Keywords
Epistemic Violence
Gender Bias
Coloniality of Knowledge
How to Cite
Abstract
This study critically analyzes the Spanish version of the twenty-second edition of the Dewey Decimal Classification from a feminist and intersectional perspective in the field of knowledge organization. Through a qualitative documentary-interpretive approach, it examines the conceptual architecture of the system under the assumption that classification devices are not neutral, but rather historically situated normative structures. The analysis identifies four structural patterns in the representation of categories linked to gender and sex-gender dissidence: conceptual invisibility, pathologization, thematic fragmentation, and hierarchical subordination. These patterns reveal dynamics of epistemic injustice that restrict the intelligibility and classificatory autonomy of certain social experiences, especially in areas such as health, violence, and social sciences. From a situated intersectional perspective, the study places these findings within the framework of Latin American feminist epistemologies, emphasizing the need to critically review systems of knowledge organization to move toward more inclusive and socially responsible forms of documentary representation.
References
Alfaya Lamas, Emilia. 2012. “La asunción del género neutro en la teoría y práctica de la organización del conocimiento”. En 20 Años del Capítulo Español de ISKO / Actas del XX Congreso ISKO-España. Ferrol, 30 de junio - 1 de julio de 2011, coordinado por Carmen Pérez Pais y María de los Ángeles González Bonome, 249-63. Universidad de Coruña. http://hdl.handle.net/2183/11653
Barría-González, Ghislaine, y Mario Recabal Marambio. 2016. “La representación del conocimiento en la RDA: un análisis de género”. Revista Ciencias de la Información 2 (1): 65-80. https://www.cienciasdeladocumentacion.cl/index.php/csdoc/article/view/61
Beghtol, Clare. 2002. “A Proposed Ethical Warrant for Global Knowledge Representation and Organization Systems”. Journal of Documentation 58 (5): 507-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410210441
Beghtol, Clare. 2005. “Ethical Decision-Making for Knowledge Representation and Organization Systems for Global Use”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56 (9): 903-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20184
Blázquez Graf, Norma. 2012. “Epistemología feminista: temas centrales”. En Investigación feminista / Epistemología, metodología y representaciones sociales, coordinado por Norma Blázquez Graf, Fátima Flores Palacios y Maribel Ríos Everardo, 21-35. Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Ciencias y Humanidades, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Bowker, Geoffrey C., y Susan Leigh Star. 1999. Sorting Things Out / Classification and Its Consequences. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6352.001.0001
Budd, John M. 2003. “The Library, Praxis, and Symbolic Power”. The Library Quarterly 73 (1): 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1086/603373
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2012. “El doble discurso de los grupos dominados”. En Feminismos negros / Una antología, editado por Mercedes Jabardo, 33-37. Traficantes de Sueños.
Collins, Patricia Hill, y Sirma Bilge. 2016. Intersectionality. Polity Press.
Corres Ayala, Patricia. 2012. “Femenino y masculino: modalidades de ser”. En Investigación feminista / Epistemología, metodología y representaciones sociales, coordinado por Norma Blázquez Graf, Fátima Flores Palacios y Maribel Ríos Everardo, 111-38. Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinarias en Ciencias y Humanidades, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Denzin, Norman K., y Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2005. “Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research”. En The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3.ª ed., editado por Norman K. Denzin e Yvonna S. Lincoln, 1-32. SAGE.
Fox, Melodie J. 2016. “‘Priorities of Arrangement’ or a ‘Hierarchy of Oppressions?’. Perspectives on Intersectionality in Knowledge Organization”. Knowledge Organization 43 (5): 373-83. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2016-5-373
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic Injustice / Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001
Gago, Verónica. 2019. La potencia feminista / O el deseo de cambiarlo todo. Tinta Limón Ediciones.
Gargallo, Francesca. 2007. “Feminismo latinoamericano”. Revista Venezolana de Estudios de la Mujer 12 (28): 17-34. https://saber.ucv.ve/ojs/index.php/rev_vem/article/view/2179
Garry, Ann. 2011. “Intersectionality, Metaphors, and the Multiplicity of Gender”. Hypatia 26 (4): 826-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01194.x
Guimarães, José Augusto Chaves, y Fabio Assis Pinho. 2007. “Desafíos da representação do conhecimento: abordagem ética”. Informação & Informação 12 (1): 19-39. https://doi.org/10.5433/1981-8920.2007v12n1p19
Hall, Stuart, ed. 1997. Representation / Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. SAGE Publications.
Haraway, Donna J. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”. Feminist Studies 14 (3): 575-99. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3178066
Haraway, Donna J. 1991. “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century”. En Simians, Cyborgs and Women / The Reinvention of Nature, 149-181. Routledge.
Harding, Sandra. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? / Thinking from Women’s Lives. Cornell University Press.
Hjørland, Birger. 2003. “Fundamentals of Knowledge Organization”. Knowledge Organization 30 (2): 87-111. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2003-2-87
Hooks, Bell. 1984. Feminist Theory / From Margin to Center. South End Press.
Lagarde y de los Ríos, Marcela. 2001. Claves feministas para la autoestima de las mujeres. Horas y Horas.
Lugones, María. 2008. “Colonialidad y género”. Tabula Rasa 9: 73-101. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.340
Macón, Cecilia. 2016. “Esperanza contra natura o de los pasados queer como desafío en el presente”. El Banquete de los Dioses. Revista de Filosofía y Teoría Política Contemporáneas 5 (7): 130-146.
Meneses Tello, Felipe. 2013. “La carga ideológica en los instrumentos para la organización bibliográfica”. Revista General de Información y Documentación 23 (1): 97-131. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_RGID.2013.v23.n1.41451
Mignolo, Walter D. 2011. The Darker Side of Western Modernity / Global Futures, Decolonial Options. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv125jqbw
Olson, Hope A. 1997. “The Feminist and the Emperor’s New Clothes: Feminist Deconstruction as a Critical Methodology for Library and Information Studies”. Library & Information Science Research 19 (2): 181-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(97)90042-6
Olson, Hope A. 1998. “Mapping Beyond Dewey’s Boundaries: Constructing Classificatory Space for Marginalized Knowledge Domains”. Library Trends 47 (2): 233-54.
Olson, Hope A. 2002. “The Authority to Name”. En The Power to Name / Locating the Limits of Subject Representation in Libraries, 142-82. Springer Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3435-6
Radford, Jill, y Diana E. H. Russell, eds. 1992. Femicide / The Politics of Woman Killing. Twayne Publishers.
Rodó-Zárate, María. 2021. Interseccionalidad / Desigualdades, lugares y emociones. Editorial Bellaterra.
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa, y José Guadalupe Gandarilla Salgado. 2009. Una epistemología del Sur / La reinvención del conocimiento y la emancipación social. Siglo Veintiuno Editores; Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales.
Smaldone, Mariana. 2017. “El trabajo doméstico y las mujeres: aproximaciones desde la teoría de género, los feminismos y la decolonialidad.” Revista Feminismos 5 (2): 71-84.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1988. “Can the Subaltern Speak?”. En Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, editado por Cary Nelson y Lawrence Grossberg, 271-313. University of Illinois Press.
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1996. “Discourse, Power and Access.” En Texts and Practices / Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, editado por Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard y Malcolm Coultgard, 84-104. Routledge.
Viveros Vigoya, Mara. 2016. “La interseccionalidad: una aproximación situada a la dominación”. Debate Feminista 52: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.df.2016.09.005
Wittig, Monique. 1992. El pensamiento heterosexual y otros ensayos. Traducción de Javier Sáez y Paco Vidarte. Editorial Egales.
Authors:
- They must sent the publication authorization letter to Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
- They can share the submission with the scientific community in the following ways:
- As teaching support material
- As the basis for lectures in academic conferences
- Self-archiving in academic repositories.
- Dissemination in academic networks.
- Posting to author’s blogs and personal websites
These allowances shall remain in effect as long as the conditions of use of the contents of the journal are duly observed pursuant to the Creative Commons:Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 license that it holds. DOI links for download the full text of published papers are provided for the last three uses.
Self-archiving policy
For self-archiving, authors must comply with the following
a) Acknowledge the copyright held by the journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
b) Establish a link to the original version of the paper on the journal page, using, for example, the DOI.
c) Disseminate the final version published in the journal.
Licensing of contents
The journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información allows access and use of its contents pursuant to the Creative Commons license: Attribution- Non-commercial-NoDerivatives 4.0.
Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información by Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional License.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://rev-ib.unam.mx/ib.
This means that contents can only be read and shared as long as the authorship of the work is acknowledged and cited. The work shall not be exploited for commercial ends nor shall it been modified.
Limitation of liability
The journal is not liable for academic fraud or plagiarism committed by authors, nor for the intellectual criteria they employ. Similarly, the journal shall not be liable for the services offered through third party hyperlinks contained in papers submitted by authors.
In support of this position, the journal provides the Author’s Duties notice at the following link: Responsibilities of authors.
The director or editor of the journal shall notify authors in the event it migrates the contents of the journal’s official website to a distinct IP or domain.