Discourse on marginalized women oscillates between Marxist dogmatism and celebration of the other.

Evidence

Now, it seems to me it is very useful if one can think of female subject constitution as well, because one doesn’t usually. The kind of discourse you get when you speak of the constitution of the urban sub-proletariat or the paraperipheral woman, or tribality, aboriginality etc.: either a very hard, classical marxist fundamentalist kind of talk or a sort of celebration of the other. In terms of those psycho-biographies I am interested in looking at these women who are being shafted by post-modern capitalism. I am interested in looking at them also in terms of their subject-constitution which would throw a challenge to being caught within psycho-analysis or counter-psychoanalysis. — Elizabeth Grosz, Criticism, Feminism and the Institution, 120

Categorization

  • QUESTION: The dichotomy Spivak positions strategic essentialism against — hard Marxism vs. celebration of the other — could clarify whether the strategic move was meant to escape exactly this binary.
  • XREF: connects to: Feminism is shaped by the same ideological sureties it challenges. — Donna Landry and Gerald MacLean, The Spivak Reader: Selected Works of…, 555; Feminism that ignores anti-Muslim racism is inconsistent — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 579; Feminist literature is often racist and sexist despite its liberatory rhetoric — bell hooks, Ain’t I a Woman_ Black Women and…, 553 (+1 more)

Broader Connections