Thoughts on production, alienation, and ideology
So, here’s one of the biggest challenges on the left that I’ve been thinking about lately. We start with the core of a good idea. The idea even works well in specific situations. But then we turn that idea into some kind of Iron Law, trying to apply it way beyond its limits. The result? It doesn’t work so well any longer! I think we see this problem a lot with appeals to the notion of ‘lived experience.’
What’s going on here? What’s wrong with the appeal to lived experience?
I often make the point that the left should target a broad working-class coalition. Every now and then to the point of sounding like a broken record. This includes an approach from multiple vectors – not only people on the job, but also unemployed people and the precariat. But while I often talk about race and about tenants unions, I don’t talk as often about gender. I’ll do that here by looking at the feminization of work.
Readers who know me might be surprised that I haven’t written as much about gender. After all, I have a background in feminist philosophy and activism. So, in that spirit, I’ll use this post to share one key data point on the feminization of work. I think it addresses why it’s so important for leftists to address issues of gender, especially in the world of work.
By now I’m sure many of us know that the choices we make are far more complex than popular debate suggests. Almost everyone agrees on the need for consent, on at least some notion of ‘consent.’ But whether and how we consent – and what kind of consent we need – remains less clear.
I might approach these issues in a million ways. But here’s one way. I recently re-read a blog post on Feministing. The post covered a 2014 study in Psychology of Women Quarterly on gender and choices about body hair. It turns out that a woman’s decision to remove (or not remove) body hair is a pretty complicated one. In particular, the social pressures involved cloud the matter of whether and how women consent and make choices.
Many readers know I like to set a common theme for the year. For this year’s theme, I chose value and the corporate workplace, a topic I’ve also written about in prior years. So far, I’ve hit this theme in a number of ways. But one way I might summarize it all? Work won’t love you back.
Imagine my surprise, then, when I found out labor journalist Sarah Jaffe recently wrote a book called Work Won’t Love You Back.
Let’s take a look at Jaffe’s book.
Two years ago – on June 22, 2018 – Mattachine Society president and pre-Stonewall gay rights activist Dick Leitsch died at the age of 83. I’ll share with readers what I wrote about him in a Facebook post a few weeks ago. I wanted to highlight him and his work for Pride Month.
© 2024 Base and Superstructure
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
