Passionately Posthuman: From Feminist Disidentifications to Postdisciplinary Posthumanities

  • Nina Lykke

I hold a doctoral degree from a faculty of the humanities and was educated as a literary scholar, but my relationship to the humanities has for years been ambivalent and troubled. I do not easily identify as a humanities scholar. Instead, I have come to position myself as a posthumanist and postconstructionist feminist scholar who belong to an international, trans- and postdisciplinary scholarly community of critical intellectuals with various kinds of affiliations to political movements which struggle for social and environmental justice – feminist, queer, transgender, anti-racist, anti-colonial, anti-ableist, environmental etc. movements. In academic terms, I am professor of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies, which I define as a postdisciplinary discipline as elaborately reflected in earlier work (Lykke 2010, 2011). In this chapter, I will make myself accountable for my troubled relationship to the humanities and elaborate on the ways in which I position myself in a feminist version...


  1. Alaimo, Stacy. 2008. Trans-corporeal feminisms and the ethical space of nature. In Material feminisms, eds. Stacy Alaimo, and Susan Hekman, 237–264. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Åsberg, Cecilia, Redi Koobak, and Ericka Johnson. 2011. Beyond the humanist imagination. NORA: Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 19(4): 218–230.Google Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1984. Rabelais and his world. Transl. Hélène Iswolsky. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett, Jane. 2010. Vibrant matter. A political ecology of things. Durham, NC, and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Braidotti, Rosi. 2006. Transpositions. On nomadic ethics. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Braidotti, Rosi. 2011. Nomadic theory. The portable Rosi Braidotti. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Braidotti, Rosi. 2013. The posthuman. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Case, Sue-Ellen. 2001. Feminism and performance. A post-disciplinary couple. Theatre Research International 26(2): 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehrenreich, Barbara. 2009. Smile or die. How positive thinking fooled America and the world. London: Granta.Google Scholar
  12. Haraway, Donna. 1991. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, cyborgs and women. The reinvention of nature. 183–201. London: Free Association Books. Donna Haraway.Google Scholar
  13. Haraway, Donna. 1997. Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium. FemaleMan©_Meets_ OncoMouse™. Feminism and technoscience. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Latour, Bruno. 1993. We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Lorde, Audre. 1997. The cancer journals. San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Books.Google Scholar
  16. Lykke, Nina. 2010. Feminist studies. A guide to intersectional theory, methodology and writing. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Lykke, Nina. 2011. Intersectional analysis – Black box or useful critical feminist thinking technology? In Framing intersectionality: Debates on a multi-faceted concept in gender studies, eds. Helma Lutz, Maria Teresa Herrera Vivar, and Linda Supik, 207–221. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Lykke, Nina. 2014. Passionate disidentifications as an intersectional writing strategy. In Writing academic texts differently. Intersectional feminist methodologies and the playful art of writing ed. Nina Lykke, 30–47. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Minh-Ha, Trinh T. 1989. Woman, native, other. Writing postcoloniality and feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Muñoz, José Esteban. 1999. Disidentifications: Queers of color and the performance of politics. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Plumwood, Val. 1993. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. London, New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Ryle, Gilbert. 1949. The Concept of the Mind. London: HutchinsonGoogle Scholar
  23. Said, Edward W. 1978. Orientalism. Western conceptions of the orient. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  24. Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. 1998. Tendencies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, Mark J. 1998. Social science in question: Towards a postdisciplinary framework. London and New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Sontag, Susan. 1978. Illness as metaphor. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  27. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1999. A critique of postcolonial reason. Toward a history of a vanishing present. Cambridge MA and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Stacey, Jackie. 1997. Teratologies. A cultural study of cancer. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit of Gender Studies, Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations