Granting Standpoint as a Strategy for Promoting Social Justice Activism: An Analysis of Dolores Huerta’s Rhetoric

References

• Alcoff, L. (1991–1992). The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique, 20(20), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/1354221
   Google Scholar
• Anzaldúa, G. (2007). Borderlands/La frontera: The new mestiza. Aunt Lute Books. Original work published 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Black, E. (1970). The second persona. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335637009382992
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buzzanell, P. M., Remke, R. V., Meisenbach, R., Liu, M., Bowers, V., & Conn, C. (2017). Standpoints of maternity leave: Discourses of temporality and ability. Women’s Studies in Communication, 40(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2015.1113451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, P. H. (2004). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of black feminist thought. In S. Harding (Ed.), The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies (pp. 103–126). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Condit, C. M. (2019). Public health experts, expertise, and Ebola: A relational theory of ethos. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 22(2), 177–216. https://doi.org/10.14321/rhetpublaffa.22.2.0177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Onís, K. M. (2015). Lost in translation: Challenging (White, monolingual feminism’s) <choice> with justicia reproductive. Women’s Studies in Communication, 38(1), 1–19. doi:10.1080/07491409.2014.989462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doss, E. F., & Jensen, R. E. (2013). Balancing mystery and identification: Dolores Huerta’s shifting transcendent persona. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 99(4), 481–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2013.833667
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, T. (2008). Introduction to “Speech given by Dolores Huerta, UCLA, February 22, 1978. In M. T. García (Ed.), A Dolores Huerta reader (pp. 241–257). University of New Mexico Press.
   Google Scholar
• García, M. T. (2008). Introduction: La pasionaria Chicana. In M. T. García (Ed.), A Dolores Huerta reader (pp. xv–xxix). University of New Mexico Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, A. R. (2021). Introduction: “Check yo’ stuff” allies: A forum on the personal/political challenges of coalition-building in precarious times. Women’s Studies in Communication, 44(2), 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2021.1923328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halloran, S. M. (1982). Aristotle’s concept of ethos, or if not his somebody else’s. Rhetoric Review, 1(1), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198209359037
   Google Scholar
• Hernández, L. H. (2020). Silence, (in)action, and the downfalls of White allyship. Women & Language, 43(1), 147–152. doi:10.34036/WL.2020.015.
   Google Scholar
• Huerta, D.(2008a). Dolores Huerta talks about Republicans, César Chávez, children, and her home town. In M. T. García (Ed.), A Dolores Huerta reader (pp. 163–175). University of New Mexico Press. Original work published 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Huerta, D. (2008b). Keynote address before the annual convention of the American Public Health Association, October 21, 1974, New Orleans, Louisiana. In M. T. García (Ed.), A Dolores Huerta reader (pp. 229–239). University of New Mexico Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huerta, D. (2008c). Speech given by Dolores Huerta, UCLA, February 22, 1978. In M. T. García (Ed.), A Dolores Huerta reader (pp. 241–257). University of New Mexico Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson, D. (1996). Rights across borders: Immigration and the decline of citizenship. Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jarratt, S. C., & Reynolds, N. (1994). The splitting image: Contemporary feminisms and the ethics of ethos. In J. S. Baumlin & T. F. Baumlin (Eds.), Ethos: New essays in rhetorical and critical theory (pp. 37–63). Southern Methodist University Press.
   Google Scholar
• John, C. A. (2011). Strategic ambivalence: A feminist standpoint theory reading of Nella Larsen’s novels. Feminist Formations, 23(1), 94–117. https://doi.org/10.1353/ff.2011.0001
   Google Scholar
• McClish, G., & Bacon, J. (2002). “Telling the story her own way”: The role of feminist standpoint theory in rhetorical studies. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 32(2), 27–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02773940209391227
   Google Scholar
• Mussell, H. (2016). The truth of the matter. Hypatia, 31(3), 537–553. S. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nautiyal, J. (2020). Tease and persist: A scratchy note to White “allies.”. Women & Language, 43(1), 141–145. doi:10.34036/WL.2020.014.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien Hallstein, D. L. (2000). Where standpoint stands now: An introduction and commentary. Women’s Studies in Communication, 23(1), 25–43. doi:10.1080/07491409.2000.11517687.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, G. (2018). Entertaining a healthy cispicion of the ally industrial complex in transgender studies. Women & Language, 41(1), 146–151.
   Google Scholar
• Pinnick, C. L. (2008). Science education for women: Situated cognition, feminist standpoint theory, and the status of women in science. Science and Education, 17(10), 1055–1063. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-008-9153-7
   Google Scholar
• Pittman, C. (2007). Black women writers and the trouble with ethos: Harriet Jacobs, Billie Holiday, and Sister Souljah. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 37(1), 43–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/02773940600860074
   Google Scholar
• Reynolds, N. (1993). Ethos as location: New sites for understanding discursive activity. Rhetoric Review, 11(2), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350199309389009
   Google Scholar
• Smith, C. R. (2004). Ethos dwells pervasively: A hermeneutic reading of aristotle on credibility. In M. J. Hyde (Ed.), The ethos of rhetoric (pp. 1–19). University of South Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sowards, S. K. (2010). Rhetorical agency as haciendo caras and differential consciousness through lens of gender, race, ethnicity, and class: An examination of Dolores Huerta’s rhetoric. Communication Theory, 20(2), 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01361.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sowards, S. K. (2012). Rhetorical functions of letter writing: Dialogic collaboration, affirmation, and catharsis in Dolores Huerta’s letters. Communication Quarterly, 60(2), 295–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2012.669341
   Google Scholar
• Sowards, S. K. (2019). ¡Sí, ella puede!: The rhetorical legacy of Dolores Huerta and the united farm workers. University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stillion Southard, B. A. (2014). A rhetoric of epistemic privilege: Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Harriot Stanton Blatch, and the educated vote. Advances in the History of Rhetoric, 17(2), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/15362426.2014.890962
   Google Scholar
• Wander, P. (1984). The third persona: An ideological turn in rhetorical theory. Central States Speech Journal, 35(4), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978409368190
   Google Scholar
• Wood, J. T. (2005). Feminist standpoint theory and muted group theory: Commonalities and divergences. Women and Language, 28(2), 61–64.
   Google Scholar