# Introduction Kathy Davis critiques Donna Haraway's portrayal of feminist health activism, particularly that second-wave feminist self-help practices, such as gynecological self-help, rely on colonialist tropes of discovery and acquisition of women's bodies. Davis explores the disconnect between theoretical poststructuralist feminist theory and experiential, quotidian women's health activism, arguing that feminist theory must embrace women's embodied experiences and offer practical epistemological tools for feminist health activism. >In a path-breaking essay, ‘The Virtual Speculum in the New World Order’ (1999), Donna Haraway, one of the most important contemporary feminist theorists on women’s bodies and feminist politics of knowledge, provides a devastating critique of feminist self-help, which was popular in US women’s health movement during the 1970s. >Although the women’s health movement, and gynaecological self-help are not and never were – identical, Haraway views them as expressions of the same feminist politics of knowledge. The women’s health movement emerged during the 1960s and 70s US second-wave feminism. Its goal was to challenge the male-dominated and sexist medical establishment. Key issues included reproductive rights, challenging medical authority, and holistic health and birth practices. Gynecological self-help was a more radical offshoot of the women’s health movement, particularly associated with self-examination and the slogan “taking back our bodies.” It involved self-examination, reclaiming the speculum, and community education. >In short, a new politics of knowledge is required for a ‘truly comprehensive’ feminist politics of health and of technoscience more generally (Haraway, 1999: 84). In essence, Haraway is urging feminists to rethink and expand their approach to health and science, making it more inclusive, global, and equipped to address intersectional issues. “Politics of knowledge” refers to how power influences what counts as knowledge, who is considered a legitimate knower, and which types of knowledge are valued or marginalized. Davis will use Haraway's essay, _The Virtual Speculum in the New World Order_, as a starting point to... >consider the gap between contemporary poststructuralist feminist theory on the body and women’s health activism. In order to explain this gap, I will now examine some of the points of contention in more detail: namely, the significance of the ‘natural’ body (and the importance of ‘denaturalizing’ women’s bodies), the value of experiential knowledge (and the necessity of ‘deconstructing’ experience as authentic source of knowledge), and the value of women’s epistemic agency (and the problem of the autonomous individual). I will then suggest some alternative (phenomenological) approaches to women’s bodies and health which can provide a more viable epistemological foundation for a practical feminist politics of embodiment. Put another way, Davis will explain the gap between poststructuralist feminist theory and women's health activism will examine these points of contention... 1. _The significance of the "natural body."_ Poststructuralist feminist theory challenges the idea of a "natural" / essential body, instead emphasizing how the body is shaped by culture and power, not merely biology. 2. _The value of experiential knowledge._ Feminist health activists emphasize women's lived experiences. Poststructuralist theory is skeptical of relying on personal experience as "authentic" knowledge, instead emphasizing how experience is shaped by power and culture. 3. _The value of women's epistemic agency._ Epistemic agency refers to the ability of women to generate knowledge, evaluate it, and act on it. Poststructuralist feminism complicates this notion, highlighting how culture and power influence women's capacity for agency. Davis suggests a phenomenological approach, emphasizing lived experience and embodiment, can bridge the gap between theoretical poststructuralist theory and practical, experiential feminist health activism. # Feminist body theory/Feminist body politics There's a tension between... - feminist body theory's tendency to treat the body as cultural text to be deconstructed— as culturally shaped and suspect, - and the women's health movement's emphasis on embodied experience and experiential knowledge as crucial to countering medical hegemony. The women's health movement addressed a wide range of issues, like abortion rights, sexual violence, poverty, and birth control. The movement assumed that women's material bodies and experiences were crucial. In contrast, poststructuralist feminist theory was more ambivalent about embodied experience, and tended to treat the body as a cultural text to be deconstructed. This was typified by the "equality versus difference" debate: Should feminism focus on _equality_ with men (emphasizing similarities between men and women) or embrace and value the _differences_ between genders. This led some feminists to argue that the female body was responsible for women's subjugation and therefore needed to be transcended. Others argued for the affirmation of the female body, particularly women's capacity for motherhood. >Contemporary feminist body theory began to focus on dismantling the dualistic thinking which linked women to their biological bodies in the first place (Bordo, 1987). Biology was regarded as a culprit, often used to justify women’s inferiority and social subordination. Thus, the first intervention was to separate biological sex from socially and culturally constructed gender. >The fear that any mention of the female body would open the doors to biological determinism meant that women’s biological bodies were left untheorized. It also meant that many feminist theorists looked at feminist health activism with its focus on women’s sexual organs, reproductive function, and the benefits of cervical self-help with grave suspicion. The ascendancy of postmodernism and the 'linguistic turn' complicated the project of questioning science's "objectivity" and therefore asserting the primacy of women's experience: >Once regarded as the very bedrock of second-wave feminism, ‘experience’ came to be seen as an increasingly suspect concept (Scott, 1992). If all knowledge was regarded as culturally shaped, then neither women nor feminists had special access to the ‘truth’ (Haraway, 1991). While this critique was a needed corrective to simplified claims about the authenticity of experience and opened up space for reflexivity, it had the unintended consequence that the entire concept of experience was discarded. Davis suggests a resolution to this fundamental tension, requiring at least three shifts in feminist body theory's conceptualization of... 1. the body 2. embodied experience 3. epistemic agency ## Fleshing out the body Feminist body theory must strike a balance between deconstructing essentialist views and acknowledging the material body with its vulnerabilities, limitations, and physiological processes. A theory that only focuses on the cultural or symbolic aspects of the body risks losing sight of the lived, embodied experiences that are essential to understanding women’s health, illness, and everyday realities. Susan Wendell argues that postmodern theories erase the everyday realties of living with bodily limitations, especially that of disabled women. Lynda Birke critiques the extremes of feminist body theory—either overemphasizing the body’s fluidity or dismissing biology entirely. She proposes a balanced approach that integrates biological reality with cultural understanding. This view respects the body’s materiality and integrity, while avoiding the traps of biological determinism and essentialism, offering a more grounded understanding of women’s embodied experiences. >In my view, Wendell and Birke provide a promising alternative to the disembodied body in feminist body theory. Both take up the project which feminist activists of the 1970s started – namely, a concern for women’s embodied vulnerabilities and a desire to engage critically with medical knowledge. They show how it is possible to learn from biology without falling into biological determinism, thereby justifying a feminist epistemology which engages with the female body as an anatomical and physiological entity, without ignoring the body’s capacity for change. They also tackle the biological conditions which enable and constrain an individual’s interactions with the world around her without ignoring the role of culture in giving meaning to these conditions. And, last but not least, they assume that knowledge about women’s bodies and how they work should not be left to biology, but should be an integral part of feminist inquiry. ## Retrieving experience The section argues for a balanced approach that acknowledges the cultural construction of experience while still valuing women’s embodied knowledge. Experience should not be dismissed or reduced to mere discourse, as it provides essential insights into the material and lived realities of women’s lives. Phenomenology offers a useful framework for retrieving these experiences and making them central to feminist inquiry, enabling women to challenge dominant discourses and redefine their embodied lives. ## Women as epistemic agents Postmodern feminist theory has played a key role in deconstructing the notion of an autonomous subject capable of accessing pure or undistorted knowledge. It emphasizes how cultural discourses shape women’s experiences and agency, often framing women’s choices as forms of **compliance** with societal norms rather than genuine acts of subversion or resistance. However, this focus on the power of discourse comes at a cost, limiting the recognition of how women might actively engage with knowledge for personal empowerment and feminist activism. # Embodied theories Davis calls for a reconceptualization of feminist body theory to better bridge the gap between feminist theory and feminist activism by focusing on women’s lived experiences and their epistemic agency. This requires three critical shifts: a reconceptualization of the body, embodied experience, and epistemic agency. ### First Shift: Reconceptualizing the Body ### Second Shift: Reconceptualizing Embodied Experience ### Third Shift: Reconceptualizing Epistemic Agency