On Jan 6, 2008, at 6:06 PM, Joanna wrote:
> Doug wrote
>>
>> I hear this sort of thing a lot and I'm not sure what it means. In
>> 1974, second-wave feminism was still pretty young, and the level of
>> gender consciousness was extremely low. Organized labor was largely
>> the domain of grumpy, socially conservative white guys. Those with
>> "identity" issues - basically everyone who wasn't one of those grumpy
>> white guys - had something real to complain about.
> The three things that have had the greatest impact on my life have
> been
> (in order of importance)
> -- the availability of birth control
> -- the availability of a nearly free education (through grad school)
> -- the economic deterioration that required most women to work most
> of
> the time
>
> Identity politics did not play much of a role in any of those.
> Identity
> politics did play a role in making sexual harrassment and rape
> actionable offenses, which probably had a salutary effect on working
> conditions.
I still don't get what you mean by "identity politics." Organized feminism had a lot to do with the improvement of women's economic status (and, as Jane Mansbridge argues, informal relations of daily life change things well after the organizational phase has peaked - what she calls everyday feminism). Is that "identity politics"? Where would race relations be without the NAACP and the Black Panthers? Are they i.d. politics too? Gay people would still be in the closet without a movement. I.d. politics too? What do you mean? Were all those movements distraction from the "real" business of politics - which is, what? The AFL-CIO?
Doug