>Then I'll specify the nature of the dishonesty. She is lying. The critics
she
>is replying to, or the conservative marxists she is attacking, don't exist.
When I heard her delivering that paper at the Rethinking Marxism
conference in December 1996 I had the same reaction. "Who the hell is
she talking about?,"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'd like to know too. As far out as I am on race, class & gender, I would not classify race or gender as "merely cultural." I do not rank them or depict them the same as others, but their political and economic salience is beyond question. Who would say otherwise?
One explanation is that the notion of someone on the left classifying gender as cultural is really a way of attacking someone who is believed to put class over gender, or someone who says Butler is not much worth reading or relevant to politics on the planet we call Earth. So the idea is really a rhetorical slur. Now it's one thing to exaggerate someone's position for polemical effect. It's another to base a whole bloomin' analysis on it.
mbs