Robert V. Scheetz
ay581 at yfn.ysu.edu
Thu Jul 20 21:01:34 MDT 1995
I don't recognize my argument in any of your criticisms...except maybe
the Mc's "vulgarity" quip..."Think crude!" is my main mantra...am gratified
my method, tearing my analyses slimy and stinking from the living bowels of
reality, hd effect...
find especially perverse the charge "ahistorical".
Sojourner Truth, Emma Goldman, Mother Jones, Eleanor...all those you cite...
there is certainly a Feminism of moment; but my argument restricted itself to
a very specific set of historical phenomena, not the above. Perhaps the
idiomatic "middle class" works better than "bourgeois".
Moreover, Boomer female's dilemma cannot be overstated, was/is
very real, excruciating, I think ...as are the socio-economic exigencies,
unemployment, the Burgher's malthusian nightmare, referred.
Rogers, may I put you a pointed question?
Given the period under review as classically patriarchal (let's say pre-60's),
how explain that the central cultural institutional artifact regulating the
relationship between genders, marriage/divorce law (along with the
sustaining "middle-class morality"), overwhelmingly favored the female
in its assumptions and definitions re transgressor, guilt, and its
awards and sanctions, child custody and support, house, alimony?
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism