The Hestian Paradigm: Theory Construction for Home Economics
By P. Thompson
Glossary Terms
Endogamy theory – theory generated from “inside’ a field (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Exogamic theory – theory introduced from “outside” a field (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Homogamic theory – a holistic, integrative theory that transcends sexist and elitist biases on the human condition. (pg. 95) Homogamic theory is needed to address our total humanness, both in the concrete and in the abstract. The homogamic position represents a third alternative standpoint the rejects two equally odious extremes. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Liberal Feminist views: (Thompson, 1989, pg. 99)
Marxist feminism – addresses the issue of social and political inequality. “…human survival depends on consciously and purposefully transforming natural resources into food, drink, shelter, and clothing through human effort, or praxis.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 102)
Praxis – “practical energy”
Social feminism – views “the struggle between women and men as changing historically with changes in modes of production. Socialist areas of interest: reproductive rights, family relationships, child care, early childhood education, social economic arrangements between men, women, and children in households, the family and the workplace (Thompson, 1989, pg. 103)
Phallocentrism - In critical theory and deconstruction, phallogocentrism or phallocentrism is a neologism coined by Jacques Derrida to refer to the privileging of the masculine (phallus) in the construction of meaning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phallocentrism
Radical feminist – diverges on the issue of gender orientation. Discloses how “sexual” and “gender” polotics must be understood as a precondition for introducing social change. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 106)
Gynomorphic – having the shape of a woman. When referring to language, I think this means having a more feminine approach, taking the masculine away. http://www.lexic.us/definition-of/gynomorphic
Ecofeminist – diverges from other versions of feminism, focuses on ecological issues. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 107)
Hestian sphere – refers to the domestic sphere of human action and interaction. The oikos (Greek, household) includes personal relationships, the family as an ecosystem. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 112)
Hermean sphere – refers to the public sphere of human action and interaction. The polis (Greek, city-state) includes social order and impersonal relationships. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 112)
Quotes and Comments
“Women students are good theorists, especially if the emphasis is on relationships, and hypotheses are not formulated in language that invalidates their personal experiences.” Jackie Lanum (Thompson, 19, pg. 95)
When I first read this I thought what a nice way of putting it; but, then the question becomes whether or not this is insulting or not. Maybe I am just questioning whether theories on relationships can exist without personal experiences. Can we have hypotheses about relationships that do not interject personal experiences? Are these hypothesis even valuable, accurate or helpful without the experience.
“Feminist viewpoints are collective attempts to validate women’s ways of seeing, being, knowing, and thinking.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 98)
While I have a fundamental problem with the concept of having to validate the way women view the world and how we function, I do understand the need for this in a society that still maintain a very patriarchal structure. It is important to understand that our perspective is different but just as valuable.
“For home economists, conceptualizing everyday life and its myriad activities is both a theoretical and a practical challenge. For communication about the everyday as experiences, we cannot always rely on “common sense” The compass points to everyday life provide alternative paradigms, organizational modes, and conceptual categories for the study of material necessity and gender relations.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 109)
There are far more varying aspects to life and the experience of different people within this field of study. One must study a variety of different aspects of daily life from a variety of different people because no one will do everything the same. There are so many influences that a home economist understands that any area of study may not be fully accurate and assumptions when made need to be understood that they will not likely be representative of all situations. “Common sense” seems like a logical thing but many people may not have developed the same values and understanding depending on their upbringing. What seems logical for one person, may completely escape the realm of another person.
References
Thompson, P (1989). The Hestian Paradigm: Theory Construction for Home Economics, In F. H. Hultgren & D. L. Coomer (Eds.), Alternative modes of inquiry in Home Economics (pp. 95-115). Peoria, IL: Glencoe.
Endogamy theory – theory generated from “inside’ a field (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Exogamic theory – theory introduced from “outside” a field (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Homogamic theory – a holistic, integrative theory that transcends sexist and elitist biases on the human condition. (pg. 95) Homogamic theory is needed to address our total humanness, both in the concrete and in the abstract. The homogamic position represents a third alternative standpoint the rejects two equally odious extremes. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 95)
Liberal Feminist views: (Thompson, 1989, pg. 99)
- Faith in rationality
- The belief that women and men share the same potential for rational behaviour
- Commitment to education (especially critical thinking)
- Each human being acts as and autonomous agent in the search for truth, search depends on freedom to pursue it
- The doctrine of natural rights extends to the political arena and includes the demand for suffrage for the disenfranchised – both women and blacks
Marxist feminism – addresses the issue of social and political inequality. “…human survival depends on consciously and purposefully transforming natural resources into food, drink, shelter, and clothing through human effort, or praxis.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 102)
Praxis – “practical energy”
Social feminism – views “the struggle between women and men as changing historically with changes in modes of production. Socialist areas of interest: reproductive rights, family relationships, child care, early childhood education, social economic arrangements between men, women, and children in households, the family and the workplace (Thompson, 1989, pg. 103)
Phallocentrism - In critical theory and deconstruction, phallogocentrism or phallocentrism is a neologism coined by Jacques Derrida to refer to the privileging of the masculine (phallus) in the construction of meaning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phallocentrism
Radical feminist – diverges on the issue of gender orientation. Discloses how “sexual” and “gender” polotics must be understood as a precondition for introducing social change. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 106)
Gynomorphic – having the shape of a woman. When referring to language, I think this means having a more feminine approach, taking the masculine away. http://www.lexic.us/definition-of/gynomorphic
Ecofeminist – diverges from other versions of feminism, focuses on ecological issues. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 107)
Hestian sphere – refers to the domestic sphere of human action and interaction. The oikos (Greek, household) includes personal relationships, the family as an ecosystem. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 112)
Hermean sphere – refers to the public sphere of human action and interaction. The polis (Greek, city-state) includes social order and impersonal relationships. (Thompson, 1989, pg. 112)
Quotes and Comments
“Women students are good theorists, especially if the emphasis is on relationships, and hypotheses are not formulated in language that invalidates their personal experiences.” Jackie Lanum (Thompson, 19, pg. 95)
When I first read this I thought what a nice way of putting it; but, then the question becomes whether or not this is insulting or not. Maybe I am just questioning whether theories on relationships can exist without personal experiences. Can we have hypotheses about relationships that do not interject personal experiences? Are these hypothesis even valuable, accurate or helpful without the experience.
“Feminist viewpoints are collective attempts to validate women’s ways of seeing, being, knowing, and thinking.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 98)
While I have a fundamental problem with the concept of having to validate the way women view the world and how we function, I do understand the need for this in a society that still maintain a very patriarchal structure. It is important to understand that our perspective is different but just as valuable.
“For home economists, conceptualizing everyday life and its myriad activities is both a theoretical and a practical challenge. For communication about the everyday as experiences, we cannot always rely on “common sense” The compass points to everyday life provide alternative paradigms, organizational modes, and conceptual categories for the study of material necessity and gender relations.” (Thompson, 1989, pg. 109)
There are far more varying aspects to life and the experience of different people within this field of study. One must study a variety of different aspects of daily life from a variety of different people because no one will do everything the same. There are so many influences that a home economist understands that any area of study may not be fully accurate and assumptions when made need to be understood that they will not likely be representative of all situations. “Common sense” seems like a logical thing but many people may not have developed the same values and understanding depending on their upbringing. What seems logical for one person, may completely escape the realm of another person.
References
Thompson, P (1989). The Hestian Paradigm: Theory Construction for Home Economics, In F. H. Hultgren & D. L. Coomer (Eds.), Alternative modes of inquiry in Home Economics (pp. 95-115). Peoria, IL: Glencoe.