My point isn't entirely based on Marx. That was one quote I was using as an example. Goldman certainly considered prostitutes' labor as, well, labor. And I don't think sh recognized (a la Bakunin) any difference between seling one's "time" (labor time) between selling oneself, no matter the job at hand - sex-related, or not. You're selling yourself, period. As far as "courtesans" go, I'm still not used to hearing that outside of 19th century romanticist poetry.
I'll be honest: I've read Butler (very) selectively. People who speak in the language of PoMo, when it seems to me they are making point that could just as well be made without the dense purple fog of PoMo-speaking infusing their arguments, are an immediate turn off. A personal preference.
-B.
On 4/7/10 8:48 AM, Dennis Claxton wrote:
"I think more important than whether or not we agree with this is that it highlights why work like Judith Butler or Susie Bright, et. al. do was (is) so badly needed by the left. Marx wasn't very good on sex and gender."