Nancy Fraser (fwd)

[xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

>As an academic and a philosopher, she tends to oppose
>the "postmodernist" people you also dislike. So what if she's not your
>idea of a socialist feminist?

i do not know. the last time i read her article in a volume edited by
linda nicholson, she was defending the post-modernist perspective quite
consciously. see her article written with nicholson: "social criticism
without philosopy: an encounter between feminism and post-modernism"
(routledge, 1991), pp.19-37.

she says: "in general, post-modernist feminist theory would be pragmatic
and fallistic. it would tailor to its methods and categories to the
specific task hand,using multiple categories when appropriate and
forswearing the metaphysical comfort of a single feminist method or
feminist epistemology" (p.35)

i think this is a quite sympethatic view of post-modernism.

>Why is it so important to you that
>everyone accept your version of marxism down to the last comma?

i take this as an intolerant question. m-fem is an appropriate
forum to discuss and debate what one thinks to be marxist (and feminist).
no body needs to buy it. i expressed my views about this particular line
of feminism just as in the same way that you expressed your griviences
about "marxist feminists" many moons ago. no body says that
you should buy my argument, and it is clear that you don't. so, it is
hard to see why you take personally!!

plus, fraser left marxism many years ago. i am not pretty sure whether she
really grasped it though. in her older articles, i remember her giving a
a liberal reading of gramschi, which is very fashionable nowadays
among the intelligensia (synthesis of foucault+gramschi/ counter
hegemony/civil society rhetoric). so, it is not even a matter of "her own
version" of marxism.

regards,

mine Xxxxxx