The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Affective solidarity: Feminist reflexivity and political transformation
Abstract
This article seeks to intervene in what I perceive to be a problematic opposition in feminist theory between ontological and epistemological accounts of existence and politics, by proposing an approach that weaves together Elspeth Probyn’s conceptualisation of ‘feminist reflexivity’ with a re-reading of feminist standpoint through affect. In so doing, I develop the concept of affective solidarity as necessary for sustainable feminist politics of transformation. This approach is proposed as a way of moving away from rooting feminist transformation in the politics of identity and towards modes of engagement that start from the affective dissonance experience can produce. Moving beyond empathy as a privileged way of connecting with others, I argue that the difference between ‘womanhood’ and ‘feminism’ is critical for a universal yet non-essential understanding of what motivates gendered change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment.
Brewer, R. M., & Collins, P. H. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074808 · Cited by 19,445
Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective
Haraway, D. (1988) · Feminist Studies · doi:10.2307/3178066 · Cited by 18,364
Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses
Mohanty, C. (1988) · Feminist Review · doi:10.1057/fr.1988.42 · Cited by 4,855
Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation
Massumi, B. (2002) · doi:10.1215/9780822383574 · Cited by 4,627
Parables for the virtual: movement, affect, sensation
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-1946 · Cited by 3,771
Ahmed, S. (2004) · Social Text · doi:10.1215/01642472-22-2_79-117 · Cited by 3,159
Feminists Theorize the Political
(2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203723999 · Cited by 2,974
Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives.
Connell, R. W., & Harding, S. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2075914 · Cited by 2,641
Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity
Sedgwick, E. K. (2003) · doi:10.1215/9780822384786 · Cited by 2,464
Scott, J. W. (1991) · Critical Inquiry · doi:10.1086/448612 · Cited by 2,258
Cited by
Anti-Gender Politics in the Populist Moment
Graff, A., & Korolczuk, E. (2021) · ReIn UW (University of Warsaw) · doi:10.4324/9781003133520 · Cited by 513
White innocence in the Black Mediterranean: hospitality and the erasure of history
Danewid, I. (2017) · Third World Quarterly · doi:10.1080/01436597.2017.1331123 · Cited by 336
Affecting feminism: Questions of feeling in feminist theory
Pedwell, C., & Whitehead, A. (2012) · Feminist Theory · doi:10.1177/1464700112442635 · Cited by 289
Zembylas, M. (2014) · Curriculum Inquiry · doi:10.1111/curi.12051 · Cited by 258
Feeling differently: Approaches and their politics
Gammerl, B., Hutta, J. S., & Scheer, M. (2017) · Emotion, Space and Society · doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2017.07.007 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Hemmings, C.
- Venue
- Feminist Theory
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-08
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 147-161
- ISSN
- 1464-7001 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2773
- OpenAlex
- W2052448616
- Cited by
- 770
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 30.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Affective solidarity: Feminist reflexivity and political transformation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1464700112442643
- The paper
- Hemmings, C. (2012). Affective solidarity: Feminist reflexivity and political transformation. Feminist Theory. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700112442643
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
