In my day feminists dismissed gender as a social construct. I clearly haven't been keeping up.
-
-
Replying to @neilplatform1
Before you worry about keeping up, probably best to get to grips with what it means to say something is a social construct. Just saying...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
Perhaps it's my understanding of your use of materiality.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @neilplatform1
I was using the term in Marxist sense (which includes the social relations between people), because rad fem is essentially a class analysis.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
Most feminists I knew (and know) had little time for Marxism, particularly the revolutionary feminists.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @neilplatform1
Well, there are socialist feminists - e.g., MacKinnon's "Toward a Feminist Theory of the State". But obviously there's a big tension between
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @neilplatform1
Marxism & feminism in that the former locates the basis of oppression in our relationship to the means of production. But the materiality...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @neilplatform1
of class struggle has its analog in how radical feminism conceptualizes gender hierarchy. That's the point. Gender has a material basis, it
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp @neilplatform1
isn't something that just exists in the mind, to be overthrown at a whim. It's a fundamental structuring principle of patriarchal society.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
I get the idea. Is an 'objective' gender divide a necessity within that framework?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Within that framework, gender is an abstraction specified in binary terms (so, eg., Nancy Hartsock talks in terms Weberian ideal-types).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.