productive labor [used to be: marxist feminism]

[kelley]

carrol wrote:
>>I do have one positive thing against it: some have used it to define the
>>working class, thus excluding millions from the class. That may be --
>>probably is -- a misuse of it though, for which the theory itself is not
>>responsible.

roger replied:
>I agree.  It's a gross misuse.  And the difference between what is
>productive labor and who is working class provides a crucial starting point
>for understanding the difficulties in creating that consciousness, based in
>part on the different functions labor performs for capital.

okay.  but you're talking non-productive labor [bill gates].  that's a
wholly differnt thing from the m-fem category of "reproductive" labor which
encompasses service work.  obviously surplus value is extracted from a
waitress or a dry cleaner and there were service workers in marx's day.  i
thought non-repro referred to managers and 
the like?  see carrol, this is why i need those books!!  now i have to go
to the library or wait for someone to flame me!

kelley