Truth over Convention: Feminist Interpretations of Buddhism

Abstract

Satha-Anand argues against a patriarchal interpretation of Buddhism. She argues that the Buddha privileged conventional over equal gender roles in order to achieve social acceptance, but that this approach did not preclude “truth”. She specificallyuses the example of the first women’s ordination to argue for the ordination of nuns in Thai Buddhism. I found her argument somewhat apologist when she dismisses the idea of the Buddha as patriarchal in light of his supporting the truth of gender equality – can’t he be both?