i take seriously the basic insights of "standpoint epistemology," the idea that people in different social positions or groups have access to knowledge that may not be available at other standpoints. in particular, i take seriously the idea that members of oppressed groups have access to knowledge - particularly of the oppressing group and the circumstances of opression - that are systematically erased from the dominant standpoint. still, i find it a bit disconcerting that gonads, skintone, and surname seem to be primary criteria for appointment to the supreme court, and that one can't criticize this without being a racist/sexist etc.