｓ…sfル御、α１０／

Ｗb腕e7Zj〃Ｃ"Z如花amSocjgiyl7:794-805．

Khor,Diana､1996.“ConstructionofldeasandKnowledgeintheJapaneseFemi‐

nistMovement：AnAnalysisofFeministGroupsandWomen,sStudies Courses,１，HoseiUniversitylnternationalFundForeignScholarsFellowship Reports,1994-1995,Ｖ０１．６．

1999．“OrganizingforChange:Women，sGrassrootsActivisminJapan'０，

Ｆ惣加畝iSjSmdjesp25(3):633-66L

Kirschner,SusanandElizabethC・Archl984.“`Transformation1oftheCurricu‐

ｌｕｍ:ProblemsofConceptionandDeceptiｏｎ”ＷＤ沈巴〃WsSiw`iesh1ね、α如冗ａＪ Ｆｂｍ加７:149-151．

Klein，RenateD、1987．“ＴｈｅＤｙｎａｍｉｃｓｏｆｔｈｅＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesC1assroom：A ReviewEssayoftheTeachingPractｉｃｅｏｆＷｏｍｅｎ，sStudiesinHigherEdu‐

cation.”Ｗｍｚｅ扣怠Ｓｍｄｆｃｓｍｉｅｍａｒｉｏ"αｊＦｂｍ柳１０:187-206．

Martin,Biddy､1997."SuccessandItsFailures.，，〔Ziﾉﾂ１２ね"ｃｅｓ９:102-131．

MartinJaneRoland2000・ＣＯ籾j〃gQfAgゼビ"AczZ企腕ａＲｅ厩"“堰Ｗb腕e"lsHOPes q"。Ｒ噸mTj'２９加ｅＡｃａ“腕y・NewYork:Routledge

Mclntosh,PeggyandElizabethKamarckMinnichl984.“VarietiesofWomen，s Studies.”Ｗ､腕c〃ＩｓＳｔｍｉｅｓＩ)zte伽ａｄｊｍａｌＦｂｧ測加７:139-148．

Messer-Davidow,Ｅｌｌｅn.2002.DjSciiP/i"i，lgF1e加航jSmfF》、'zSocmlActitﾉﾒs腕mAczz‐

［ZemcDiscoz47saDurhamandLondon:DukeUniversitvPress、

Mies，Maria、1990．“Women，sStudies：Science，Violence，andResponsibility.”

ＷｍＴｅれきＳｍａｉｅｓ町彪加α"o"αＪＦｂｍｍｌ３:433-441．

Mohanty,ChandraTalpade､2003.Ｆｾﾂ"j"js醜WUtlDomBome7s:Decolo"“１９９Ｔｈｅ omPmcticj"gSoJimz河lhy・DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress、

Morley,Louise､1999.0'gzJ"jZi"ｇ"ｍｍｊＳ７?TsJThe雌cmPoli雄ｓＱ／theAcQae7'Zy・

London:MacmillanPress．

Ｏ，Barr,ＪｅａｎFox､1994.Ｆ１ｅｍｊ"ｉｓ加！〃ＡＣ"o打:Ｂ御jldj"ｇ”sfim"０"ｓα"ａＣｂ腕加脚"i`ｙ Ｚｈ”z4gﾉｊＷｍｚｅ〃ＩＳＳ畝djes・ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress・

Okuyama,Kazuhiro2005､允測αα-”がi〃ｏ〃た彫れ（ｍｅＲｅｉ"smZemc"ｔｑ／Ｃｅ〃d〃

、寵).Tokyo:Shinfusha、

Readings,BilL1996・ＴｈｅＵ"j”だi〃i〃Ｒ”"s,Cambridge,MassandLondon,Eng‐

land:HarvardUniversityPress

Resurreccion,Bernadette,2004."SummaryReport,，，ｐｐ､1-16ｉｎＰ､Bergstrom(ed.）

Ｗb腕e"シCe"ａｅ７Ｓｍｄ2忽sj"Asm-RzciﾉﾌﾞとbUNESCOAsiaandPacificRegional

"Disciplining.，Women'sStudiesintheUnitedStatesandJapan ^２５ BureauforEducation

Rich,Adrienne､1986.“NotestowardaPoliticsofLocation.”ｐｐ,210-232,inidem.，

Ｂﾉ００仏Ｂ花α`,α"αＰｂαがＳｅｌｅａｅｄＰｍｓｅＪ９忽一Z98aNewYorkandLondon：

Ｗ､Ｗ､ＮｏｒｔｏｎａｎｄＣｏｍｐａｎｙ・

Rosenfelt，Deborahl984．‘ＷｈａｔWomen,sStudiesProgramsDothatMain‐

streamingCan，t・”ＷＤｍｅ〃ＩｓＳｍｄねｓｂ２ｔｅｍａｊｉｏ"αＺＦｂｍ加７：167-175．

Rothfield,Philipal987.`ContradictionsinTeachingFeminiＳｍ.”Ｗb碗e〃芯Ｓｍ｡‐

ｊｅｓｍｔ膠mQtjo"αＩＦbアシ机１０:525-527．

Rowland,Robynl982.``Women1sStudiesCourses:PragmaticandPoliticallssues ConcerningtheirEstablishmentandDesign.”Ｗｂｍｅ〃むSttJdねｓ１ｹztcmaZio"αノ fbP'ｗｚ５:487-495．

Ruggiero,Chrisl99q“TeachingWomen1sStudies:TheRepersonalizationofOur Politics.”Ｗｂ碗e抓むＳｍｄｊｅｓ〃ｌｅｍＱｔｊｍＱｌＦｂ”」疵１３:469-475．

Showalter,Elaine、197Ｌ“Introduction:TeachingAboutWomen,1971.”ＩｎＦｇｍ］ぬ ＳｍｄｉｅｓＩＶｉｉ－ｘｉｉ，

Spanier,Bonniel984・MInsideanlntegrationProject:aCaseStudyoftheRela‐

tionshipbetweenBalancingtheCurriculumandWomen，sStudies.'，ＷＯ‐

腕e〃１sStzJaiなｓＩｍｃｍａＺＪｏ"αｌＦｂｌＷ腕７：153-159．

Starr,Paul1987."TheCaseforSkepticism,''ppl24-l37,ｉｎＳ・Hanke（ed.),Ｐｍｓ‐

ＰＣＣお/ｂ７ＰｍﾉatfzaZio"・NewYork:AcademyofPoliticalScience

StimpSon,CatharineR､１９９６“Women，sStudiesanditsDiscontents."DjSse"t:６７－

７５．

Takemura,KazukoandUenoChizukol999."Taidan-`JendaaToraburu，”（Dia‐

logue:"GenderTrouble,,）Ｃｅ"dniShjSo（MOdem7ytozｲgﾉir),２７(1):44-77．

Tobias，Sheilal978．“Women，sStudies：itsOrigins1itsOrganizationandits Prospects.”ＷｍＴｅ"IsStmies肋Uematjo"αｌＱⅢαがe7b11:85-97．

TheUniversityofWisconsinSystemWomen,sStudiesConsortiuml999､Ｔｍ"s‐

／bmzi昭Ｗb池e打IsEU"catjo"Ｊ７ｿleHistoびQ／Ｗb腕e"1sSmdjesj〃ｵﾉｾCD刀〃e7sjbノ ０／WHsco"sj〃SystemTheOfficeofUniversityPublicationsfortheUniver‐

sityofWisconsinSystemWomen,sStudiesConsortium

Weigman,Robyn､2005,“ThePossibilityofWomen，sStudies,,，ｐｐ､40-60,ｉｎＥＬ・

KennedyandA・Beins（eds.)，ＷＤ腕e"IsSjmibs/ｂｒｔｈｅＦＷｍ杉:Ｐｂ”datio"s，

〃termgmimsbPbljti℃s、NewBrunswick,NewJerseyandLondon:Rutgers UniversityPress

Wong，Day、2006．“BeyondldentityPoliticsTheMakinｇｏｆａｎＯｒａｌＨｉｓｔｏｒｙｏｆ ＨｏｎｇＫｏｎｇＷｏｍｅｎＷｈｏＬｏｖｅＷｏｍｅｎ０,ﾉb皿ｍａｌｑ/Lesbm〃Stwaibs,１０（3/4)：

29-48．

Yee,ShirleyJ､1997."Ｔｈｅ“Women”ｉｎWomen'ｓStudies."ｄif/b”"ｃＵｓ９:46-64 Zimmerman,Ｂｏｎｎｉｅ２００５.“BeyondDualisms:SomeThoughtsaboutthefuture

ofWomen'ｓStudies,”ｐｐ､31-39,ｉｎＥＬ・KennedvandA・Beins,eds.Ｗ､腕e〃ざ Ｓｔ"d花s/ｂｒＺｈｅＦｍ泌花:Ｆｂ""datjo"s,ノ)zfej7Dgmjo"s,Ｐｂ/iticS・NewBrunswick，

2６

NewJersey,ａｎｄLondon:RutgersUniversityPress、

Zmoroczek,Ｃ・ａｎｄＣ,Duchen,1991.“ＷｈａｔＡｒｅＴｈｏｓｅＷｏｍｅｎＵｐＴｏ？Women，s StudiesandFeministResearchintheEuropeanCommunityp,，ｐｐ､11-29,ｉｎＪ、

ＡａｒｏｎａｎｄＳ､Walby(eds.）Ｏ脚、/jheMz“"sJWb獅g"もSZzJdj②si劔鋺e｣'99,3．

LondomTaylorandFrancis．

(ジェンダーとセクシユアリティ・法学部教授）

－－－