>But to take just one interesting example of the ruling class again, that of the 'bourgeois woman'. What class does the wife of the biggest, fattest and baddest capitalist belong to?
Kerry Packer has a wife? ;-) No, hang on, to be fair to Kerry that description sounds like the late Lang Hancock (unless dead capitalists don't count.) His widow Rose is now a capitalist for sure. Lang's daughter reckons Rose murdered the old grub for his money, so maybe Rose was merely an ornament, rather than a capitalist in her own right when she was alive? It all boils down simply to whether she is free to leave the relationship with substantial capital you see. (Without poisoning him that is. Needing to do that would indicate she was either extra greedy, or that was the only way to combine freedom with economic security, short of a socialist revolution.)
> The 'capitalist class'? Why? Here we come back to theory and class composition in a way that interests me very much, since I'm hoping to complete a text on gender soon.
Well of course it has nothing to do with gender, it has to do with ownership of capital. Like I say, if you need to work for a living you aren't a capitalist and having to shag old Lang Hancock to put food in your mouth is dirty work no matter how you cut it.
>And I welcome whatever help I can get with that.
Pleased to be of assistance. What's your target audience? Would-be fortune hunters are probably a likely market. There's a quid to be made from them for sure. As I say, its hardly rocket science and I'm not sure how you would pad it out to book length, but best of luck.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas