Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Although feminists have historically engaged the law for political purposes, this article traces critiques of such engagements from early feminist legal theory to poststructuralist feminist thought. While early feminist legal theorists understood the law as patriarchal and oppressive, poststructuralists suggest that the law is productive. This theory of law would seem to necessitate reimagining how feminists might engage law. However, poststructuralist feminist thinkers argue that activists should eschew legal tactics in favor of political practices of resignification, collectivity, and agonistic democracy. Thus, these thinkers construct an opposition between law and politics that fundamentally contradicts their understanding of law as productive. Through an examination of this contradiction, the article shows that these thinkers implicitly share a conception of law as oppressive with early feminist legal theorists. Therefore, the poststructuralists fail to fully develop the insights of their own theory. Through a case study of the unionization of San Francisco’s Lusty Lady strip club in 1996, the article demonstrates how law is both productive and not inherently opposed to politics; it not only shows how law and politics are dynamically connected, but also how law can, at times, bolster politics. Thus, the article rethinks the place of law in feminist politics.
Although feminists have historically engaged the law for political purposes, this article traces critiques of such engagements from early feminist legal theory to poststructuralist feminist thought. While early feminist legal theorists understood the law as patriarchal and oppressive, poststructuralists suggest that the law is productive. This theory of law would seem to necessitate reimagining how feminists might engage law. However, poststructuralist feminist thinkers argue that activists should eschew legal tactics in favor of political practices of resignification, collectivity, and agonistic democracy. Thus, these thinkers construct an opposition between law and politics that fundamentally contradicts their understanding of law as productive. Through an examination of this contradiction, the article shows that these thinkers implicitly share a conception of law as oppressive with early feminist legal theorists. Therefore, the poststructuralists fail to fully develop the insights of their own theory. Through a case study of the unionization of San Francisco’s Lusty Lady strip club in 1996, the article demonstrates how law is both productive and not inherently opposed to politics; it not only shows how law and politics are dynamically connected, but also how law can, at times, bolster politics. Thus, the article rethinks the place of law in feminist politics.
Sarah Earnshaw directs attention toward cultural production to explore the tensions and transformative relations of solidarity through the documentary films Live Nude Girls Unite! (2000) and Made in L.A. (2007). Documents of mobilisation by women worker organisers in sex and garment work, the films mediate the material and social relations of class across multiple lines of oppression and centre workers often left out of frame in mainstream labour discourse. Exploring the documentary form as suturing class struggle while retaining recognition of differentiation, the chapter discusses screening labour before turning to narrative strategies of storytelling and negotiations of public/private, finally considering the role of place in filmic practices as mapping solidarity from below.
Oratorical practice may be viewed as the material enactment of a philosophy of class struggle. Drawing on the work of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, I propose “orator-machine” as a concept-term to describe speech making in the context of the open exterior of interconnected human and nonhuman machinic assemblages in capitalist modernity. My argument is based on a reconsideration of a single address, delivered by William D. “Big Bill” Haywood in 1911 at the Cooper Union in New York City. Reading Haywood against the grain—as a conceptual innovator—allows me to demonstrate a mode of analysis that affirms the philosophical quality and ontological politics of oratorical performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.